"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com...
> bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
> http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
I dont know about plans, They allready have bought a voip company called
Teleo.
I believe the ideais to include it under the MSN brand
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 12:14:09 +0100, "Ian" <spam"AT"bathfordhill.co.uk>
wrote:
>
>"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com.. .
>> bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
>> http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
>> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
>
>I dont know about plans, They allready have bought a voip company called
>Teleo.
You clearly didn't read the article first then Ian!
In article <2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com>, no_spam_bca1000
@hotmail.com says...
> bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
> http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
>
Oh dear, that is not good.
You be part way though your conversation and realise that someone else
is also listening, because of the lack of security, then you will have
to wait for a service pack to get it right.
The other problem you may get is some way into your conversation, you
will get a spoken message like "the phone service have caused an error,
we are sorry for the inconvenience"
"Me" <me@me.me> wrote in message
news:0u8bh1d0tn30lc2trr12sdngk1pmo7fq1f@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 12:14:09 +0100, "Ian" <spam"AT"bathfordhill.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Brian A" <no_spam_bca1000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com.. .
> >> bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
> >> http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
> >> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
> >
> >I dont know about plans, They allready have bought a voip company called
> >Teleo.
>
> You clearly didn't read the article first then Ian!
Not the BBC one as theirs are always simplified. I had read http://tinyurl.com/a6pop early this morning which is a bit more in depth
By buying teleo they now have a voip company what they are planning to do is
incorperate it into MSN.
AD C wrote:
> In article <2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com>, no_spam_bca1000
> @hotmail.com says...
>
>>bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
>>http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
>>Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
>>
>
> Oh dear, that is not good.
> You be part way though your conversation and realise that someone else
> is also listening, because of the lack of security, then you will have
> to wait for a service pack to get it right.
> The other problem you may get is some way into your conversation, you
> will get a spoken message like "the phone service have caused an error,
> we are sorry for the inconvenience"
Nah, they're more likely to release it in a year or two, then claim that
they invented voip.
>On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:09:50 +0100, AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com>, no_spam_bca1000
>>@hotmail.com says...
>>> bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
>>> http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
>>> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
>>>
>>Oh dear, that is not good.
>>You be part way though your conversation and realise that someone else
>>is also listening, because of the lack of security, then you will have
>>to wait for a service pack to get it right.
>>The other problem you may get is some way into your conversation, you
>>will get a spoken message like "the phone service have caused an error,
>>we are sorry for the inconvenience"
>When you have used it then criticize it if you must and not before .
Why should Micro$oft be immune from a few jibes based on their past record?
They have truly earned it. Only now, after about 20 years, do they have a
reasonably stable GUI OS.
On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:20:28 +0100, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>Why should Micro$oft be immune from a few jibes based on their past record?
>They have truly earned it. Only now, after about 20 years, do they have a
>reasonably stable GUI OS.
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d7fbc75cbe5b1dc989713@news.metronet.co.u k...
> In article <2b1bh1l7i48l42qqp7ks1frkgdbj0ejrbh@4ax.com>, no_spam_bca1000
> @hotmail.com says...
>> bbc: Microsoft plans telephone service
>> http://tinyurl.com/ac3je
>> Remove 'no_spam_' from email address.
>>
> Oh dear, that is not good.
> You be part way though your conversation and realise that someone else
> is also listening, because of the lack of security, then you will have
> to wait for a service pack to get it right.
> The other problem you may get is some way into your conversation, you
> will get a spoken message like "the phone service have caused an error,
> we are sorry for the inconvenience"
....We will end up having to press * # and Recall to reset the phone, then
it'll take 5 minutes to boot, because it will have to run Windows CE
SmartVoIPPhone Edition!!
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:20:28 +0100, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> >Why should Micro$oft be immune from a few jibes based on their past record?
> >They have truly earned it. Only now, after about 20 years, do they have a
> >reasonably stable GUI OS.
