BOYCOTT Win LiveMail!

Live mail is dreadful & seems designed for kids. For a business user we
don't want to share everything, so there is nothing like Outlook Express".
Windows mail was a poor copy of that & now I also have resorted to using
Outlook as my mail program. But its not so good also!
I find Microsoft barely listen to their users, and force people who are
already happy with a platform, into something new. This is their obnoxious
attitude within the Industry, and one of the reasons other software
manufacturers are up in arms about them!
Vista was a failure, but every laptop manufacturer was forced to use it. I
feel WIN 7 (if its a success) should be offered free to all Vista customers
as compensation for being part of a 2 years failed experiment! Or should I
say, guinea-pigs for WIN 7.
Bring back a decent mail program. I would also like to see Quick Launch.
Copying Apple sucks!!

The removal of OE is one of the stupidest decisions in a torrent of stupid
decisions that started with the design of Vista in 2005/6.
Two problems:
1. the people making these decisions are too young to know anything, thus
they make endless blunders now matter how high their IQs.
2. Microsoft has decided to push this "Live" ____ as the next big thing.
Who cares if my "Live" mail will hook up with my web email accounts. I have
them separate, on the web, for a reason. OE has been fiine for me; it's
easy, it looks okay, it's fast enough, and if I need more advanced features
I can run Agent.
So now it looks like Thunderbird. I've pretty much given up Int. Explorer,
except for MSFT sites that they will not make compatible with FireFox. I
will check out IncrediMail and whatever is on the Windows 7 site....


I'm another of those complainers about the lack of Outlook Express. I have
Windows 7 RC installed on another computer, and I tried the Windows Live
Mail. I have to say that I want my Outlook Express back! Windows Live Mail
is a poor substitute, and I do not understand why Microsoft would remove an
application that works perfectly well for millions of home users. The old
adage, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," would appear to apply here. Did
anyone at Microsft consult users before making this change? What legitimate
rationale could Microsoft possibly have for trying to force a move to
Windows Live Mail?
If I go to Windows 7 (released version) in the future, I certainly will not
be using the Windows Live Mail. I will be using Thunderbird or another
non-web based client.

Sure, it may be fine for me because I have to tell my corporate clients that
it is going to cost them $x-amount-of-thousands-more for my extra time
getting things working, so I end up making a lot more money on the deal, but
in many cases that just means that they decide to either not upgrade or
change to another vendor.
For security reasons the workstations are all tied down tight, and don't
allow the users to install or run anything like Live, Messenger, etc.
The MS Live system goes against this type of business setup.
Trust me, it's not going to be as easy as just downloading Live Mail and
everything will be just fine...
Livemail is


I have the same problem about not having a mail program installed in
windows.
I have tried Windows live mail on my vista... It totally [F] everything up.
And I need to use a signature in some of the e-mails I am sending because of
my work from my home.
I think I will stay with Windows Vista... I don't want to pay a lot of money
for something that is a waste of time.
It is bad enough that there is a law about the browser... which I also just
need to copy to a cd before I install the final version of Windows 7!!!

JapanJews on Mars wrote:
> Live mail is dreadful & seems designed for kids. For a business user we

<Snip rant>

The point is to MAKE the GENERAL user use Win Live mail, and to try and
force creating separate user accounts for security reasons, and/or
move/force people closer to "Cloud" computing. (Particularly since
Microsoft has applied for patents regarding Cloud computing... SURPRISE!
LOL) If you need email for a business atmosphere, they also want you
using Outlook period. (Which of course you pay dearly for) Why are you
so surprised? It's all about MONEY dude, get used to it or change
OS's!..And really, for business, it doesn't matter which OS you use, all
of them have regular plain email for the general user, and software for
a business atmosphere. Where have you been hiding all this time? Stuff
has passed you by, eh? DL Open Office if you have a problem PAYING for
business orientated Office software, for that part of it, and any other
alternative for email etc. ..Otherwise, quit bitching and PAY for
professional office type software. Sheesh! Pretty simple really. Outlook
Express is outdated, and they have no interest reworking it. Either get
used to change or keep running XP for Outlook Express after it's life
cycle expires, but quit bitching. ..You HAVE choices.

G'day

On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:14:13 -0500, "Stan Starski"
<> wrote:

>
>I've been using Office for a long time, but just now started using its
>Outlook as prior to that I was on WinXP with OutlookExpress, I was forced
>into Vista, installed my old Office2007 bought 2 years ago and this week
>realized - well, it's tim eto finally start using something I've been
>ignoring for many years in every Office suite - Outllok.
>
>It's bloated but better than WLM.

