From hro5-2 at cox.net Thu Dec 8 02:43:39 2016 From: hro5-2 at cox.net (Jim Hill) Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 23:43:39 -0800 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client Message-ID: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> I'm looking for a good email client. I receive about a hundred emails/day, and am looking for one that has good sorting and searching capabilities, and has a good support forum where I can get help. Being able to delete dup's is a plus. I'm currently using Eudora, which is no longer supported by the vendor, Qualcomm, but still can be downloaded, has a loyal following, and has two good support forums, but I'm currently having some serious problems receiving emails. I hope to resolve the problem, but need redundancy. Any suggestions? Jim, w6ivw From jeffv at op.net Thu Dec 8 07:58:18 2016 From: jeffv at op.net (jeff) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 07:58:18 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client In-Reply-To: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: Thunderbird. Works on most platforms. Been using it for years. Also used Eudora in days past. On 12/08/2016 02:43 AM, Jim Hill wrote: > I'm looking for a good email client. I receive about a hundred > emails/day, and am looking for one that has good sorting and searching > capabilities, and has a good support forum where I can get help. Being > able to delete dup's is a plus. I'm currently using Eudora, which is no > longer supported by the vendor, Qualcomm, but still can be downloaded, > has a loyal following, and has two good support forums, but I'm > currently having some serious problems receiving emails. I hope to > resolve the problem, but need redundancy. > > Any suggestions? > Jim, w6ivw > > ______________________________________________________________ > Ham-Computers mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net > > List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF > ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** > > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > From w4byg at att.net Thu Dec 8 11:08:05 2016 From: w4byg at att.net (Ray, W4BYG) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:08:05 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client In-Reply-To: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: <58498565.5010501@att.net> Jim, I have been using Mozilla Thunderbird for several years now. Now in v38.7.2. I also receive a good number of emails daily. I find it excellent for my purposes. Ray, W4BYG On 12/8/2016 2:43 AM, Jim Hill wrote: > I'm looking for a good email client. I receive about a hundred > emails/day, and am looking for one that has good sorting and searching > capabilities, and has a good support forum where I can get help. > Being able to delete dup's is a plus. I'm currently using Eudora, > which is no longer supported by the vendor, Qualcomm, but still can be > downloaded, has a loyal following, and has two good support forums, > but I'm currently having some serious problems receiving emails. I > hope to resolve the problem, but need redundancy. > > Any suggestions? > Jim, w6ivw > > ______________________________________________________________ > Ham-Computers mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net > > List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF > ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** > > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > -- I'm no longer young enough to know everything! From k4bet at bellsouth.net Thu Dec 8 12:16:53 2016 From: k4bet at bellsouth.net (Paul McInnish) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 12:16:53 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client In-Reply-To: <58498565.5010501@att.net> References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> <58498565.5010501@att.net> Message-ID: <000001d25176$df9461c0$9ebd2540$@net> Microsoft Outlook has been my choice for years and years. Has features and benefits that I still have not discovered. Extremely versatile. Best regards, Paul McInnish - K4BET Deputy Sheriff (Retired) 'Riding a motorcycle is hours & hours of pure fun & joy interrupted by brief moments of sheer stark unadulterated terror!' -----Original Message----- From: Ham-Computers [mailto:ham-computers-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ray, W4BYG Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2016 11:08 AM To: Computers (or other) used for amateur radio, communications, or experimenting Subject: Re: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client Jim, I have been using Mozilla Thunderbird for several years now. Now in v38.7.2. I also receive a good number of emails daily. I find it excellent for my purposes. Ray, W4BYG On 12/8/2016 2:43 AM, Jim Hill wrote: > I'm looking for a good email client. I receive about a hundred > emails/day, and am looking for one that has good sorting and searching > capabilities, and has a good support forum where I can get help. > Being able to delete dup's is a plus. I'm currently using Eudora, > which is no longer supported by the vendor, Qualcomm, but still can be > downloaded, has a loyal following, and has two good support forums, > but I'm currently having some serious problems receiving emails. I > hope to resolve the problem, but need redundancy. > > Any suggestions? > Jim, w6ivw > > ______________________________________________________________ > Ham-Computers mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net > > List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF > ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** > > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email > list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > -- I'm no longer young enough to know everything! ______________________________________________________________ Ham-Computers mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html From kd7jyk at earthlink.net Thu Dec 8 22:46:35 2016 From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 19:46:35 -0800 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: I've used Outlook Express for about twenty years, still do, does all you mention, fast, efficient, using version 6 right now. Tried Thunderbird, looked/worked