If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
Robert Macy wrote:
On May 16, 6:10 pm, thanatoid wrote: Robert Macy wrote oups.com: Anybody know how to broach this next step of isolating my local folders and emails from requiring the log in to a soon to extinct ISP? No, but this might be a good time to mention what I thought after reading you direct reply to me, as well as *many* other times when reading other people's IE and/or webmail server horror stories. One should NOT keep ANY of their mail on ANY machine except their own and their own backups - preferably two if the stuff is really important. I do not have ANYTHING on the 3 different servers of any of my 4 email accounts, so when anything happens (and it always CAN, I remember a REAL horror story from a few years ago), I am safe. I DL, process, archive, backup and delete everything on the mail servers. And my email isn't even that important. It's the principle: Trust no one. Yes, great idea, but... I need to have access from 5 different machines to the same emails. So if I download to mine, there are four machines that can no longer see them. Solution #1: Set OE to leave a copy on the server. Solution #2: Get the mail into OE...Select all...Save as a folder on your desktop. Zip folder, send to other machines. _____________ Plus, being on dial up, I hate to take the time to download those peasky, and numerous, 20-100MB attachments I get. My last horror story was to save my emails on my own machine and then OE changed a version and incompatibility insued. I've been using OE versions from 1998 to now (v.6.00.2900.5512) and have never had any "incompatibilities" ______________ Adding insult to injury was that most of these emails were 500B to 3kB at most, and MS took a huge quantity of memory to store simple little emails, and always, always took miniutes to retrieve find etc. You are/were doing something wrong. That or your machine was severly gimped. ________________ I think the best way is to simply throw away emails and be done with it. You are right. Why people save them all is beyond me. Even worse is saving what THEY have sent. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
thanatoid wrote:
Robert Macy wrote in ups.com: My last horror story was to save my emails on my own machine and then OE changed a version and incompatibility insued. That's why MS software is to be avoided (I have NO MS programs on my 3 old computers except the OS's) and that's why all email should have remained TXT and attachments. Adding insult to injury was that most of these emails were 500B to 3kB at most, and MS took a huge quantity of memory to store simple little emails AFAIK, just like on your HDs, the LEAST amount of space a single file will use, even if it is only 15 bytes, is 4,096 bytes, True. Which is why OE stores emails as data in a dbx file. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
"dadiOH" wrote in
: You are right. Why people save them all is beyond me. Even worse is saving what THEY have sent. Actually I do it. Not because I'm in love with my own amethystine prose (half the reason I posted was just to get to use THAT), but because I often know I said something to someone once by mail, and need to remember what it was because it related to ongoing work, or because a server or incoming record borked, and the quoted reply I used in answering is the only remaining record. Most times I never think about it but the few times I needed it, I REALLY needed it, so the habit stayed. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
"dadiOH" wrote in
.com: AFAIK, just like on your HDs, the LEAST amount of space a single file will use, even if it is only 15 bytes, is 4,096 bytes, True. Which is why OE stores emails as data in a dbx file. nPOP keeps all in one file too. It's plain text, not compressed, which I like. Opening in TextPad to search with RegExp is hard to beat. I sometimes think compression would be cool to save space, but if the data files get big it loads slowly enough to notice and want better. Compression would make that worse. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
Robert Macy wrote:
On May 16, 8:20 am, "dadiOH" wrote: Robert Macy wrote: Solution, well a bit of a solution, was to empty delete folder, close application, reboot, ...then empty a chunk of the offending folder, empty the delete folder, and then close app and reboot. Only took six cycles of that to completely empty FOLDER01. One side note, even thought these were totally local folders and local operations, OE5 would NOT let me touch anything unless I was online and logged into the ISP that will soon be disappearing! The implications of that are horrific. Even though I have stored all the emails in local folders, when I can no longer log onto the ISP; I can't do anything with the contents of those local folders! Another fine example of logic from MS. Nothing is either horrific or illogical. If they are on your machine they are completely independent of both ISP and being online; neither is necessary. You can do anything you want with the mail messages...save them as files outside of OE's dbx files, delete them, read them, reply to them...anything. One thing you might want to do is compact them via OE; that or save them in a non-dbx folder and zip the folder; once saved in non-dbx folder - zipped or not - you can delete the originals that are still in OE's dbx. If not zipped, clicking on one will open it with