On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:21:05 -0800, "mark bay"
strung together this:

Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.

Try using a decent newsreader, mine doesn't jumble them up if the time
is wrong.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 07:21:05 UTC, "mark bay"
wrote:

Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.

1) Do why are you posting with a Californian time zone (and thus at
07:21 tomorrow, GMT)?

2) Good newsreaders don't *get* confused.


--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

"mark bay" wrote in message
...
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to
read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please

Ooh - how can I change my clock to BST?

Mary

Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to
read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please

....so when will you be sending the photos of your thrashing!
(you are 480 minutes out, so is that 480 thrashes I guess)

Sparks...

In message , mark bay
wrote
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please



Where can we see photos of your punishment?

You posting 8 hours different to the rest of us in the UK?

From your headers
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:21:05 -0800

I suspect that if you are having problems that you haven't bothered to
configure your Microsoft software to be somewhere else than the default
place in the world - which is somewhere in the USA.

Hint: It's not only the clock that needs to be correct but also the
timezone settings.
--
Alan

mark bay wrote:

Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please

Sort your time zone out and it might make more sense! ;-)

(Loosing OE would help as well)

--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

On Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:39:54 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

Ooh - how can I change my clock to BST?

Wait till summertime.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

"John Rumm" wrote
| (Loosing OE would help as well)

What, setting it free to run around the world unhindered by fetters?

Owain

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...


(Loosing OE would help as well)

Don't be so boring.

And learn to spell.

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 00:01:22 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

(Loosing OE would help as well)

Don't be so boring.

Eh? What you twittering on about now?
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

"mark bay" wrote in message
...
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to
read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please


From *your* headers;
From: "mark bay"
Newsgroups: uk.d-i-y
Subject: computer clocks
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:21:05 -0800

**** !... :~(

In message , Alan
writes
In message , mark bay
wrote
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please



Where can we see photos of your punishment?

You posting 8 hours different to the rest of us in the UK?

From your headers
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:21:05 -0800

I suspect that if you are having problems that you haven't bothered to
configure your Microsoft software to be somewhere else than the default
place in the world - which is somewhere in the USA.

Hint: It's not only the clock that needs to be correct but also the
timezone settings.
Being a septic is prolly punishment enough,

although, I for one would like to see some pix involving a sharp stick
and some KY jelly

coz I'm a *******

--
geoff

In article ,
"mark bay" writes:
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.

I suggest you use a threaded newsreader. Following thread
branches is much more meaningful than following posting times.

--
Andrew Gabriel
Consultant Software Engineer

"mark bay" wrote in message
...
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to
read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of
2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please

What colour T&E do you have to use?

Adam

Mary Fisher wrote:

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...


(Loosing OE would help as well)


Don't be so boring.

Just because you decided to chop a lump off yourself, you don't have
take it out on me... stroppy little mare!

Advising someone to ditch OE would seems like good advice for any number
of reasons. It is the number one vector for email mailware on the
planet, and as a newsgroup reader it has a number of limitations -
loosing message threading due to (apparently) differing posting times
being just one of them.

And learn to spell.

Learn to spell? I would love to. Not sure what prompted that comment
since I can't actually see anything wrong with the original post.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In article , "Alan"
says...
In message , mark bay
wrote
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please



Where can we see photos of your punishment?

You posting 8 hours different to the rest of us in the UK?

From your headers
Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:21:05 -0800

I suspect that if you are having problems that you haven't bothered to
configure your Microsoft software to be somewhere else than the default
place in the world - which is somewhere in the USA.

Redmond WA - which is where Microsoft is based.

In article , "John
Rumm" says...
Mary Fisher wrote:

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...


(Loosing OE would help as well)


Don't be so boring.

Just because you decided to chop a lump off yourself, you don't have
take it out on me... stroppy little mare!

Advising someone to ditch OE would seems like good advice for any number
of reasons. It is the number one vector for email mailware on the
planet, and as a newsgroup reader it has a number of limitations -
loosing message threading due to (apparently) differing posting times
being just one of them.

And learn to spell.

Learn to spell? I would love to. Not sure what prompted that comment
since I can't actually see anything wrong with the original post.

loosing should be losing

Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of 2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...


(Loosing OE would help as well)


Don't be so boring.

