WindowsLiveMail OE-QuoteFix Substitute

[..winston]

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

Lukewarm!
"Less replies" is a meaningless juxtaposition of words (unless "Less" is

someone's name).

Lol...juxtaposition or not comprehending the meaning didn't require more or less thought.

 

[Buffalo]

"R. C. White" wrote in message

Hi, Buffalo.

[snip}
And you are still using WLM version 15; a newer version is available.

RC

The latest version of Windows Live Mail I can find on the Internet is "
Version 2012 (Wave 5)

On August 7, 2012, Microsoft released a new version of Windows Essentials
2012, which included Windows Live Mail 2012."
Not sure what you mean by WLM 15.

Thanks for the reply.


Buffalo
PS: Any free newsreader client(s) you can recommend that does a good job in
replying to ngs?

 

[Nil]

I never understand why people use news clients that won't deal
properly with attributions, separation of quoted from new, and
clipping. There are several to choose from.

I kind of understand that - it's usually due to ignorance or inertia.
What I don't understand is why someone would intentionally use a news
client that creates miscommunication and misunderstanding. I see from
this conversation that some do it to prove their status as mavericks,
to flaunt their disregard of "netiquette", but I don't think they
understand that the netiquette thing isn't just a bunch of arbitrary
rules, they're guidelines to help foster clear and unambiguous
communication. Isn't that what we're here for?

 

[Char Jackson]

I kind of understand that - it's usually due to ignorance or inertia.
What I don't understand is why someone would intentionally use a news
client that creates miscommunication and misunderstanding. I see from
this conversation that some do it to prove their status as mavericks,
to flaunt their disregard of "netiquette", but I don't think they
understand that the netiquette thing isn't just a bunch of arbitrary
rules, they're guidelines to help foster clear and unambiguous
communication. Isn't that what we're here for?

Well said, and I think the moral is that we're perhaps not all here for the
same things, unfortunately.

 

[Char Jackson]

Lukewarm!
"Less replies" is a meaningless juxtaposition of words (unless "Less" is
someone's name).

Another one is "less people", which I guess either refers to children or
dwarves. Otherwise, they'd have said "fewer people".

 

[R. C. White]

Hi, Buffalo.

Microsoft's naming crew has really gone wild with Windows Live Mail! :>(

Over the past several years it has been through so many versions and names
that I won't even try to list them all. Among others, they have been named
Wave 3, Wave 4, etc.; Build 11, Build 12, etc.; Windows Mail, Windows Live
Mail - and now back to Windows Live Mail 2012...aka Windows Mail 2012, since
Microsoft has dropped the "Live" name from its products. (But Windows Mail
2012 is NOT to be confused with the Windows Mail that was included only in
Windows Vista.)

To see the version you are currently using, click that blue button in the
upper left corner, then select About from the drop-down menu.

Select one of your posts here, then press <Ctrl>+<F3>. You should see a
window pop up with lots of text that might look like gibberish if you are
not familiar with the codes that are included "behind the curtain" of every
newsgroup message. There's a LOT of information there, most of which we can
ignore for now. But, about 20 lines down, you should see:

X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513

That tells us that you used Build 15.4.3538.513 of Windows Live Mail to post
that message - WLM 15 for brevity - and this should correspond to what the
About screen shows you.

Then go to this URL, which was also included in my post on 1/28/13:
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows-live/essentials-home

That is the home page for the Windows Essentials (formerly - and sometimes
still - known as Windows Live Essentials), which include Windows (Live)
Mail, Photo Gallery, Movie Maker and other components. Follow the
instructions there to download WLM and as many of the others as you want.
Each of the components will include the information that they are Build
16.4.3505.0912. This is the version referred to by the August 7, 2012
message you quoted.

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

"R. C. White" wrote in message

Hi, Buffalo.

[snip}
And you are still using WLM version 15; a newer version is available.

