WindowsLiveMail OE-QuoteFix Substitute


B

Buffalo

Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
Thanks,
Buffalo
PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?
 
Ad

Advertisements

J

John Williamson

Buffalo said:
Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
Thanks,
Buffalo
PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?
You could try the sequence mentioned here:-

http://www.dusko-lolic.from.hr/wlmquote/

It may need you to step back to WLM 14, though. As I don'tuse WLM, I
don't know if it works well, if at all.

Or install a proper newsreader such as Agent. Or install Thunderbird,
which I find a reasonable compromise between a newsreader and an e-mail
program.
 
K

Ken Blake

Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.

Windows Live Mail doesn't do it in newsgroups and it also doesn't do
it in e-mail. It's largely for that reason that most of us here
consider Windows Live Mail to be the *worst* such program available. I
strongly recommend dumping it.

PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?

There's no reason to use Windows Live Mail. There are lots of other
choices, and they are all better than Windows Live Mail. I use Forte
Agent for newsgroups and Microsoft Outlook for e-mail.
 
M

mechanic

Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
Thanks,
Buffalo
PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?
Maybe this will help?
http://www.dusko-lolic.from.hr/wlmquote/
 
R

R. C. White

Hi, Buffalo.
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
That no-quoting problem is probably the most-complained-about failing of
Windows Live Mail - and with good reason. Because of that, many Usenet and
email users (including my good friend, Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP) refuse to
use it - and say so loudly and often. But a few of us diehards (like me)
continue to use it, while working around its quirks and deficiencies. If
you want to switch to something else, it's OK by me. But, if you want to
continue with WLM, my workaround may help.

Different versions (builds) of WLM work with different versions of Windows.
The quote problem varies from build to build. The headers for your post say
you are using Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513, which is about a
year old and a couple of builds behind.

I'm running Windows 8 with the latest WLM (Build 16.4.3505.0912). To get
this latest build, go to
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-live/essentials-home - but be
aware that the quoting problem still has not been fixed -and WILL NOT BE
FIXED. Microsoft stopped developing WLM a couple of years ago.

As a workaround, I often copy'n'paste pertinent parts of the original
message, then insert ">" before the pasted text, as I did at the start of
this message. For a multi-line paragraph, I reformat the lines and put ">"
before the first line; WLM adds it to the other lines.

RC
-- --
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3505.0912) in Win8 Pro


"Buffalo" wrote in message
Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
Thanks,
Buffalo
PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?
 
W

..winston

At this stage of the MSFT product line with development ceasing on Windows Live Mail (even though included in the last Windows
Essentials 2012 release that also rebranded Photo Gallery/Movie Maker dropping the Live name, dropped Live Mesh in favor of
SkyDrive and now ceasing Live Messenger in lieu of Skype) even if a third party app was available future updates from that 3rd
party source for that feature may rapidly diminish.

In the long run, you might be better off with just using WLMail for email accounts and choose a separate news reader (nntp client)
for news reading (e.g. SeaMonkey which coincidentally also provides a decent Mozilla based alternative to Internet Explorer 9 and
10)

WLMail's design intent was never for news (while it can be used) but for email and primarily for use with Microsoft based Hotmail
type accounts (Hotmail, Live, Msn, Outlook.com) using the Http protocol (DeltaSync).


--
....winston
msft mvp


"Buffalo" wrote in message
Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
Thanks,
Buffalo
PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?
 
J

J. P. Gilliver (John)

In message <kqKdnRlsjOcptprMnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@posted.grandecom>, R. C.
White said:
As a workaround, I often copy'n'paste pertinent parts of the original
message, then insert ">" before the pasted text, as I did at the start
of this message. For a multi-line paragraph, I reformat the lines and
put ">" before the first line; WLM adds it to the other lines.
[]
Interesting that it does that. Any reason you don't use WLM-quotefix? I
ask as an interested observer: I've never used WLM (any edition), but
have seen WLM-QF mentioned by many, so as a "diehard" WLM user, I'd be
interested to know your reason for not using it, assuming you've tried
it.
 
K

Ken Blake

That no-quoting problem is probably the most-complained-about failing of
Windows Live Mail - and with good reason. Because of that, many Usenet and
email users (including my good friend, Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP) refuse to
use it - and say so loudly and often.

Right <g> But I not only refuse to use it, I strongly *recommend*
against it. I'll say it loudly again: I think it's the worst of all
the available choices.

But a few of us diehards (like me)
continue to use it, while working around its quirks and deficiencies. If
you want to switch to something else, it's OK by me. But, if you want to
continue with WLM, my workaround may help.

Yes, I know that you, and Winston, continue to use it. But to tell the
truth, I really don't understand why. Yes, you insert the > signs
into the quotations manually, and it's greatly appreciated, since as a
result your message are no harder to read that of other people.