Advising someone to ditch OE would seems like good advice for any number
of reasons. It is the number one vector for email mailware on the planet,
and as a newsgroup reader it has a number of limitations - loosing message
threading due to (apparently) differing posting times being just one of
them.

I - and, I suggest - MOST people who use the internet use MS. That means
it's successful. Why is it successful? Because it works. It does what I want
and I don't have a problem with what you say.

And learn to spell.

Learn to spell? I would love to. Not sure what prompted that comment since
I can't actually see anything wrong with the original post.

There's a difference between 'lose' and 'loose'.

You used the wrong version in your previous as well as the above post.

I rarely criticise posters' spelling, although, I reckon, most people don't
give the care to spelling, grammar and punctuation as they give to, say,
their personal appearance. In this case I consider that I was justified. If
you can criticise others' choice of utility you're leaving the field open to
criticism of the way you post.

The damning of OE by posters IS boring in that it's a constant moan. We know
how the moaners feel about OE, we choose to continue using it. Your
criticism isn't going to change that, in the same way that my criticism of
your spelling isn't going to change your use of it, so you might as well
stop being boring and go back to being your usual witty, scintillating and
exciting self :-)

The same applies to me of course.

Mary



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

"raden" wrote in message
...

snip slippery stuff

I'm a *******

Geoff, we all know that, you don't need to tell us :-)

Mary

"ARWadsworth" wrote in message
.uk...
"mark bay" wrote in message
...
Can people please adjust to the correct times as when you are trying to
read
a thread they become all jumbled up and are difficult to follow.
Therefore I propose a punishment......the next person to post with an
incorrect time should thrash themselves 10 times with a 1m length of
2,5mm
twin & earth.....severity according to how far out the clock is out.
Photos required for evidence please

What colour T&E do you have to use?

And will it change with the new regs?

Mary

Adam

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 09:49:52 -0000, "Mary Fisher"
strung together this:

The damning of OE by posters IS boring in that it's a constant moan. We know
how the moaners feel about OE, we choose to continue using it. Your
criticism isn't going to change that,

That's why no-one said anything to you, some people are quite happy to
change, I've converted quite a few people recently to using Firefox
instead of IE and Thunderbird instead of OE.

If we're going to be picky and stroppy can you snip posts properly
rather than leaving all the irrelevant bits in, or don't post.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

Mary Fisher wrote:

I - and, I suggest - MOST people who use the internet use MS. That means
it's successful. Why is it successful? Because it works.

coughs

Hate to wade into the middle of an OE argument, but I really don't
believe that the reason you give is accurate. People use IE/OE because
that's what's on their machine when they first get it.

The products (IE & OE) do 'work', in that they largely allow users to do
most of what they want to do most of the time, but that doesn't mean
they are particularly good tools.

The free blade that you get when you buy a circular saw 'works', but in
most cases it's a very poor blade. Unless you spend some time learning
about blades, and the differences between them, and experimenting with
other blades, you'll never know how poor that first blade is. Cuts wood,
doesn't it?

My biggest objection to OE is on security - I really don't care if users
want to live with a limited set of functionality - that's their choice -
but the inherent poor security of the application has very widespread
consequences.



--
Grunff

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 11:01:07 +0000, Grunff strung
together this:

Hate to wade into the middle of an OE argument, but I really don't
believe that the reason you give is accurate. People use IE/OE because
that's what's on their machine when they first get it.

I really wouldn't bother if I were you, some people don't want to
listen and Mary is one of those, she already seems to know everything.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

Mary Fisher wrote:

I - and, I suggest - MOST people who use the internet use MS. That means
it's successful. Why is it successful? Because it works. It does what I want
and I don't have a problem with what you say.

I would agree, I am sure most people do use OE (although a quick review
of the headers of the posts in this group would suggest there is a
sizeable proportion who do not use it for usenet access). It works well
enough, and comes free with the PC, hence people use it.

There's a difference between 'lose' and 'loose'.

Fair cop, missed that.

(although I suppose you could argue that "loose" as in "set free" would
still work in the sentence)

their personal appearance. In this case I consider that I was justified. If
you can criticise others' choice of utility you're leaving the field open to
criticism of the way you post.

It was not a criticism of their choice, just a recommendation they try
something different because it may solve the problem they are having.
Perhaps my wording was too brief / flippant.

