changed subject for experiement on threading orders
in [Laptops]
|
From: BillW50 on 27 May 2010 19:49 On 5/27/2010 5:39 PM, John Rumm wrote: > On 27/05/2010 23:17, BillW50 wrote: > >>>>> Each to his own I guess. >>>> >>>> OE seems so very efficient compared to other programs. As other >>>> programs >>>> seem to make the user go through so much work and it really >>>> shouldn't be >>>> that way. >>> >>> Oddly I find OE hugely frustrating - it must be it just does not work >>> the way I think! Probably tells you something about either it or me ;-) >> >> I can see and understand this. As There is the MS way of doing things >> and then there is the everybody else way of doing things. They are two >> completely different systems of doing things. And doing it the MS way >> does take a bit of a learning curve. And it is much harder the more you >> know of the other ways. In the long run though, I find it far more >> productive. > > I suspect its down to the way MS focus group test stuff and observe how > users use things. As a result they often come at problems a different > way or leave out subtle bits of functionality that some find confusing. > It can make things easier to learn for novice users, but frequently also > frustrates power users. The office "ribbon" being a good example. Users > with no exposure to office style apps often find it easier to learn, but > anyone used to another way of doing it (including previous users of MS > office) find it difficult. > > (kind of like the opposite of Adobe with say photoshop - they will often > go about a common feature in a way that seems more complicated than the > others, but also in a way that opens up a whole new layer of extra power > and flexibility for those who invest the time and effort really getting > to understand what they are doing). There is a lot of truth to what you say. And the MS way can cause problems to the power users. But then again, there is usually undocumented solutions to those problems. So that is really a tough call I agree. But get this, I remember there was a survey about office suites. And I don't remember the exact number, but it was like only 20% of the features was known among business users. I would have guessed 80%, but no. So I guess the masses don't really use most of the features of a given application anyway. I think MS knows this too. And I believe they use this to their advantage. So we end up with either the MS way and/or the other way. And since most people it seems don't use all or even most of the features of an application, the MS way is easier for most. >> One really annoying thing about OE was quoting. Although there is >> OE-QuoteFix which has taken care of that one. And I won't personally use >> OE without it. >> >> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ > > Yup agreed, that makes a huge improvement. Not sure if it fixes the > phantom attachment problem though? Phantom attachment? Is that the same as that syntax error in the MIME attachment that had hidden it in OE? And when the user opened the email (or newsgroup post I suppose) OE didn't see or show it but it would automatically run it in the background? Well AFAIK this was fixed long ago. Even then AFAIK the following would foil this. One was to view messages in plain text. And secondly (now the default) was to treat attachments in the restricted zone instead of the Internet zone. And the restricted zone would warn you before OE does anything stupid. The other problem that I recall about OE was as attachment could claim it was something normally harmless like a txt file or something in the MIME header. And when you open it up, it could be totally different and could be really an exe file for example and Windows would execute it. I believe this has been fixed too. But the work around is and is probably still a very good idea anyway is to save the attachment. And the name better end up as a txt type for example. If it isn't, something is wrong. ;-) -- Bill Thunderbird Portable 3.0 (20091130)
From: John Rumm on 27 May 2010 20:28 On 28/05/2010 00:49, BillW50 wrote: > On 5/27/2010 5:39 PM, John Rumm wrote: >> On 27/05/2010 23:17, BillW50 wrote: >> >>>>>> Each to his own I guess. >>>>> >>>>> OE seems so very efficient compared to other programs. As other >>>>> programs >>>>> seem to make the user go through so much work and it really >>>>> shouldn't be >>>>> that way. >>>> >>>> Oddly I find OE hugely frustrating - it must be it just does not work >>>> the way I think! Probably tells you something about either it or me ;-) >>> >>> I can see and understand this. As There is the MS way of doing things >>> and then there is the everybody else way of doing things. They are two >>> completely different systems of doing things. And doing it the MS way >>> does take a bit of a learning curve. And it is much harder the more you >>> know of the other ways. In the long run though, I find it far more >>> productive. >> >> I suspect its down to the way MS focus group test stuff and observe how >> users use things. As a result they often come at problems a different >> way or leave out subtle bits of functionality that some find confusing. >> It can make things easier to learn for novice users, but frequently also >> frustrates power users. The office "ribbon" being a good example. Users >> with no exposure to office style apps often find it easier to learn, but >> anyone used to another way of doing it (including previous users of MS >> office) find it difficult. >> >> (kind of like the opposite of Adobe with say photoshop - they will often >> go about a common feature in a way that seems more complicated than the >> others, but also in a way that opens up a whole new layer of extra power >> and flexibility for those who invest the time and effort really getting >> to understand what they are doing). > > There is a lot of truth to what you say. And the MS way can cause > problems to the power users. But then again, there is usually > undocumented solutions to those problems. So that is really a tough