But what I don't understand is why you go to the trouble of manually
inserting the > signs when you have several other choices of better
newsreaders and e-mail clients (several of which are free) that do it
for you automatically. Is there something you like better about
Windows Live Mail than its competitors? I haven't used it in a while,
but I tried it when it first came out, and I couldn't find anything I
particularly liked about it, and very quickly stopped using it. Both
for Usenet and for e-mail, its lack of automatically inserting the >
sign makes it a non-contender for me.
 
K

Ken Blake

In message <kqKdnRlsjOcptprMnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@posted.grandecom>, R. C.
White said:
As a workaround, I often copy'n'paste pertinent parts of the original
message, then insert ">" before the pasted text, as I did at the start
of this message. For a multi-line paragraph, I reformat the lines and
put ">" before the first line; WLM adds it to the other lines.
[]
Interesting that it does that. Any reason you don't use WLM-quotefix? I
ask as an interested observer: I've never used WLM (any edition), but
have seen WLM-QF mentioned by many, so as a "diehard" WLM user, I'd be
interested to know your reason for not using it, assuming you've tried
it.

Two points:

1. I've never tried WLM-quotefix, so I have no opinions about it. But
if anybody here has tried it (or is still using it), I'd like to hear
your opinions.

2. If Windows Live Mail was better than its competitors in ways other
than its quoting, I could understand using a third-party solution like
WLM-quotefix. But I see no reason to try to fix that defect in a
program that, as far as I'm concerned, has no other strengths.
 
B

Bob Henson

Right <g> But I not only refuse to use it, I strongly *recommend*
against it. I'll say it loudly again: I think it's the worst of all
the available choices.




Yes, I know that you, and Winston, continue to use it. But to tell the
truth, I really don't understand why. Yes, you insert the > signs
into the quotations manually, and it's greatly appreciated, since as a
result your message are no harder to read that of other people.

But what I don't understand is why you go to the trouble of manually
inserting the > signs when you have several other choices of better
newsreaders and e-mail clients (several of which are free) that do it
for you automatically. Is there something you like better about
Windows Live Mail than its competitors? I haven't used it in a while,
but I tried it when it first came out, and I couldn't find anything I
particularly liked about it, and very quickly stopped using it. Both
for Usenet and for e-mail, its lack of automatically inserting the >
sign makes it a non-contender for me.
I have asked the same question of many people, and have yet to get any
answer which makes sense. My own conclusion is that they do it just
because other people ask them not to do so, just as some people dye
their hair bright red so as not to be seen to conform to the widely
accepted norm. I have never, personally, been so bolshie as to feel the
need, but some do.
 
R

R. C. White

Hi, Ken (and John and others).

The REAL reason I use WLM probably is "inertia". ;^}

In the '80's and early '90's, before the first Outlook Express, I
experimented with many online services, starting with CompuServe in 1978.
Had a Charter Account with AOL. Was a regular on many BBSes and mailservs.
Used Aladdin (on GEnie), Lexis/Nexis, Gopher, Bitnet, Delphi, Pegasus,
Eudora, Netcom, Netscape - and so many others that I can't even remember
now. And then Win95 and OE came along. By then, I was tired of
experimenting and OE fit my style of reading and posting very well. Its
best feature - which other clients didn't support at that time - was that I
could collect mail from multiple mail servers with a single phone call, in
those pre-broadband days of dial-up only (even with my shiny new 2400-baud
modem). And everything was long-distance then. When the Internet finally
came to San Marcos in 1995, I could FINALLY use email (and Usenet) without
paying for long-distance telephone. The common wisdom was that "It's
cheaper to call Boston than Austin" because interstate phone rates were much
cheaper than intrastate. For years, my monthly bill for online services
might be $20, but my LD bill for 100 MINUTES might be over $200 - some
months I paid $700 for LD! So, when I finally could make one call do it
all, I was so grateful to my local ISP and to OE that I formed an attachment
that still exists.

So, although my original ISP was bought out by another ISP and that one by a
bigger ISP, I still have the successor to my subscription. And I still have
the successor to OE.

And OE/WM/WLM still fits ME. You've recommended Outlook to me several
times, Ken, and I've tried it. In fact, I have OL 2010 running in the
background right now. But it doesn't do Newsgroups. And its "philosophy"
(I suppose that's the right word) for handling email confuses me no end! It
just doesn't fit ME.

Yes, I know I could use separate apps for news and mail, just as I did 20+
years ago. But I LIKE the way WLM handles both. So I haven't bothered to
experiment with Forte Agent or Sea Monkey or all those other apps that I see
others are so happy with. I'm happy with WLM - for now. Yes, I suspect
that WLM's days are numbered and I will have to choose something else in the
not-too-distant future. When that time comes, I'll be ready for advice and
recommendations from you and others. But I'm in no hurry. ;^}

RC
-- --
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3505.0912) in Win8 Pro


"Ken Blake" wrote in message

That no-quoting problem is probably the most-complained-about failing of
Windows Live Mail - and with good reason. Because of that, many Usenet
and
email users (including my good friend, Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP) refuse to
use it - and say so loudly and often.