When someone posts to say they are having difficulty drilling holes into
hard masonry, and I and others recommend switching to a SDS drill. It is
not intended as a criticism of their current tool, just telling them
there are ones better for the job.

The damning of OE by posters IS boring in that it's a constant moan. We know
how the moaners feel about OE, we choose to continue using it. Your

I am sure you are diligent enough (and sufficiently aware of the issues)
to keep your computer patched up to date, run current anti virus and
firewall software/hardware, keep your preview pane turned off, and most
importantly be selective as to what emails you open rather than delete.

My experience would suggest however that a good many users are not.
Unless someone tells them, how will they know?

(Sadly the answer is usualy once their computer is spending 90% of its
CPU time as a part of a script kiddies botnet, slugging internet
performance carrying out DDoS attacks, sending spam, and hosting dodgy porn)

On a more general point, I will often make a recommendation to people to
use an alternative tool, because of the damage that OE can do to
everyone else, even people who do not use it. Pretty much all the email
worms and viruses that I receive have at some time been propagated as a
result of a someone using IE/OE. Every customer I go to see, who is
complaining that their computer is running slowly or misbehaving in some
other way, has a machine loaded with spyware and trojans that have
arrived as a result of a lack of attention to detail on their part,
coupled with use of IE/OE. It is sometimes difficult to get their
attention, but you can change their software!


--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

I intended replying to your other post but since this one is fuller I shan't
need to type as much.

I - and, I suggest - MOST people who use the internet use MS. That means
it's successful. Why is it successful? Because it works. It does what I
want and I don't have a problem with what you say.

There's a difference between 'lose' and 'loose'.

Fair cop, missed that.

(although I suppose you could argue that "loose" as in "set free" would
still work in the sentence)

You used it in both posts and I doubt that it's what you meant.

their personal appearance. In this case I consider that I was justified.
If you can criticise others' choice of utility you're leaving the field
open to criticism of the way you post.

It was not a criticism of their choice, just a recommendation they try
something different because it may solve the problem they are having.

But you didn't. You said:
"(Loosing OE would help as well)"
You have a point in that there might be other systems which are better for
certain uses but you didn't suggest what they were or in what precise ways
they were better.

I'm fed up with people sounding very superior by denouncing OE users without
suggesting alternatives, with details of costs, benefits and other reasons
why they should be considered. It has become very boring and says more about
the posters than the people they're answering.

Perhaps my wording was too brief / flippant.

I think it was.

When someone posts to say they are having difficulty drilling holes into
hard masonry, and I and others recommend switching to a SDS drill. It is
not intended as a criticism of their current tool, just telling them there
are ones better for the job.

But who was posting to say that s/he was having difficulty with OE? No-one.

The damning of OE by posters IS boring in that it's a constant moan. We
know how the moaners feel about OE, we choose to continue using it. ...

I am sure you are diligent enough (and sufficiently aware of the issues)
to keep your computer patched up to date, run current anti virus and
firewall software/hardware,

I am. MS helpfully suggests those things.

keep your preview pane turned off,

I have NEVER used a preview pane, I can't see the point. It's never been the
default, I've never even tried to find out how to put it on. Don't bother
telling me :-)

and most importantly be selective as to what emails you open rather than
delete.

I certainly am. And I block those which I find offensive. But I still read
yours G

My experience would suggest however that a good many users are not. Unless
someone tells them, how will they know?

MS does give positive advice and help in telling people about security. You
didn't.

(Sadly the answer is usualy once their computer is spending 90% of its CPU
time as a part of a script kiddies botnet, slugging internet performance
carrying out DDoS attacks, sending spam, and hosting dodgy porn)

I don't understand the construction of that sentence, could you look at it
and explain it better, please? It might be interesting.

On a more general point, I will often make a recommendation to people to
use an alternative tool, because of the damage that OE can do to everyone
else, even people who do not use it.

But WHAT alternative tool? I've never seen you offer the 'SDS alternative'.

Pretty much all the email worms and viruses that I receive have at some
time been propagated as a result of a someone using IE/OE.

How on Earth did you receive them with all your protection? :-^

Every customer I go to see, who is complaining that their computer is
running slowly or misbehaving in some other way, has a machine loaded with
spyware and trojans that have arrived as a result of a lack of attention
to detail on their part, coupled with use of IE/OE. It is sometimes
difficult to get their attention, but you can change their software!