call > I agree. > > But get this, I remember there was a survey about office suites. And I > don't remember the exact number, but it was like only 20% of the > features was known among business users. I would have guessed 80%, but > no. So I guess the masses don't really use most of the features of a > given application anyway. Indeed! Computer/Technology journalist the late Guy Kewney had a saying of computer software some years back along the lines of "People are in the habit of demanding tomorrows technology today, when in reality most of them would be incapable of using yesterdays technology next week" > I think MS knows this too. And I believe they use this to their > advantage. So we end up with either the MS way and/or the other way. And > since most people it seems don't use all or even most of the features of > an application, the MS way is easier for most. It always makes me smile when Steve Ballmer attempts to downplay open office with the accusation that it only has the feature set of Office XP. Quietly sidestepping the issue that for a vast swathe of their user base that was more than adequate! >>> One really annoying thing about OE was quoting. Although there is >>> OE-QuoteFix which has taken care of that one. And I won't personally use >>> OE without it. >>> >>> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ >> >> Yup agreed, that makes a huge improvement. Not sure if it fixes the >> phantom attachment problem though? > > Phantom attachment? Is that the same as that syntax error in the MIME > attachment that had hidden it in OE? And when the user opened the email > (or newsgroup post I suppose) OE didn't see or show it but it would > automatically run it in the background? No, I was thinking of its incomplete decoding of mime headers that would cause it to think that there was a broken attachment on a post when a line began: begin something... it took the "begin" as a mime header. > Well AFAIK this was fixed long ago. Even then AFAIK the following would > foil this. One was to view messages in plain text. And secondly (now the > default) was to treat attachments in the restricted zone instead of the > Internet zone. And the restricted zone would warn you before OE does > anything stupid. > > The other problem that I recall about OE was as attachment could claim > it was something normally harmless like a txt file or something in the > MIME header. And when you open it up, it could be totally different and > could be really an exe file for example and Windows would execute it. That was actually a powerfully dumb default that it inherited from windows (and I can't believe they have still not fixed it!), where a double file extension such as picture.jpg.exe would be truncated for display to "picture", and given the default .jpg handler's icon. However when opened it would be treated as the .exe it really was. > I believe this has been fixed too. But the work around is and is > probably still a very good idea anyway is to save the attachment. And > the name better end up as a txt type for example. If it isn't, something > is wrong. ;-) The whole reliance on file extensions for identifying file content and associated apps is very 1970's anyway! -- Cheers, John. /=================================================================\ | Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk | |-----------------------------------------------------------------| | John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk | \=================================================================/
From: dennis on 28 May 2010 02:58 "John Rumm" <see.my.signature(a)nowhere.null> wrote in message news:F9ydnY1aNsU_aWPWnZ2dnUVZ8iidnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk... > On 27/05/2010 23:17, BillW50 wrote: > >>>>> Each to his own I guess. >>>> >>>> OE seems so very efficient compared to other programs. As other >>>> programs >>>> seem to make the user go through so much work and it really shouldn't >>>> be >>>> that way. >>> >>> Oddly I find OE hugely frustrating - it must be it just does not work >>> the way I think! Probably tells you something about either it or me ;-) >> >> I can see and understand this. As There is the MS way of doing things >> and then there is the everybody else way of doing things. They are two >> completely different systems of doing things. And doing it the MS way >> does take a bit of a learning curve. And it is much harder the more you >> know of the other ways. In the long run though, I find it far more >> productive. > > I suspect its down to the way MS focus group test stuff and observe how > users use things. As a result they often come at problems a different way > or leave out subtle bits of functionality that some find confusing. It can > make things easier to learn for novice users, but frequently also > frustrates power users. The office "ribbon" being a good example. Users > with no exposure to office style apps often find it easier to learn, but > anyone used to another way of doing it (including previous users of MS > office) find it difficult. > > (kind of like the opposite of Adobe with say photoshop - they will often > go about a common feature in a way that seems more complicated than the > others, but also in a way that opens up a whole new layer of extra power > and flexibility for those who invest the time and effort really getting to > understand what they are doing). > >> One really annoying thing about OE was quoting. Although there is >> OE-QuoteFix which has taken care of that one. And I won't personally use >> OE without it. >> >> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ > > Yup agreed, that makes a huge improvement. Not sure if it fixes the > phantom attachment problem though? I don't know why people use OE at all. It hasn't been maintained for years and was replaced by windows live mail. WLM has the same looks but has most of the OE bugs fixed. It is a lot easier and nicer to use than TB and agent and others I have tried and forgotten about as they were so poor.