RC

The latest version of Windows Live Mail I can find on the Internet is "
Version 2012 (Wave 5)

On August 7, 2012, Microsoft released a new version of Windows Essentials
2012, which included Windows Live Mail 2012."
Not sure what you mean by WLM 15.

Thanks for the reply.


Buffalo
PS: Any free newsreader client(s) you can recommend that does a good job in
replying to ngs?

 

[..winston]

"R. C. White" wrote in message Hi, Buffalo.
Microsoft's naming crew has really gone wild with Windows Live Mail! :>(
Over the past several years it has been through so many versions and names
that I won't even try to list them all. Among others, they have been named
Wave 3, Wave 4, etc.; Build 11, Build 12, etc.; Windows Mail, Windows Live
Mail - and now back to Windows Live Mail 2012...aka Windows Mail 2012, since
Microsoft has dropped the "Live" name from its products. (But Windows Mail
2012 is NOT to be confused with the Windows Mail that was included only in
Windows Vista.)
Subtle correction for 'nomenclature' clarification.

Latest name for the last released version of Windows Live Mail is:
- Windows Live Mail 2012 and included in 'Windows Essentials 2012'

- MSFT dropped the 'Live' name for the latest integrated 'Essentials' suite name (fka Windows Live Essentials)
- Only Microsoft Photo Gallery/Movie Maker 2012 dropped the 'Live' name (branding). Photo Gallery and Movie Maker 2012 are also now
a single combined (bundled) product.
- Live Mesh (deprecated, backend server shutdown) is no longer included in Windows Essentials 2012 and replaced with a SkyDrive
Desktop installer

Windows Mail (as previously noted) was the name of the email client included in Vista. It is also the name of the email 'app'
included in Windows 8...though neither (even with the same name) have much of anything in common except both support IMAP

Direct download links to Microsoft server for the installer executable file(s)

Full version 2012 installer
http://g.live.com/1rewlive5-all/en/wlsetup-all.exe

Web Version 2012 Installer – English Language Version
http://g.live.com/1rewlive5-web/en/wlsetup-web.exe

 

[Ken Blake]

Hi, Buffalo.

Microsoft's naming crew has really gone wild with Windows Live Mail! :>(

Over the past several years it has been through so many versions and names
that I won't even try to list them all. Among others, they have been named
Wave 3, Wave 4, etc.; Build 11, Build 12, etc.; Windows Mail, Windows Live
Mail - and now back to Windows Live Mail 2012...aka Windows Mail 2012, since
Microsoft has dropped the "Live" name from its products. (But Windows Mail
2012 is NOT to be confused with the Windows Mail that was included only in
Windows Vista.)

Not to mention Outlook Express (not to be confused with Outlook),
which all the above are sort of later versions of. And Microsoft
Internet Mail and News, which is what Outlook Express was originally
called.

Microsoft is good about many things, and terrible about some others.
In my opinion, the names they give things, and the changes they make
to the names, are among their weakest areas. It's almost as if they
work very hard to confuse people.

They should work hard to find a good name for a product, and a name
that is not similar to another existing name. And once they give
something a name, they should stick with it. Do *not* change it.

 

[Robin Bignall]

Well said, and I think the moral is that we're perhaps not all here for the
same things, unfortunately.

You're probably right, Char. I would have thought that serious posters
(even when joshing) want to communicate, understand useful answers and
try to ensure that their responses are clear, especially in
international newsgroups where not everyone is a native English speaker.

Just think of resumes and CVs. If yours is scruffy and
incomprehensible, you won't get many job interviews.

 

[..winston]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message Not to mention Outlook Express (not to be confused with Outlook),
which all the above are sort of later versions of. And Microsoft
Internet Mail and News, which is what Outlook Express was originally
called.

Microsoft is good about many things, and terrible about some others.
In my opinion, the names they give things, and the changes they make
to the names, are among their weakest areas. It's almost as if they
work very hard to confuse people.