And you're saying that no-one who has whatever alternatives there are NEVER
get such nasties?

I'd find that very difficult to believe.

I support the responsible use of MS, it works well for me.

Mary

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

Advising someone to ditch OE would seems like good advice for any number
of reasons. It is the number one vector for email mailware on the planet,
and as a newsgroup reader it has a number of limitations - loosing message
threading due to (apparently) differing posting times being just one of
them.


Isn't Outlook (as in, the paid-for Office component) susceptible to the same
MS-targeted problems as OE, as regards email?

I use OE as a newsreader myself (with Outlook for email), admittedly for no
better reason than the fact that OE was 'there' when I wanted a newsreader,
and I keep meaning to get round to using something better. Would be
interested to know what others here prefer and why!

David

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:08:24 +0000, Lobster wrote:

"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

Advising someone to ditch OE would seems like good advice for any number
of reasons. It is the number one vector for email mailware on the
planet, and as a newsgroup reader it has a number of limitations -
loosing message threading due to (apparently) differing posting times
being just one of them.


Isn't Outlook (as in, the paid-for Office component) susceptible to the
same MS-targeted problems as OE, as regards email?

I use OE as a newsreader myself (with Outlook for email), admittedly for
no better reason than the fact that OE was 'there' when I wanted a
newsreader, and I keep meaning to get round to using something better.
Would be interested to know what others here prefer and why!

David

Knode or Pan on Linux for the simple reason that it is not a walking
security exploit!

--
Regards

Tony Hogarty
(Take out the garbage to reply)

On 15 Dec 2004, Lobster wrote

-snip-

I use OE as a newsreader myself (with Outlook for email),
admittedly for no better reason than the fact that OE was 'there'
when I wanted a newsreader, and I keep meaning to get round to
using something better. Would be interested to know what others
here prefer and why!

XNews; not for any wildly dogmatic reason, but just that I'd never
used OE when it was recommended to me.

I particularly like the way it lets me have a vertical screen division
(tree on the left; message text on the right), and it automatically
assigns the majority of the screen to whichever side you're dealing
with.

I've heard good things about XanaNews; I tried it and it seemed quite
good, but as there was no screaming advantage to cause me to switch,
I've stayed with XNews.

--
Cheers,
Harvey

Lobster wrote:

Isn't Outlook (as in, the paid-for Office component) susceptible to the same
MS-targeted problems as OE, as regards email?

It sure is. Using either Outlook or OE is inherently unsafe, and can
only be made safe through a lot of additional work.


I use OE as a newsreader myself (with Outlook for email), admittedly for no
better reason than the fact that OE was 'there' when I wanted a newsreader,
and I keep meaning to get round to using something better. Would be
interested to know what others here prefer and why!

This is really a personal preference thing - a lot of it depends on how
you like your intreface to look/work. Having said that, if you don't
have server-side spam filtering, give Thunderbird a go. Activate the
spam filtering, and you will be amazed at how good it is.

http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

--
Grunff

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:08:24 GMT, "Lobster"
strung together this:

Isn't Outlook (as in, the paid-for Office component) susceptible to the same
MS-targeted problems as OE, as regards email?

Yes. I use Mozilla Thunderbird for emails as a direct replacement for
OE, it does come across as being very OE based so you won't really
notice much of a difference during general use.
If you do try Thunderbird the try using Firefox too as a IE
replacement. I have found it to be the only true popup blocker and I
feel happier using it as opposed to IE.

I use OE as a newsreader myself (with Outlook for email), admittedly for no
better reason than the fact that OE was 'there' when I wanted a newsreader,
and I keep meaning to get round to using something better. Would be
interested to know what others here prefer and why!

I use Forte Agent 2, mainly because I've always used Free Agent and
got used to the look and feel. It's not too bad but I got the paid for
copy for free, I wouldn't pay for it as there are plenty of decent
free newsreaders out.
I did trial a few a while back and found Gravity to be pretty good.
--

SJW
Please reply to group or use 'usenet' in email subject

"Lobster" wrote in message
...
"John Rumm" wrote in message
...