From: BillW50 on 28 May 2010 07:13 On 5/28/2010 1:58 AM, dennis(a)home wrote: > "John Rumm" <see.my.signature(a)nowhere.null> wrote in message > news:F9ydnY1aNsU_aWPWnZ2dnUVZ8iidnZ2d(a)brightview.co.uk... >> On 27/05/2010 23:17, BillW50 wrote: >>> One really annoying thing about OE was quoting. Although there is >>> OE-QuoteFix which has taken care of that one. And I won't personally use >>> OE without it. >>> >>> http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/ >> >> Yup agreed, that makes a huge improvement. Not sure if it fixes the >> phantom attachment problem though? > > I don't know why people use OE at all. I do. ;-) > It hasn't been maintained for years and was replaced by windows live mail. WLM hasn't been updated in years either. As it seems like the updates between OE6 and WLM stopped just months apart from one another. > WLM has the same looks but has most of the OE bugs fixed. Actually it has a new interface which is somewhat nice. Although they separated email from newsgroups. Now instead of glancing at one window if anything new came in, You have to toggle between email and newsgroups. Which is more work. WLM also broke the account view. And you no longer can select more than one newsgroup (or folders in the case of email) and change all the sync settings all at one time. Now it is a real pain in the neck to do. And the worst thing IMHO about OE and WLM is the poor quoting. At least there is OE-QuoteFix that takes care of OE. But there is yet a WLM-QuoteFix. The only real good thing I like about WLM is you can't run OE6 on Vista or Windows 7 machines. But WLM can. ;-) > It is a lot easier and nicer to use than TB and agent and others I have > tried and forgotten about as they were so poor. I agree there. I don't know why others make things so hard to do some of the most basic tasks. That just doesn't make any sense to me. -- Bill Thunderbird Portable 3.0 (20091130)
From: dennis on 28 May 2010 08:01
"BillW50" <BillW50(a)aol.kom> wrote in message news:hto8hj$oq5$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > On 5/28/2010 1:58 AM, dennis(a)home wrote: 8< >> I don't know why people use OE at all. > > I do. ;-) > >> It hasn't been maintained for years and was replaced by windows live >> mail. > > WLM hasn't been updated in years either. As it seems like the updates > between OE6 and WLM stopped just months apart from one another. My WLM was updated late last year. > >> WLM has the same looks but has most of the OE bugs fixed. > > Actually it has a new interface which is somewhat nice. Although they > separated email from newsgroups. Now instead of glancing at one window if > anything new came in, You have to toggle between email and newsgroups. > Which is more work. Not here. I have email and two news servers that all appear in the same pane on the left. > > WLM also broke the account view. And you no longer can select more than > one newsgroup (or folders in the case of email) and change all the sync > settings all at one time. Now it is a real pain in the neck to do. I didn't know you could do that in OE. > > And the worst thing IMHO about OE and WLM is the poor quoting. At least > there is OE-QuoteFix that takes care of OE. But there is yet a > WLM-QuoteFix. I don't usually have a problem with quoting, well nothing that OEQuoteFix fixed. > > The only real good thing I like about WLM is you can't run OE6 on Vista or > Windows 7 machines. But WLM can. ;-) > >> It is a lot easier and nicer to use than TB and agent and others I have >> tried and forgotten about as they were so poor. > > I agree there. I don't know why others make things so hard to do some of > the most basic tasks. That just doesn't make any sense to me. They are written by programmers for themselves and other programmers. They don't think about users much. |