OE; ditto if zipped though you might have to extract it first. Interesting. However, I could NOT move, nor delete any thing in the local folders, unless I was online with the ISP. OE5 wouldn't let me touch anything. Because you did not have them on your machine...they were on the server. __________ If not saved as .dbx just for OE5; what format aill the emails be saved in? If you have them on your machine and in OE, they WILL be and HAVE to be stored as data - not files, not emails - in the dbx files. That does NOT mean you cannot move individual emails somewhere else. To do so, all you need do is select one or more emails (NOT OE folders) in the pane showing them and drag or Save as to wherever you want them. They will be saved as whatever.eml In OE, the emails are saved as data in dbx files to conserve space. If stored as individual files they would each use a minumum of 4096 bytes which is the smallest possible allocation unit. That's why I suggest zipping emails moved elsewhere as those files ARE individual files. If you do move them out of OE, you still have the same data (emails) in OE's dbx files. No reason for it to be there, so you can delete those emails now duplicated elsewhere from OE. If you click on an email stored out of OE, your default email program will open, open the email and display it. If for some obscure reason you want to copy a moved email TO the OE dbx file, open OE and drag the file back to where you got it. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
Lostgallifreyan wrote:
"dadiOH" wrote in : You are right. Why people save them all is beyond me. Even worse is saving what THEY have sent. Actually I do it. Not because I'm in love with my own amethystine prose (half the reason I posted was just to get to use THAT), but because I often know I said something to someone once by mail, and need to remember what it was because it related to ongoing work, or because a server or incoming record borked, and the quoted reply I used in answering is the only remaining record. Most times I never think about it but the few times I needed it, I REALLY needed it, so the habit stayed. Better, IMO, to not save the normal sent stuff - lots of mine, at least, is mindless babble - but to stash something you might need later in a different dbx folder. -- dadiOH ____________________________ dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
"dadiOH" wrote in
: Better, IMO, to not save the normal sent stuff - lots of mine, at least, is mindless babble - but to stash something you might need later in a different dbx folder. Ok, but agomising over whether I'll need it later is tough, easier just to stow it. Hindsight by definition can't be planned for. Most times I really need that stash, it's because something unforseen happened. Take usenet for example.. Xnews stores all posts posted. I just let it do it. I rarely need to look, and most times I do it's just to check a post really got posted so I don't fire off dupes when all I need to do is wait for sluggish propagation. But there are other times when I need to know the reply I got to some post, and totally forgot the detail. Google is lousy without good search terms, and Usenet web archives are VAST. A quick search through my own history has got me search terms that quickly found entire original threads, with all replies. Hard to beat that... I shure as hell couldn't store all of that locally, though I do store a few tech threads where I know I'll need the reference, but again, hindsight isn't all it ought to be. Nor is memory! That is a subject which philosphers and psychologists and lawyers and scientists can write many books on, but I know it's suspect enough to value being able to see if I really did forget my own past experience, and keeping records of my reactions to it counts for a lot. It's notoriously hard to see ourselves as others see us, and keeping records like those helps with that too. Not that there haven't been inane mails I had good reason to chuck out. Those tend to go if they're just a bit of back-and-forth that meant nothing outside their own moment. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
Lostgallifreyan wrote in
: shure I NEVER spell 'sure' that way. I blame Querty.... And claim the fifth.. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
problem running IE 5 on Win98 ??
-- http://hot-text.ath.cx "Robert Macy" wrote in message ... weird problem with IE 5 running on Win98: one folder has 2,221 emails, during transfer [copy] to a local folder, error occurred, tried again, got double copies, and worse, can't now get rid of those 'extra' copies. don't delete, don't move (get an error message), can't even delete one at a time, nothing happens ?! any ideas as to how to purge the contents and refill with 'proper' emails? can't delete folder ...has subfolders plus won't delete anyway Download Internet Explorer 6 Service Pack 1 http://www.microsoft.com/windows/ie/...1/default.mspx |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Does anyone have Diskeeper 9 running on Win98 ? | Warren | General | 7 | April 12th 08 07:24 AM |
i running win98 se | [email protected] | General | 3 | October 5th 07 05:16 AM |
running win98 apps on xp? | Gary Grantham | General | 2 | March 18th 05 05:09 PM |
Running Win98 setup | jjhunt2 | Setup & Installation | 2 | November 30th 04 10:21 PM |
Issues with running an XP partition with Win98? | John | General | 3 | November 24th 04 09:14 PM |