Advising someone to ditch OE would seems like good advice for any number
of reasons. It is the number one vector for email mailware on the planet,
and as a newsgroup reader it has a number of limitations - loosing
message threading due to (apparently) differing posting times being just
one of them.


Isn't Outlook (as in, the paid-for Office component) susceptible to the
same MS-targeted problems as OE, as regards email?

I use OE as a newsreader myself (with Outlook for email), admittedly for
no better reason than the fact that OE was 'there' when I wanted a
newsreader, and I keep meaning to get round to using something better.
Would be interested to know what others here prefer and why!

As my computers generally arrive as a box of bits, nothing comes installed
on the machine. I use OE for the same reason that I use any other MS
product - it is the best for my purposes. One of the main considerations
being that a number of users, with a variety of computing skill levels,
should be able to use the products they are most likely to be familiar with.
Yes, it is the most popular target for attacks, but that does not mean that
other programmes or operating systems are immune from attacks and they
usually do not come with automatic installation of security updates when
vulnerabilities are found.

Colin Bignell

John Rumm wrote:

On a more general point, I will often make a recommendation to people
to use an alternative tool, because of the damage that OE can do to
everyone else, even people who do not use it. Pretty much all the
email worms and viruses that I receive have at some time been
propagated as a result of a someone using IE/OE. Every customer I go
to see, who is complaining that their computer is running slowly or
misbehaving in some other way, has a machine loaded with spyware and
trojans that have

Less of an issue now. Due to patches released in 2001, most of the nastiest
holes have been plugged. Many of the more recent viruses I see are
encrypted archives, making the user open the file, enter a password
contained in the message and run the executable manually. Don't tell me
that OE would be any worse than Thunderbird for these viruses!

When it comes to completely unpatched machines, I would agree 100%.

John.

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:20:31 UTC, "Mary Fisher"
wrote:

(snipped)

And you're saying that no-one who has whatever alternatives there are NEVER
get such nasties?

Virtually never. The principal problem with OE is its lack of security.
Yes, there are loads of patches. Something that has that many holes is
suspect. Its basic problem is that it does too much.

Use a 'simple' email client and the security holes just aren't there. It
can't accidentally execute a script if the execution environment isn't
provided. I gave my elderly mother-in-law Eudora on her machine, which
works fine for her. I removed OE completely. There may be exploits for
Eudora (not that I've found any yet) but they are few and far between).

I guess the reason people don't suggest alternatives is that there are
so many. Few, if any, suffer from the same security problems as OE.

I support the responsible use of MS, it works well for me.

But people AREN'T responsible - with a few exceptions. And who knows
when one of the holes that hasn't been found yet will suddenly bite you?
Or others in your address book? 'It works well for me' sounds a bit like
'I'm all right Jack'...

I criticise OE because it is a bad piece of software. It may be
superficially reliable, but it has bugs that haven't been fixed in years
(e.g. the pseudo attachment bug).

Yes, lots of people use it. Unfortunately it doesn't just affect them,
but others too. I'd draw a loose parallel with people driving the 'old'
Skodas. They were fine for limited applications, but at speed or heavily
loaded they were positively dangerous, IMO. Perhaps you just do the
equivalent of pottering round the town on OE, and you haven't been
seriously targeted by any exploits - in which case the OE 'Skoda' is
fine for the moment.
--
Bob Eager
begin a new life...dump Windows!

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:27:56 UTC, Tony Hogarty
wrote:

Knode or Pan on Linux for the simple reason that it is not a walking
security exploit!

Same here, with ProNews/2! But I started over 20 years ago with 'rn'...

--
Bob Eager

Mary Fisher wrote:

their personal appearance. In this case I consider that I was justified.
If you can criticise others' choice of utility you're leaving the field
open to criticism of the way you post.

It was not a criticism of their choice, just a recommendation they try
something different because it may solve the problem they are having.


But you didn't. You said:
"(Loosing OE would help as well)"
You have a point in that there might be other systems which are better for
certain uses but you didn't suggest what they were or in what precise ways
they were better.

Well to an extent, pretty much any of the applications designed as news
posting/reading clients will tend to do a better job.

However if you would like a specific recommendation, then I would
suggest that for people used to OE or Outlook they might like
Thunderbird. It has a nice (but not too different) UI, and you get a
number of advantages like good junk mail detection, ability to disable
running any active content in news/mail messages, support for RSS news
feeds etc.