They should work hard to find a good name for a product, and a name
that is not similar to another existing name. And once they give
something a name, they should stick with it. Do *not* change it.Good luck with that.

Don't forget about the other initial mail client (for Win95) in addition to IMN
Microsoft Mail for PC Networks -> Microsoft Exchange -> Windows Messaging

IMN was released twice (1.0, 2.0) in 1996..the first after the release of IE3.
IMN was renamed as Outlook Express and released in 1997 (bundled with IE4 and MSN Explorer software) and one of its primary
purposes at the time was to provide Http support for the millions of MSN subscribers eventually providing subscribers both POP3 and
WebDav capability. If Windows Messaging was in use, installing OE replaced it for MSN subscribers.

What goes around comes around...with the exception of Vista Windows Mail since 1997 all MSFT products have one long standing
product theme - Http support and evolving forward with Windows Live Mail and now with the Windows 8 Mail app. Even Outlook (while
capable of POP3 and IMAP) is travelling further down that same path.

 

[Ken Blake]

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
Not to mention Outlook Express (not to be confused with Outlook),
which all the above are sort of later versions of. And Microsoft
Internet Mail and News, which is what Outlook Express was originally
called.

Microsoft is good about many things, and terrible about some others.
In my opinion, the names they give things, and the changes they make
to the names, are among their weakest areas. It's almost as if they
work very hard to confuse people.

They should work hard to find a good name for a product, and a name
that is not similar to another existing name. And once they give
something a name, they should stick with it. Do *not* change it.
Good luck with that.

I know--I'm dreaming. <g>

But I said what I think they *should* do, not what I expect them to
do.

 

[R. C. White]

Hi, Winston.

Where does the new Outlook.com email service fit into all this? Once more,
Microsoft is using a venerable, well-known name to refer to something
completely different. Well, not COMPLETELY different. Just different
enough and similar enough to the existing Outlook component of Microsoft
Office to absolutely INVITE confusion! Why does MSFT feel it is necessary,
or even wise, or that it even qualifies as Common Sense to use the same name
for such different/similar apps/services/programs?

As in the current thread, "outlook mail app no send receive button?", in the
alt.comp.os.windows-8 newsgroup.

And, yes, I know that you are not the guy making all these decisions, but
you know more about them than just about anybody I can think of to ask.

Yes, I do have a new (e-mail address removed) account, as you suggested. But I'm
not 100% sure why, or if it was necessary.

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


"..winston" wrote in message

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
Not to mention Outlook Express (not to be confused with Outlook),
which all the above are sort of later versions of. And Microsoft
Internet Mail and News, which is what Outlook Express was originally
called.

Microsoft is good about many things, and terrible about some others.
In my opinion, the names they give things, and the changes they make
to the names, are among their weakest areas. It's almost as if they
work very hard to confuse people.

They should work hard to find a good name for a product, and a name
that is not similar to another existing name. And once they give
something a name, they should stick with it. Do *not* change it.Good luck with that.

Don't forget about the other initial mail client (for Win95) in addition to
IMN
Microsoft Mail for PC Networks -> Microsoft Exchange -> Windows Messaging

IMN was released twice (1.0, 2.0) in 1996..the first after the release of
IE3.
IMN was renamed as Outlook Express and released in 1997 (bundled with IE4
and MSN Explorer software) and one of its primary
purposes at the time was to provide Http support for the millions of MSN
subscribers eventually providing subscribers both POP3 and
WebDav capability. If Windows Messaging was in use, installing OE replaced
it for MSN subscribers.

What goes around comes around...with the exception of Vista Windows Mail
since 1997 all MSFT products have one long standing
product theme - Http support and evolving forward with Windows Live Mail and
now with the Windows 8 Mail app. Even Outlook (while
capable of POP3 and IMAP) is travelling further down that same path.

 

[Ken Blake]

Well said,

Ditto!


and I think the moral is that we're perhaps not all here for the
same things, unfortunately.