Try Thunderbird. It will take you a little while to get used to it
(learning to set it up is the biggest hurdle), but it's clean like OE
was and is very tuneable.

Stan Starski wrote:
> My solution is now I use Outlook and not paying for it separately, but
> as part of Office2007
> Comparing to say Agilent ADS 2009 which costs $50K+, Office I decided to
> spend money on.
>
> Also I tweaked all tiny bits of Office and modified registry to set my
> own colors e.g. background color for highlighted words in Word was a
> disaster, many are aware of it but only few like myself found a solution
> (set Registry key controllin git to "transparent" or something like
> that, done a year ago, dont remember).
>
> I've been using Office for a long time, but just now started using its
> Outlook as prior to that I was on WinXP with OutlookExpress, I was
> forced into Vista, installed my old Office2007 bought 2 years ago and
> this week realized - well, it's tim eto finally start using something
> I've been ignoring for many years in every Office suite - Outllok.
>
> It's bloated but better than WLM.

Not hard to be "better than WLM" really, but for the general user, no
big deal. I HAVE to use Outlook at work and I'm not liking it at all.
What cracks me up the most, is that if it is specified that one must
enter a password for their account, the box pops up and you have to
enter the password. However, if you don't enter the password and bypass
it, YOUR EMAIL STILL OPENS UP revealing to all any SENSITIVE emails. Not
like Outlook Express where you had to know the proper password BEFORE
the account would actually open. Sure, in Outlook if the password has
been bypassed one can't get NEW mail, but existing mails is easily
accessible. What a crock AND security risk! I absolutely hate it for
that reason. BUT there again, what Microsoft wants, is separate log-ins
for everybody. However, that is not practical in every setting, like
where I work. Too many people need access to the same computer, so email
on those computers is common, that is, everyone with an account can
switch to it from someone else's without logging out that computer and
logging back in under YOUR identity. AND having to log in and out on
particular computers is completely impracticable. I have to send
sensitive emails that wind up being accessible to anyone. That sucks!
Accounts that require a password should NEVER open until the proper
password has been entered, period! Maybe the IT guys have screwed the
pooch, I dunno, I don't know Outlook, and MS Exchange all that well. All
I know, is that nothing should EVER open until the proper password has
been typed, period.

G'day

+Bob+ wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:14:13 -0500, "Stan Starski"
> <> wrote:
>
>> I've been using Office for a long time, but just now started using its
>> Outlook as prior to that I was on WinXP with OutlookExpress, I was forced
>> into Vista, installed my old Office2007 bought 2 years ago and this week
>> realized - well, it's tim eto finally start using something I've been
>> ignoring for many years in every Office suite - Outllok.
>>
>> It's bloated but better than WLM.
>
> Try Thunderbird. It will take you a little while to get used to it
> (learning to set it up is the biggest hurdle), but it's clean like OE
> was and is very tuneable.
>

Yes, it's a good one and I use it, but what I need is a client that
simply will NOT even open until the proper password has been input
period. That is what I liked about Outlook Express. Your "identity" if
password protected, simply would not open at all until you typed in the
correct password. That is a good/needed feature. Keeps things private,
and unaccessible to those who have no business reading certain emails
without having to constantly log in and out of a computer.. Know what I
mean?

G'day

Muad'Dib wrote:
> +Bob+ wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:14:13 -0500, "Stan Starski"
>> <> wrote:
>>
>>> I've been using Office for a long time, but just now started using
>>> its Outlook as prior to that I was on WinXP with OutlookExpress, I
>>> was forced into Vista, installed my old Office2007 bought 2 years ago
>>> and this week realized - well, it's tim eto finally start using
>>> something I've been ignoring for many years in every Office suite -
>>> Outllok.
>>>
>>> It's bloated but better than WLM.
>>
>> Try Thunderbird. It will take you a little while to get used to it
>> (learning to set it up is the biggest hurdle), but it's clean like OE
>> was and is very tuneable.
>
> Yes, it's a good one and I use it, but what I need is a client that
> simply will NOT even open until the proper password has been input
> period. That is what I liked about Outlook Express. Your "identity" if
> password protected, simply would not open at all until you typed in the
> correct password. That is a good/needed feature. Keeps things private,
> and unaccessible to those who have no business reading certain emails
> without having to constantly log in and out of a computer.. Know what I
> mean?
>
> G'day