>
> Oh good - is there a proposed release date??
> Geo
Only when they start making vacuum cleaners will Microsoft have a
product that doesn't suck!
In article <5ijRe.39$t_4.5@newsfe2-win.ntli.net>, tom@sanguinarius.dyndns.org says...
>
> Nah, they're more likely to release it in a year or two, then claim that
> they invented voip.
>
Oh yes, like they are going to change the name of RSS and no doubt say
they invented it.
> When you have used it then criticize it if you must and not before .
>
It is Microsoft, they are there to be criticised. come on, you only have
to look at their software to see what well happen.
Microsoft have not made one bit of software that do not have security
flaws or that don't crash. How the hell they got where they are, I don't
know.
Just proves that even rubbish can do well.
In article <eeibh197t1a94fa73nk7d5qhp15mm47cr0@4ax.com>, me@privacy.net
says...
>
> Why should Micro$oft be immune from a few jibes based on their past record?
> They have truly earned it. Only now, after about 20 years, do they have a
> reasonably stable GUI OS.
>
>
Are you sure about that? every time I install some new software these
last few weeks, the computer decides it don't want to restart.
the only way I can get it to restart is to stick it in safe mode and
then restart it in normal mode.
I just come back from a mates place, he turned his computer off this
morning and when he switched it back on, it kept resetting.
Why? Nothing have changed, and that only way he could stop it was to
press f8 and use the start with last known good configuration option.
That is not a sign of a stable OS system, I do admit that XP is better
than ME, but then that is not difficult.
I really am getting fed up with Microsoft and if the software I wanted
to use was available on Linux, then I change over completely tomorrow.
In article <43162df8$0$38039$bed64819@news.gradwell.net>, this@is.invalid says...
>
>
> ...We will end up having to press * # and Recall to reset the phone, then
> it'll take 5 minutes to boot, because it will have to run Windows CE
> SmartVoIPPhone Edition!!
>
It makes me laugh that Bt is going to use windows base set top boxes for
their TV over IP systenm. Still they both deserve each other.
AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
[...]
> I really am getting fed up with Microsoft and if the software I
> wanted to use was available on Linux, then I change over completely
> tomorrow.
There is the alternative possibility that the software you want is
available for OSX.
--
I like children. If they're properly cooked.
- W.C. Fields
In article <df7fvg$jg6$2@slavica.ukpost.com>, adamc@linuxmail.org
says...
> > I really am getting fed up with Microsoft and if the software I wanted
> > to use was available on Linux, then I change over completely tomorrow.
> >
>
>
> What software is it you want to use that stops you from using Linux?
>
I do use Linux now and again, but not much.
I need decent video editing software, decent audio editing software. the
other problem is that one of my printers do not have Linux drivers and
how ever much I try, I can not get my wireless network card to work in
Linux.
In article <43174a7e$0$525$da0feed9@news.zen.co.uk>, abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
> AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
> > I really am getting fed up with Microsoft and if the software I
> > wanted to use was available on Linux, then I change over completely
> > tomorrow.
>
> There is the alternative possibility that the software you want is
> available for OSX.
>
>
That means getting another computer, something that I am not willing to
do for another couple of years.
My machine is a 2500 Athlon, with 1Gb of ram and almost 1Gb of storage
on the hard drives. How ever much I like the MAC, it will never have the
same power and it certainly not be able to cope with the storage, unless
it is external or I get one of the very expensive macs.
I do like the MAc, but it do not offer good value for money, compared to
a P.C.
> I do use Linux now and again, but not much.
> I need decent video editing software, decent audio editing software. the
> other problem is that one of my printers do not have Linux drivers and
> how ever much I try, I can not get my wireless network card to work in
> Linux.
Look for a kernel module called ndiswrapper it allows most WLAN devices
to work under linux using the WINDOWS driver.
Regards
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
In article <431f0d88.0@entanet>, viperdudeuk@gmail.com says...