Right <g> But I not only refuse to use it, I strongly *recommend*
against it. I'll say it loudly again: I think it's the worst of all
the available choices.

But a few of us diehards (like me)
continue to use it, while working around its quirks and deficiencies. If
you want to switch to something else, it's OK by me. But, if you want to
continue with WLM, my workaround may help.

Yes, I know that you, and Winston, continue to use it. But to tell the
truth, I really don't understand why. Yes, you insert the > signs
into the quotations manually, and it's greatly appreciated, since as a
result your message are no harder to read that of other people.

But what I don't understand is why you go to the trouble of manually
inserting the > signs when you have several other choices of better
newsreaders and e-mail clients (several of which are free) that do it
for you automatically. Is there something you like better about
Windows Live Mail than its competitors? I haven't used it in a while,
but I tried it when it first came out, and I couldn't find anything I
particularly liked about it, and very quickly stopped using it. Both
for Usenet and for e-mail, its lack of automatically inserting the >
sign makes it a non-contender for me.
 
R

R. C. White

Hi, John.
Any reason you don't use WLM-quotefix?
Like you, I haven't tried it. Manual insertion of the ">" is just not that
big a problem for me.

As a retired auditor, I always want to "preserve the audit trail", so I
generally quote the entire previous message, and maybe the entire thread if
it helps to preserve the sense of the conversation. I don't care to get
into a top-post/bottom-post/cut'n'paste discussion. Each method works best
sometimes, but not always. When I enter a new conversation, it helps to see
the whole thread, top to bottom. But when I check a NG like this one daily,
I don't like or need to rehash everything I read just yesterday, so I'm
grateful to the top-posters. And some conversations just call for comments
to be inserted at various points in the prior thread.

So I usually top-post. But when I want to respond to a particular point in
the prior message - as in the current thread - I pull it out and insert the
">". This takes only a moment and - I think - it clarifies why I'm making
my comments, while also preserving the prior thread for readers who are
coming in to the middle of the conversation.

RC
-- --
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
(e-mail address removed)
Microsoft Windows MVP (2002-2010)
Windows Live Mail 2012 (Build 16.4.3505.0912) in Win8 Pro


"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message

In message <kqKdnRlsjOcptprMnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@posted.grandecom>, R. C.
White said:
As a workaround, I often copy'n'paste pertinent parts of the original
message, then insert ">" before the pasted text, as I did at the start of
this message. For a multi-line paragraph, I reformat the lines and put ">"
before the first line; WLM adds it to the other lines.
[]
Interesting that it does that. Any reason you don't use WLM-quotefix? I
ask as an interested observer: I've never used WLM (any edition), but
have seen WLM-QF mentioned by many, so as a "diehard" WLM user, I'd be
interested to know your reason for not using it, assuming you've tried
it.
 
W

..winston

"Ken Blake" wrote in message Yes, I know that you, and Winston, continue to use it. But to tell the
truth, I really don't understand why. Yes, you insert the > signs
into the quotations manually, and it's greatly appreciated, since as a
result your message are no harder to read that of other people.

But what I don't understand is why you go to the trouble of manually
inserting the > signs when you have several other choices of better
newsreaders and e-mail clients (several of which are free) that do it
for you automatically. Is there something you like better about
Windows Live Mail than its competitors? I haven't used it in a while,
but I tried it when it first came out, and I couldn't find anything I
particularly liked about it, and very quickly stopped using it. Both
for Usenet and for e-mail, its lack of automatically inserting the >
sign makes it a non-contender for me.
As you've probably noticed, for the most part...I will reformat a reply placing the '>' before and after inherent quoted text in a
news group, but only on two of the 12 news groups I follow.
The majority of my nntp usage is on a private server (Annex Café) where responses are not critiqued for top/bottom/quoted text with
or without '>' and permits html posting, attachments, inserted pictures, stationery, etc..

Second, since I use WLM for all Hotmail type accounts (Hotmail.com, Live.com, Msn.com, Outlook.com) using the http protocol
(DeltaSync) which is WLM's primary design intent in addition to integration across the other programs included in the Essentials
suite.

Thus with the majority of my use being for Hotmail type email accounts and the Annex Café I see no reason to introduce another
piece of software (even though I do have SeaMonkey installed with its browser and news client), adapt or as previously noted more
than once...care what you or anyone thinks about use of WLM for news.