If you don't mind paying for usenet software, then "The Bat" gets very
good reviews.

Ports of traditional Unix usenet software like Tin can also be good.
Forte Agent seems popular among many usenet users.

To be fair to OE, the more recent patches have started to add some more
security aware additions to that as well e.g. ability to block retrieval
of images not hosted on the sending site. It still has one major
achilles heel however in that it uses IE as a backend for rendering
HTML and hence inherits any vulnerabilities present in that.

But who was posting to say that s/he was having difficulty with OE? No-one.

The OP had a problem with jumbled message ordering. This could have been
attributed to OE's limited threading ability - there is an option buried
in the later versions to select whether this is done based on posting
time or thread IDs. (having found it the other day however, I can't find
which dialogue they have hidden it in today!)

The damning of OE by posters IS boring in that it's a constant moan. We
know how the moaners feel about OE, we choose to continue using it. ...

I am sure you are diligent enough (and sufficiently aware of the issues)
to keep your computer patched up to date, run current anti virus and
firewall software/hardware,


I am. MS helpfully suggests those things.

It does, alas many do not even read the suggestions (e.g. the recent
very sensible change to turn on the firewall in XP SP2 by default. This
was necessary simply because the majority of users did not bother to
enable it even though it was installed and ready to go).

keep your preview pane turned off,


I have NEVER used a preview pane, I can't see the point. It's never been the
default, I've never even tried to find out how to put it on. Don't bother
telling me :-)

I was under the impression (certainly for email) that the default window
layout in OE still has the message preview turned on. (i.e. the three
pane layout, inbox and other folders to the left, message titles top
right, preview bottom right).

and most importantly be selective as to what emails you open rather than
delete.


I certainly am. And I block those which I find offensive. But I still read
yours G

Note to self, must try harder ;-)

My experience would suggest however that a good many users are not. Unless
someone tells them, how will they know?


MS does give positive advice and help in telling people about security. You
didn't.

(Sadly the answer is usualy once their computer is spending 90% of its CPU
time as a part of a script kiddies botnet, slugging internet performance
carrying out DDoS attacks, sending spam, and hosting dodgy porn)


I don't understand the construction of that sentence, could you look at it
and explain it better, please? It might be interesting.

Apologies if you are already aware of some of the stuff that follows,
but it gives a fuller description of some of the above mentioned topics:

Much of the focus of computer "malware" in general has shifted in the
last couple of years. There was a time when computer viruses etc. ranged
in their unpleasantness, but they usualy shared a common goal of causing
some form of loss or disruption to the computer user, and propagating
copies of themselves. I don't pretend to understand the motivation of
the people who wrote these things, but I expect recognition among their
peer group was a big factor.

More recently things have taken a turn for the more sinister. Organised
crime has moved in, and opportunities for developing these technologies
into hard cash generating activities have grown.

As a result, the focus of much malware these days is to install itself
on a computer and *not* set out to do it any immediate harm. The desire
being to remain undetected. The majority of these applications open up
back doors into the computer. They will silently connect to a IRC
discussion channel, and await instruction from their master. This is a
"botnet". The back door will typically include a trojan downloader. This
is a program that can be instructed to download and execute any other
software at will. There are several common reasons for doing this:

1) The computers in the botnet can be instructed to perform a
Distributed Denial of Service attack. A recent example of this was a
Russian organised crime network that was targeting online casino sites.
Prior to a large sporting event they would threaten to take down their
web site unless it's owners paid up the requested extortion fee. If they
refused, they would find their web sites under attack from tens of
thousands of infected PCs. This would in effect knock them off the web
with their potential customers unable to reach them. DDoS attacks also
have a knock-on effect on other internet users as a result of the
bandwidth wasted by the attacks.

2) Estimates vary, but it is believed that over half of the worlds spam
is now relayed by compromised Windows PCs in this way. It is also much
harder to block small quantities of spam coming from large numbers of
hosts, than it is to block a large quantity of spam coming from a single
host.

3) Identity theft: Many botnets will have keyboard loggers installed.
These are designed to try and catch identity and other sensitive
financial data from the user of the PC. They can then "phone home" with
the information which can be used either for direct theft from online
bank accounts, or for identity theft etc.

