«

Carnations wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:28:49 +1300, Enkidu wrote:
>
>>> As a complete aside, do you know if there is any code shared
>>> between MS Outlook and Outlook Express in any of its renamed
>>> variants?
>>>
>> It depends what you mean by shared code. There may some DLLs which
>> they both use, similar to the way that two applications may share
>> libraries in Linux. But the 'base code' to coin a phrase is not
>> shared.
>
> I wasn't referring to operating system libraries - but to them being
> (or not being) pulled from the same source code tree.
>
I'm not talking about the OS libraries either. Modern apps come in two
parts, the main application base and libraries of functions for the
application base to use. Other applications can be and often are written
to use the apps libraries. Some apps (eg PostgreSQL) separate the base
application and the libraries into two separate packages. Similar
applied to the Windows world - a DLL is written as support from an
application or in support of many applications.

In the Linux world many applications use the GTK API and are written to
use the GTK libraries for display purposes. I was thinking that maybe
the same applies in the Windows environment, with many apps using one or
a few display libraries.
>
> If they're not then why is Microsoft devoting all that effort to two
> different applications that people can use to do essentially the same
> thing - ie read email?
>
The reason is historical, as I understand it. There were two groups
within Microsoft creating an email client, one associated with the
browser group and one with the office system group.

Cheers,

Cliff

--

The Internet is interesting in that although the nicknames may change,
the same old personalities show through.

I caught a glimpse of Mary Hanna <> on Wed, 30 Dec 2009
19:07:25 +1300, writing in nz.comp:

>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:27:43 +1100, Erik Vastmasd <>
>wrote:
>
>>I caught a glimpse of Mary Hanna <> on Mon, 28 Dec 2009
>>20:06:57 +1300, writing in nz.comp:
>>
>>>Why I ask is that Outlook Express in no longer used.
>>>
>>>And from the looks of it Windows Live Mail has no support..
>>>
>>>I had a quick try of Live Mail, I got rid of it in a few hours utterly Total
>>>Crap..
>>
>>I see you are using Agent 5 currently, it can be upgraded to Agent 6
>>which works well under Windows 7.
>
>You do not need to Windows 7. has a Compatibility mode that works very well.

Does it force you to install Agent on C: ?

>Forte is getting a very greedy company, you need to upgrade every Year and Pay
>$30us each time, plus you have to upgrade to get the Bug fixes..0

Fair enough.
--

Erik

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:12:03 +1300, Donchano <>
wrote:

>
>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:07:25 +1300, Mary Hanna <>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>Forte is getting a very greedy company, you need to upgrade every Year and Pay
>>$30us each time, plus you have to upgrade to get the Bug fixes..
>
>Nonsense. Try and get your facts straight.
>
>You do NOT need to upgrade every year. Nor do you pay USD30.00 when
>you do. The upgrade costs USD19.00 and, in the rare event that there
>actually ARE any bug-fixes, you don't pay for them at all.


Yes you doo there are Bugs in V5 I have to buy V6 to get the Bugs Fixed..

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 17:42:17 +1100, Erik Vastmasd <>
wrote:

>I caught a glimpse of Mary Hanna <> on Wed, 30 Dec 2009
>19:07:25 +1300, writing in nz.comp:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 14:27:43 +1100, Erik Vastmasd <>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>I caught a glimpse of Mary Hanna <> on Mon, 28 Dec 2009
>>>20:06:57 +1300, writing in nz.comp:
>>>
>>>>Why I ask is that Outlook Express in no longer used.
>>>>
>>>>And from the looks of it Windows Live Mail has no support..
>>>>
>>>>I had a quick try of Live Mail, I got rid of it in a few hours utterly Total
>>>>Crap..
>>>
>>>I see you are using Agent 5 currently, it can be upgraded to Agent 6
>>>which works well under Windows 7.
>>
>>You do not need to Windows 7. has a Compatibility mode that works very well.
>
>Does it force you to install Agent on C: ?


Yes part of it but that can be moved.

>>Forte is getting a very greedy company, you need to upgrade every Year and Pay
>>$30us each time, plus you have to upgrade to get the Bug fixes..0
>
>Fair enough.

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:31:34 +1300, Mary Hanna <>
shouted from the highest rooftop:

>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:12:03 +1300, Donchano <>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:07:25 +1300, Mary Hanna <>
>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>
>>>Forte is getting a very greedy company, you need to upgrade every Year and Pay
>>>$30us each time, plus you have to upgrade to get the Bug fixes..
>>
>>Nonsense. Try and get your facts straight.
>>
>>You do NOT need to upgrade every year. Nor do you pay USD30.00 when
>>you do. The upgrade costs USD19.00 and, in the rare event that there
>>actually ARE any bug-fixes, you don't pay for them at all.
>
>
>Yes you doo there are Bugs in V5 I have to buy V6 to get the Bugs Fixed..

As usual you avoid addressing the very issues you yourself have raised
- ducking and diving for cover yet again. Version 6 isn't a bug-fix,
it's a major upgrade and it costs USD19.00 not the USD30.00 you
claimed. Nor do you "need to upgrade every Year."

Speaking of "doo" you are a bullshitter, Roger. Pure and simple, and
far too obvious to be taken seriously.

Happy New Year.