But I don't agree with that. All people who come here to get solutions
to their problems are here for the same thing--solutions. If they
don't work hard to provide "clear and unambiguous communication" they
are likely to get no answers, or sometimes even worse, incorrect
answers.

 

[Ken Blake]

Hi, Winston.

Where does the new Outlook.com email service fit into all this? Once more,
Microsoft is using a venerable, well-known name to refer to something
completely different. Well, not COMPLETELY different. Just different
enough and similar enough to the existing Outlook component of Microsoft
Office to absolutely INVITE confusion! Why does MSFT feel it is necessary,
or even wise, or that it even qualifies as Common Sense to use the same name
for such different/similar apps/services/programs?

Quoting myself: "It's almost as if they work very hard to confuse
people."

You're a man after my own heart on this! (But you already
knew that <g>.)

 

[..winston]

Hello RC.

Where does Outlook.com fit.
Afaics, it’s a rebranding of the Hotmail name for 4 purposes:
1. Building upon the familiarity of the Outlook brand name
2. Windows 8 Mail app which by design supports all Hotmail types accounts (Outlook.com, Hotmail/Live/MSN.com), Exchange and
Exchange Active-Sync
3. Works with the Outlook web based apps for sending a document via the signed on MSFT account email via the Outlook.com UI
4. Continues the social media connection in the web UI which also was present in Outlook which started with the Outlook Hotmail
Connector and Social Provider (Messenger, Facebook) in OL 07/10 and natively in 2013 with increasing focus on cloud storage (not
just for mail)

In reference to that other thread...
- Outlook.com (web UI) does have a Send button and like previous Hotmail web UI's auto-polls for incoming when the UI is accessed
(logon or when switching from another MSFT account service e.g. SkyDrive) and on a preset time interval when in the web UI
interface.

Incidentally the Win8 Mail app (Windows Mail) which we've previously discussed also has a 'Send' function (more like a push out the
door to the server when completing composition) and auto polls for incoming in addition to the ability to perform a 'receive' by
syncing.

Confusing for most ? Yes, there's a lot to digest in MSFT's email and social integration puzzle.

On the other hand, if one has been operating WLM in a Live ID/MSFT account signon mode or using OL with the integrated add-ons
(Connector and Social Providers) or Windows Phone...the pieces are easier put together. If the background is XP (OE), Vista (WM),
or a third party email client using POP3 it's a bit harder to see.

But as you and I and others know, MSFT's vision and objective for a mail client has always been somewhat controversial and driven
by demographics at a given point in time (now more global than ever)

Email while still a valid route to communicate is no longer the only pc based route. Throw in the desire and long term plan to
attract the future disposable dollars of a younger generation, the planned deprecation/ignoring of XP (and whatever email client or
software they use) in favor or Win7/8, and its easy to see who is and who isn't the target market and where support and effort is
going to be focused.

Lol...What I do know is that I've been able to access/sync my email client (Outlook) contacts and calendar, listen to music, view
photos for about 13 yrs on an iPod (using software based on ARM architecture with hardware/software from concept to design to
availability in less than a year)... something it took MSFT another another 9 yrs to offer in a single package and at least 2 more
to even approach reliable.

Whether MSFT has it right or wrong...I really don't know...and confusion will continue.


....winston
msft mvp


"R. C. White" wrote in message
Hi, Winston.

Where does the new Outlook.com email service fit into all this? Once more,
Microsoft is using a venerable, well-known name to refer to something
completely different. Well, not COMPLETELY different. Just different
enough and similar enough to the existing Outlook component of Microsoft
Office to absolutely INVITE confusion! Why does MSFT feel it is necessary,
or even wise, or that it even qualifies as Common Sense to use the same name
for such different/similar apps/services/programs?

As in the current thread, "outlook mail app no send receive button?", in the
alt.comp.os.windows-8 newsgroup.

And, yes, I know that you are not the guy making all these decisions, but
you know more about them than just about anybody I can think of to ask.