http://www.pmail.com/index.htm

Alias

Alias wrote:
> Muad'Dib wrote:
>> +Bob+ wrote:
>>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:14:13 -0500, "Stan Starski"
>>> <> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've been using Office for a long time, but just now started using
>>>> its Outlook as prior to that I was on WinXP with OutlookExpress, I
>>>> was forced into Vista, installed my old Office2007 bought 2 years
>>>> ago and this week realized - well, it's tim eto finally start using
>>>> something I've been ignoring for many years in every Office suite -
>>>> Outllok.
>>>>
>>>> It's bloated but better than WLM.
>>>
>>> Try Thunderbird. It will take you a little while to get used to it
>>> (learning to set it up is the biggest hurdle), but it's clean like OE
>>> was and is very tuneable.
>>
>> Yes, it's a good one and I use it, but what I need is a client that
>> simply will NOT even open until the proper password has been input
>> period. That is what I liked about Outlook Express. Your "identity" if
>> password protected, simply would not open at all until you typed in
>> the correct password. That is a good/needed feature. Keeps things
>> private, and unaccessible to those who have no business reading
>> certain emails without having to constantly log in and out of a
>> computer.. Know what I mean?
>>
>> G'day
>
> http://www.pmail.com/index.htm
>
> Alias

Wow, forgot about that one. That was the first one I used after getting
connected to the internet for the first time, Um, years ago. LOL don't
want to give up my age. I used it for quite a while before Outlook
Express, and even after OE came out, as I had heard OE was "Crap" and it
was recommended to not use OE. I finally succumbed to the temptation to
use OE and didn't go back to Pmail. I liked Pmail a lot, and had
installed it on many Client's computers, but I had problems with it
crashing in Win98, so moved over to OE. May have to give it a try again...

G'day

Muad'Dib wrote:
> Alias wrote:
>> Muad'Dib wrote:
>>> +Bob+ wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:14:13 -0500, "Stan Starski"
>>>> <> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've been using Office for a long time, but just now started using
>>>>> its Outlook as prior to that I was on WinXP with OutlookExpress, I
>>>>> was forced into Vista, installed my old Office2007 bought 2 years
>>>>> ago and this week realized - well, it's tim eto finally start using
>>>>> something I've been ignoring for many years in every Office suite -
>>>>> Outllok.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's bloated but better than WLM.
>>>>
>>>> Try Thunderbird. It will take you a little while to get used to it
>>>> (learning to set it up is the biggest hurdle), but it's clean like OE
>>>> was and is very tuneable.
>>>
>>> Yes, it's a good one and I use it, but what I need is a client that
>>> simply will NOT even open until the proper password has been input
>>> period. That is what I liked about Outlook Express. Your "identity"
>>> if password protected, simply would not open at all until you typed
>>> in the correct password. That is a good/needed feature. Keeps things
>>> private, and unaccessible to those who have no business reading
>>> certain emails without having to constantly log in and out of a
>>> computer.. Know what I mean?
>>>
>>> G'day
>>
>> http://www.pmail.com/index.htm
>>
>> Alias
>
> Wow, forgot about that one. That was the first one I used after getting
> connected to the internet for the first time, Um, years ago. LOL don't
> want to give up my age. I used it for quite a while before Outlook
> Express, and even after OE came out, as I had heard OE was "Crap" and it
> was recommended to not use OE. I finally succumbed to the temptation to
> use OE and didn't go back to Pmail. I liked Pmail a lot, and had
> installed it on many Client's computers, but I had problems with it
> crashing in Win98, so moved over to OE. May have to give it a try again...
>
> G'day

It's a great email app. Too bad he won't port it to Linux.

Alias

"Muad'Dib" <> wrote in message
news:...
>
> Yes, it's a good one and I use it, but what I need is a client that simply
> will NOT even open until the proper password has been input period. That
> is what I liked about Outlook Express. Your "identity" if password
> protected, simply would not open at all until you typed in the correct
> password. That is a good/needed feature. Keeps things private, and
> unaccessible to those who have no business reading certain emails without
> having to constantly log in and out of a computer.. Know what I mean?


Err why not LOCK your computer everytime you leave it? Know what I mean?

"Stan Starski" <> wrote in message
news:#...
> I don't care about passwords - there're system passwords and if you start
> addign a password to each application... I am the only user of this
> laptop,
> and there's a time when you need to stop with security paranoia; because
> if
> someone got thru regular BIOS=Windows+system passwords, they will simply
> go
> into User foldoer and read you emails without running Outllok itself,
> done.

Err no - you can't open a pst file in anything other than Outlook.....


> That password is more for cosmetic reasons for people who dont know where
> to
> find message store in file system.
> OK?
>