Somewhere on teh intarwebs Donchano wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 13:50:57 +1300, "~misfit~"
> <> shouted from the highest rooftop:
[snip]
>> It does exactly what I want and I'm happy with it (although I'll
>> likely try another client in the near future, if there's better [for
>> me] then I want it). I take offence at your insulting me for my
>> choice.
>
> If this was technical newsgroup dedicated to discussing Usenet and
> newsreaders instead of being a more general and parochial newsgroup
> that covers a variety of computer and IT subjects - both technical and
> non-technical - you'd soon discover that your opinion is not shared by
> anyone who has a knowledge of and interest in newsreaders and their
> relative merits.
>
> If you don't believe me, I challenge you to take your opinions about
> using OE as your newsreader of choice to:
>
> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent
> or
> alt.usenet.offline-reader
> or
> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent.modified
>
> But please be prepared to be offended.

I wouldn't post in those groups. Also I've had self-opinionated people talk
down to me over my choice of newsreader many times over the years in random
groups.

I've been using OE (with Quotefix) for usenet since Windows 95 and it hasn't
ever caused me one problem. Not one. How then am I a chump?
--
Shaun.

"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:32:12 +1300, "~misfit~"
<> shouted from the highest rooftop:

>> If this was technical newsgroup dedicated to discussing Usenet and
>> newsreaders instead of being a more general and parochial newsgroup
>> that covers a variety of computer and IT subjects - both technical and
>> non-technical - you'd soon discover that your opinion is not shared by
>> anyone who has a knowledge of and interest in newsreaders and their
>> relative merits.
>>
>> If you don't believe me, I challenge you to take your opinions about
>> using OE as your newsreader of choice to:
>>
>> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent
>> or
>> alt.usenet.offline-reader
>> or
>> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent.modified
>>
>> But please be prepared to be offended.
>
>I wouldn't post in those groups. Also I've had self-opinionated people talk
>down to me over my choice of newsreader many times over the years in random
>groups.
>
>I've been using OE (with Quotefix) for usenet since Windows 95 and it hasn't
>ever caused me one problem. Not one. How then am I a chump?

Simple: by using a OE as your newsreader of choice and not having the
balls to accept advice to the contrary from people who know more about
Usenet than you do.

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:25:27 +1300, Donchano <>
wrote:

>
>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 20:31:34 +1300, Mary Hanna <>
>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:12:03 +1300, Donchano <>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 19:07:25 +1300, Mary Hanna <>
>>>shouted from the highest rooftop:
>>>
>>>>Forte is getting a very greedy company, you need to upgrade every Year and Pay
>>>>$30us each time, plus you have to upgrade to get the Bug fixes..
>>>
>>>Nonsense. Try and get your facts straight.
>>>
>>>You do NOT need to upgrade every year. Nor do you pay USD30.00 when
>>>you do. The upgrade costs USD19.00 and, in the rare event that there
>>>actually ARE any bug-fixes, you don't pay for them at all.
>>
>>
>>Yes you doo there are Bugs in V5 I have to buy V6 to get the Bugs Fixed..
>
>As usual you avoid addressing the very issues you yourself have raised
>- ducking and diving for cover yet again. Version 6 isn't a bug-fix,
>it's a major upgrade and it costs USD19.00 not the USD30.00 you
>claimed. Nor do you "need to upgrade every Year."

CANT YOU READ ITS A BUG FIX LITTLE BOY.

>Speaking of "doo" you are a bullshitter, Roger. Pure and simple, and
>far too obvious to be taken seriously.


I HAVE THE BUGS TO PROVE IT.

>Happy New Year.

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:38:01 +1300, Donchano <>
wrote:

>
>On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 21:32:12 +1300, "~misfit~"
><> shouted from the highest rooftop:
>
>>> If this was technical newsgroup dedicated to discussing Usenet and
>>> newsreaders instead of being a more general and parochial newsgroup
>>> that covers a variety of computer and IT subjects - both technical and
>>> non-technical - you'd soon discover that your opinion is not shared by
>>> anyone who has a knowledge of and interest in newsreaders and their
>>> relative merits.
>>>
>>> If you don't believe me, I challenge you to take your opinions about
>>> using OE as your newsreader of choice to:
>>>
>>> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent
>>> or
>>> alt.usenet.offline-reader
>>> or
>>> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent.modified
>>>
>>> But please be prepared to be offended.
>>
>>I wouldn't post in those groups. Also I've had self-opinionated people talk
>>down to me over my choice of newsreader many times over the years in random
>>groups.
>>
>>I've been using OE (with Quotefix) for usenet since Windows 95 and it hasn't
>>ever caused me one problem. Not one. How then am I a chump?
>
>Simple: by using a OE as your newsreader of choice and not having the
>balls to accept advice to the contrary from people who know more about
>Usenet than you do.
>


This chap gets more Hate posts that any one else and has the biggest Kill file
in History..

On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 09:19:27 +1300, "geoff" <>
shouted from the highest rooftop:

>Donchano wrote:
>>
>> If you don't believe me, I challenge you to take your opinions about
>> using OE as your newsreader of choice to:
>>
>> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent
>> or
>> alt.usenet.offline-reader
>> or
>> alt.usenet.offline-reader.forte-agent.modified
>>
>> But please be prepared to be offended.
>
>Are they 'religous' like Linux and Apple adherents ?

A few are. Most aren't. But none of them is as rabid as Linux and
Apple adherents or suicide bombers.