Yes, I do have a new (e-mail address removed) account, as you suggested. But I'm
not 100% sure why, or if it was necessary.

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


"..winston" wrote in message

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
Not to mention Outlook Express (not to be confused with Outlook),
which all the above are sort of later versions of. And Microsoft
Internet Mail and News, which is what Outlook Express was originally
called.

Microsoft is good about many things, and terrible about some others.
In my opinion, the names they give things, and the changes they make
to the names, are among their weakest areas. It's almost as if they
work very hard to confuse people.

They should work hard to find a good name for a product, and a name
that is not similar to another existing name. And once they give
something a name, they should stick with it. Do *not* change it.Good luck with that.

Don't forget about the other initial mail client (for Win95) in addition to
IMN
Microsoft Mail for PC Networks -> Microsoft Exchange -> Windows Messaging

IMN was released twice (1.0, 2.0) in 1996..the first after the release of
IE3.
IMN was renamed as Outlook Express and released in 1997 (bundled with IE4
and MSN Explorer software) and one of its primary
purposes at the time was to provide Http support for the millions of MSN
subscribers eventually providing subscribers both POP3 and
WebDav capability. If Windows Messaging was in use, installing OE replaced
it for MSN subscribers.

What goes around comes around...with the exception of Vista Windows Mail
since 1997 all MSFT products have one long standing
product theme - Http support and evolving forward with Windows Live Mail and
now with the Windows 8 Mail app. Even Outlook (while
capable of POP3 and IMAP) is travelling further down that same path.

 

[Char Jackson]

But I don't agree with that. All people who come here to get solutions
to their problems are here for the same thing--solutions. If they
don't work hard to provide "clear and unambiguous communication" they
are likely to get no answers, or sometimes even worse, incorrect
answers.

As a rule, I'm personally much more tolerant of the newbies who stumble in
with their requests versus folks who are here on a regular basis. I think
some of the worst offenders, IMHO anyway, are a couple of folks who provide
solutions, rather than request them.

At the top of the list would be winston, as an example of someone who
clearly knows better but simply doesn't care.

 

[Char Jackson]

You're probably right, Char. I would have thought that serious posters
(even when joshing) want to communicate, understand useful answers and
try to ensure that their responses are clear, especially in
international newsgroups where not everyone is a native English speaker.

Yes, you would think that would be the case, and yet we see daily examples
where that is apparently not true. Imagine, a text medium where a few people
intentionally cloud their text. I don't know what motivates that kind of
behavior.

Just think of resumes and CVs. If yours is scruffy and
incomprehensible, you won't get many job interviews.

If I'm hiring a heavy equipment operator, I can probably live with a few
scruffy CVs, but otherwise, no.

 

[Zaphod Beeblebrox]

As a rule, I'm personally much more tolerant of the newbies who stumble in
with their requests versus folks who are here on a regular basis. I think
some of the worst offenders, IMHO anyway, are a couple of folks who provide
solutions, rather than request them.

At the top of the list would be winston, as an example of someone who
clearly knows better but simply doesn't care.

And right beside him is R. C. White. Unless the thread is of
particular interest I tend to skip over both of their posts, and when
the two of them reply to each other I don't even try to unravel the
mess it leaves. Life is too short.

 

[Char Jackson]

And right beside him is R. C. White. Unless the thread is of
particular interest I tend to skip over both of their posts, and when
the two of them reply to each other I don't even try to unravel the
mess it leaves. Life is too short.

When I said "a couple of folks", that's exactly who I had in mind for the
second spot. ;-)

 

[Sam Hill]

When I said "a couple of folks", that's exactly who I had in mind for
the second spot. ;-)

It makes no sense to me why those "Most Valuable People" have such disdain
for proper and easy-to-read communication. I too don't bother to read much
of what they write (especially R.C. White). You are right, life is too
short to try and decipher the crap they leave. Their posts remind me of
the old story about throwing a bowl of spaghetti at a wall.