4) Trojan diallers, another common technique it to compromise dial up
users so that there normal ISP connection is surreptitiously replaced
with a ISP service operating on a premium rate phone number. I have had
a couple of customers recently who had unexpected phone bills of several
hundred pounds more than they were expecting as a result of this.

5) Botnets are often assembled by script kiddies (i.e. relatively
unskilled "hackers" using tools, and virus construction sets built by
more expert developers). They also in themselves have a "value". Botnets
are now openly traded much like any other commodity. So if you were a
spammer, you could buy the services of say 25,000 computers for a
spamming campaign from the botnets "owner".

6) Hosting: your computer can be co-opted to host illegal content
(warez, pirated movies, kiddy porn etc) for later distribution.

Many of these activities can carry on undetected for months unless
something happens to draw the users attention to the matter. Typically
this is when too the computer gets compromised by too many separate
threats and is devoting so many of its resources to running these, it no
longer does what it's owner wants or expects. Alternatively some other
problem like a browser hijack forces the owner to attempt to scan and
remove the problem, and they stumble over the other stuff as well.

Pretty much all the email worms and viruses that I receive have at some
time been propagated as a result of a someone using IE/OE.


How on Earth did you receive them with all your protection? :-^

To be fair, I don't get many - most of the direct threats are removed by
our ISPs before I get to see them. Some spam still gets through, as do
copious bounce messages that indicate someone has got their PC
compromised and it is now sending spam pretending to come from one of
our domains!

The few nasties that get as far as the computer run into a compatibility
problem, in that the (Non PC, MS, or Intel) email system is not
compatible with them!

Every customer I go to see, who is complaining that their computer is
running slowly or misbehaving in some other way, has a machine loaded with
spyware and trojans that have arrived as a result of a lack of attention
to detail on their part, coupled with use of IE/OE. It is sometimes
difficult to get their attention, but you can change their software!


And you're saying that no-one who has whatever alternatives there are NEVER
get such nasties?

"No-one" would be going too far, since even if the alternative software
was invulnerable (which it isn't), the human element it still a weak
link. However I have yet to encounter any PCs that have been thoroughly
compromised in the same way, where the users have not been using IE/OE
as their primary internet suite. I am not sure how much statistical
significance you can draw from this, since if they are savvy enough to
actively seek out alternatives, they are already aware of many of the
risks.

You also have to be aware that an unpatched Win2K / XP system can get
compromised just being connected to the internet with no firewall. This
is irrespective of any software that runs on top for email/web access.

I'd find that very difficult to believe.

So would I. Part of the weakness of the MS applications is the nature of
the monoculture. I can see that if a significant proportion of users
ditch OE for a more secure alternative, then much of the black hat
effort will also shift in trying to find compromises for the alternative
platforms. However more diversity would help reduce the problem.

I support the responsible use of MS, it works well for me.

Glad to hear it, so do I. So long as it is not also at the same time
doing sterling service for a spotty teenager in Vladivostok, then carry on.



--
Cheers,

John.

/================================================== ===============\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\================================================= ================/

In message , nightjar
wrote

and they
usually do not come with automatic installation of security updates when
vulnerabilities are found.


Is this an advantage? Allowing any third party to automatically update
your software is foolish.

--
Alan

I support the responsible use of MS, it works well for me.

Mary

Mary, you implied in an earlier post that MS was succesful because people
used it. It has nothing to do then with the fact that MS appears to force
pc makers to install windows by offering it virtually free to them and
threatening to remove business if they attempt to offer pc's without an OS
or sell them with Linux on ?

Dave

--

Some people use windows, others have a life.

Tony Hogarty wrote in
newsan.2004.12.15.16.27.54.359133@tjhpropertygar bage.co.uk:

Would be interested to know what others here prefer and why!

Xnews - small and excellent, but on-line only.

Others that have been commended are Free Agent and Gravity.

I've tried them and come back to Xnews.

All freeware, of course!

mike

"Alan" wrote in message
...
In message , nightjar
wrote

and they
usually do not come with automatic installation of security updates when
vulnerabilities are found.


Is this an advantage? Allowing any third party to automatically update
your software is foolish.

No doubt you bought Betamax too, or would have if you are too young to
recall it.

Colin Bignell