> AD C wrote:
>
> Look for a kernel module called ndiswrapper it allows most WLAN devices
> to work under linux using the WINDOWS driver.
>
I tried that, still no go, but then my network card is a bit strange.
In article <3o8q1lF4n9e9U1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
>
> "Jon Farmer" <viperdudeuk@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:431f0d88.0@entanet
>
> Your post was empty but had an attachment, which my system deleted. Please
> repost in plain text.
>
"AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d897f1b9f218aed9897df@news.metronet.co.u k
> In article <3o8q1lF4n9e9U1@individual.net>,
> ivor@despammed.invalid says...
> >
> >
> > "Jon Farmer" <viperdudeuk@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:431f0d88.0@entanet
> >
> > Your post was empty but had an attachment, which my
> > system deleted. Please repost in plain text.
> >
>
>
> It was ok here.
Maybe your system accepts attachments, mine doesn't. Do you have HTML
enabled..? I don't use that for mail either. Email and usenet should be
plain text only except in binary groups.
Ivor Jones wrote:
> "AD C" <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1d897f1b9f218aed9897df@news.metronet.co.u k
>>In article <3o8q1lF4n9e9U1@individual.net>,
>>ivor@despammed.invalid says...
>>>"Jon Farmer" <viperdudeuk@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:431f0d88.0@entanet
>>>
>>>Your post was empty but had an attachment, which my
>>>system deleted. Please repost in plain text.
>>
>>It was ok here.
>
> Maybe your system accepts attachments, mine doesn't. Do you have HTML
> enabled..? I don't use that for mail either.
It wasn't HTML, it was multipart/signed - a plain text part for the
message and a plain text part for the signature.
> Email and usenet should be plain text only except in binary groups.
In article <3o99fhF4s9qfU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
> >
> > It was ok here.
>
> Maybe your system accepts attachments, mine doesn't. Do you have HTML
> enabled..? I don't use that for mail either. Email and usenet should be
> plain text only except in binary groups.
>
It does accept HTML, but I don't think Gavity sends in HTML. I agree
with you about Usenews, HTML is not a good idea, But email? My main
email client accepts and sends HTML, but I can stop it sending. In fact
incredimail is made for HTML. Most of the people I email have changed
over to Incrdimailo, because you can do silly things. Yes it is a bit of
sillyness, with animated smilies and other icons. But with everyone I
know being on broadband, it don't really matter now.
Of cause, you need to know when to go back to plain text.
AD C wrote:
> In article <3o99fhF4s9qfU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
> says...
>>>It was ok here.
>>
>>Maybe your system accepts attachments, mine doesn't. Do you have HTML
>>enabled..? I don't use that for mail either. Email and usenet should be
>>plain text only except in binary groups.
>
> It does accept HTML, but I don't think Gavity sends in HTML. I agree
> with you about Usenews, HTML is not a good idea, But email? My main
> email client accepts and sends HTML, but I can stop it sending. In fact
> incredimail is made for HTML. Most of the people I email have changed
> over to Incrdimailo, because you can do silly things. Yes it is a bit of
> sillyness, with animated smilies and other icons. But with everyone I
> know being on broadband, it don't really matter now.
Until there is an exploitable hole in the HTML rendering engine or you
want to read the mail in a mail client which does not understand HTML
(assuming that the software does not send a plain text part as well).
"Paul Cupis" <paul@cupis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:dfqemu$1glm$1@custnews.inweb.co.uk
> AD C wrote:
> > In article <3o99fhF4s9qfU1@individual.net>,
> > ivor@despammed.invalid says...
> > > > It was ok here.
> > >
> > > Maybe your system accepts attachments, mine doesn't.
> > > Do you have HTML enabled..? I don't use that for mail
> > > either. Email and usenet should be plain text only
> > > except in binary groups.