Additionally If I need to retain the '>' for a Hotmail type account in a email response, the Hotmail/Outlook.com web UI provides
that feature....but the majority of all those replies are to people also using WLM in conjunction with the Windows Essentials suite
of programs (WLMsgr/Skype/SkyDrive/Photo Gallery) and their inherent integrated features (photo email, upload to SkyDrive etc.)

For POP3 email I prefer Outlook (like you) but also for selective Hotmail accounts (social networking) also use the Outlook
Connector and the MSFT add-on Social Networking providers.

- i.e. news (nntp with its rapidly diminishing usage and its archaic netiquette) is just not (and hasn't been for years) a top of
the list priority. If folks wish to read my posts, fine, it not that's also fine.
 
B

Bob Henson

Hi, John.


Like you, I haven't tried it. Manual insertion of the ">" is just not that
big a problem for me.

As a retired auditor, I always want to "preserve the audit trail", so I
generally quote the entire previous message, and maybe the entire thread if
it helps to preserve the sense of the conversation. I don't care to get
into a top-post/bottom-post/cut'n'paste discussion. Each method works best
sometimes, but not always. When I enter a new conversation, it helps to see
the whole thread, top to bottom. But when I check a NG like this one daily,
I don't like or need to rehash everything I read just yesterday, so I'm
grateful to the top-posters. And some conversations just call for comments
to be inserted at various points in the prior thread.

So I usually top-post. But when I want to respond to a particular point in
the prior message - as in the current thread - I pull it out and insert the
">". This takes only a moment and - I think - it clarifies why I'm making
my comments, while also preserving the prior thread for readers who are
coming in to the middle of the conversation.
You have all the bad habits. Top posting is one of the worst.

--
Bob - Tetbury, Gloucestershire, UK

I can't see the point in the theatre. All that sex and violence. I get
enough of that at home. Apart from the sex, of course. - Baldrick -
Sense and Senility
 
D

Dave-UK

Buffalo said:
Is there a program that will let LiveMail properly do attributes while
responding in newsgroups, such as OE-QuoteFix did for OE?
LiveMail doesn't put > in front of the last message, etc or color code
them at all.
Thanks,
Buffalo
PS: Is there a way except for using a different newsreader?
You can go back to the Windows Live Mail version that does quote properly:

WLM2009 ver 14
http://g.live.com/1rewlive3/en/wlsetup-all.exe
 
S

Sam Hill

R. C. White said:
Hi, Ken (and John and others).

The REAL reason I use WLM probably is "inertia". ;^}
Why do you top-post?

Why do you use improperly formatted sig delimiters?

This is Usenet, not some email message...
 
K

Ken Blake

I don't care to get
into a top-post/bottom-post/cut'n'paste discussion.

Nor I, so despite my strong feelings on the subject, I'll bite my
So I usually top-post. But when I want to respond to a particular point in
the prior message - as in the current thread - I pull it out and insert the
">". This takes only a moment and - I think - it clarifies why I'm making
my comments, while also preserving the prior thread for readers who are
coming in to the middle of the conversation.

But if you use a newsreader that inserts the >s for you, you can do
exactly the same thing without having to insert the > yourself.
 
K

Ken Blake

You have all the bad habits. Top posting is one of the worst.

Although I largely agree with your sentiments regarding top-posting. I
*strongly* disagree with the rude way you made your point.
 
Ad

Advertisements

K

Ken Blake

Hi, Ken (and John and others).

The REAL reason I use WLM probably is "inertia". ;^}

LOL! OK, I understand that reason very well. I continue to do many
things (not necessarily computer-related things) because I'm too lazy
to change them.

And OE/WM/WLM still fits ME. You've recommended Outlook to me several
times, Ken, and I've tried it. In fact, I have OL 2010 running in the
background right now. But it doesn't do Newsgroups. And its "philosophy"
(I suppose that's the right word) for handling email confuses me no end! It
just doesn't fit ME.

Then I'll say to you what I say to many people. You should try the
alternatives, and make your own decision based on what works best for
you and fits your way of working. Since you've done that with Outlook,
and it doesn't fit you, then you shouldn't use it. I won't try to
convince you otherwise.

But you might want to try some of the other alternatives. For example,
many people like Thunderbird (and it does both mail and news).

Yes, I know I could use separate apps for news and mail, just as I did 20+
years ago. But I LIKE the way WLM handles both.

Then you should stay with it. We have very different views on this,
but that's OK. I don't know *anyone* who shares all my views on
everything.

So I haven't bothered to
experiment with Forte Agent or Sea Monkey or all those other apps that I see
others are so happy with. I'm happy with WLM - for now. Yes, I suspect
that WLM's days are numbered and I will have to choose something else in the
not-too-distant future. When that time comes, I'll be ready for advice and
recommendations from you and others. But I'm in no hurry. ;^}

Understood, and OK.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads


Top