> >
> > It does accept HTML, but I don't think Gavity sends in
> > HTML. I agree with you about Usenews, HTML is not a
> > good idea, But email? My main email client accepts and
> > sends HTML, but I can stop it sending. In fact
> > incredimail is made for HTML. Most of the people I
> > email have changed over to Incrdimailo, because you can
> > do silly things. Yes it is a bit of sillyness, with
> > animated smilies and other icons. But with everyone I
> > know being on broadband, it don't really matter now.
Of course it matters. 90% plus of all email sent is spam, why make it
larger than necessary..?
> Until there is an exploitable hole in the HTML rendering
> engine or you want to read the mail in a mail client
> which does not understand HTML (assuming that the
> software does not send a plain text part as well).
I don't like HTML mail. Like an awful lot of web pages, an HTML email is
bloated and takes up more bandwidth and disk space than is necessary. Ok
so perhaps the majority of people are on broadband, but is that a reason
for using excessive resources..? Unlike a web page, HTML rarely adds any
useful content to an email.
I don't accept it, anyone sending me HTML mail is politely asked not to do
so again. If they ignore the request, I don't accept mail from them again.
In article <dfqemu$1glm$1@custnews.inweb.co.uk>, paul@cupis.co.uk
says...
> > It does accept HTML, but I don't think Gavity sends in HTML. I agree
> > with you about Usenews, HTML is not a good idea, But email? My main
> > email client accepts and sends HTML, but I can stop it sending. In fact
> > incredimail is made for HTML. Most of the people I email have changed
> > over to Incrdimailo, because you can do silly things. Yes it is a bit of
> > sillyness, with animated smilies and other icons. But with everyone I
> > know being on broadband, it don't really matter now.
>
> Until there is an exploitable hole in the HTML rendering engine or you
I have had no problems so far and I have been using Incredimail for over
4 years, in fact a few weeks ago, I decided to buy a license for the
software. I never thought I would buy email software
> want to read the mail in a mail client which does not understand HTML
> (assuming that the software does not send a plain text part as well).
>
I can get it to send plain text, if I want too, that is easy, you just
click on plain text instead of the pretty pictures.
I must admit, when a friend of mine started to use incredimail, I
thought what is the point? at the end of the day, all I wanted to do was
to send and receive email, nothing flashy, in fact I would not even
allow attachments. Now it is nice to have,
In article <3obtcmF57kteU1@individual.net>, ivor@despammed.invalid
says...
>
> Of course it matters. 90% plus of all email sent is spam, why make it
> larger than necessary..?
Don't be a misery, it livens up a boring email, I don't go mad, I have a
back ground and some animated smilies. As for spam, I do not suffer from
that, on my own domain, but then if the email is not addressed
correctly, then it will never get to me.
>
> I don't like HTML mail. Like an awful lot of web pages, an HTML email is
> bloated and takes up more bandwidth and disk space than is necessary. Ok
> so perhaps the majority of people are on broadband, but is that a reason
> for using excessive resources..? Unlike a web page, HTML rarely adds any
> useful content to an email.
>
> I don't accept it, anyone sending me HTML mail is politely asked not to do
> so again. If they ignore the request, I don't accept mail from them again.
>
Some people would not know how to turn of HTML, in fact a lot of people
would not even know what it is. things have changed a bit since the
early days of the internet, why do you think we are getting more flash
animation? I like a website to be informative, but if it is just a load
of text, it gets boring.
You are of cause within your right not to recieve in HTML, my system is
set to reject email that do not have a subject.
AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> ivor@despammed.invalid wrote:
>> Of course it matters. 90% plus of all email sent is spam, why make
>> it larger than necessary..?
> Don't be a misery, it livens up a boring email,
I'm of the school of thought that engaging writing livens up a boring
email. Having it look like an angry fruit salad tells me that the
sender doesn't actually have anything to say.
I bet you even use MS Comic Sans to "liven up" your mail:
BBC: Microsoft plans telephone service 
Linear Mode