like a Chinese/East Indian copy of a ripped off version of Outlook Express, clunky, not nearly as easy or efficient, everything about it quite odd. I get up to 800-900 e-mail a day, filter them into several dozen folders, click the folder, speed read the subject line at about six a second, delete them as fast, over-all a few minutes, then spend just a little time reading/responding to what I kept/care about. I've also tried various versions of Outlook as well. A lot of bells and whistles not needed for basic e-mail, so I dumped it. As for "support", if it worked to begin with, it'll work forever. I only upgraded to 6 because I got drug into Windows XP and 4 wouldn't play nice with it or I'd still be using that. So long as it works with your OS, you don't need "support", just something functional from day one. Now if you've upgraded to something like windows 10, which in a year and a half I have yet to see play nice with anything, including itself, find something simple that works and if so, great, but can't help you with specifics on that OS yet. Kurt From hro5-2 at cox.net Fri Dec 9 02:46:37 2016 From: hro5-2 at cox.net (Jim Hill) Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 23:46:37 -0800 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client In-Reply-To: References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: <20161209074801.YNES4024.fed1rmfepo101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Hi Kurt: thanks to you (and the others for tips and why they are good choices). However, I have heard Microsoft no longer offers Outlook Express, but obviously it still works. I'm guessing they don't support win10, and possibly win7. I'm running win XP, 7, and 10 on various computers, but XP is only on those computers that are not suitable for upgrades, and also for older hardware and software. I suggest you have Malwarebytes installed on your computer (there's a good free version), and also make an image file so you can recover in case you are unlucky. I use Terabyte International Image for Linux (works fine on win setups), but it is a little "techie". I have heard that Macrum is good, but have not tried it. If you are "dragged" again, win7 is very much like XP, and win10 is somewhat different - some things are better and some worse, but the plusses exceed the minuses in my opinion. I still have a hard drive with win7 installed, which I can use in place of my win10 drive by moving cables. It was handy when coming "up to speed". I could use win 7 and tinker with win10, but now I use win10 and start up 7 primarily to get Microsoft updates. Jim At 07:46 PM 12/8/2016, you wrote: >I've used Outlook Express for about twenty years, still do, does all you >mention, fast, efficient, using version 6 right now. Tried Thunderbird, >looked/worked like a Chinese/East Indian copy of a ripped off version of >Outlook Express, clunky, not nearly as easy or efficient, everything about >it quite odd. I get up to 800-900 e-mail a day, filter them into several >dozen folders, click the folder, speed read the subject line at about six a >second, delete them as fast, over-all a few minutes, then spend just a >little time reading/responding to what I kept/care about. I've also tried >various versions of Outlook as well. A lot of bells and whistles not needed >for basic e-mail, so I dumped it. > >As for "support", if it worked to begin with, it'll work forever. I only >upgraded to 6 because I got drug into Windows XP and 4 wouldn't play nice >with it or I'd still be using that. So long as it works with your OS, you >don't need "support", just something functional from day one. > >Now if you've upgraded to something like windows 10, which in a year and a >half I have yet to see play nice with anything, including itself, find >something simple that works and if so, great, but can't help you with >specifics on that OS yet. > >Kurt > >______________________________________________________________ >Ham-Computers mailing list >Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net > >List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF >** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** > > >This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html From ka4inm at gmail.com Fri Dec 9 08:28:28 2016 From: ka4inm at gmail.com (Ron Youvan) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 08:28:28 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for THE BEST email client In-Reply-To: References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: On 12/08/2016 10:46 PM, KD7JYK DM09 wrote: > I've used Outlook Express for about twenty years, still do, does all you > mention, fast, efficient, using version 6 right now. Tried Thunderbird, > looked/worked like a Chinese/East Indian copy of a ripped off version of > Outlook Express, clunky, not nearly as easy or efficient, everything about > it quite odd. The one BIG problem with Outlook es Outlook Express is, as with all M$ products, if you click on an attachment* Outlook or Outlook Express passes the job on to the general operating system's parser, it looks at the FINAL extension (remember only the first extension is displayed by M$ products an example is Flower.jpeg.bat) and the virus displays an image of a flower and infects your confuser. (downloading in the background) This includes all ransomware. Non-M$ products, T-bird and seamonkey (& others) do NOT do this. They use their own parser and it complains about you wanting to run this program, that alone puts Outlook es Outlook Express at the bottom of MY list. All viruses (not Trojans) effect Micro$oft OS ONLY. Disclaimer; I have not used M$ products since June 30, 1997. (except at that place, before I retired) (LINUX is secure!) I am just a user, not a programmer or anything else. * it also attaches "it's starter" to all of your outgoing E-mails in the background. -- Ron KA4INM - Youvan's corollary: Every action results in unwanted side effects. From k4bet at bellsouth.net Fri Dec 9 09:58:44 2016 From: k4bet at bellsouth.net (Paul McInnish) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 09:58:44 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client In-Reply-To: <20161209074801.YNES4024.fed1rmfepo101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> <20161209074801.YNES4024.fed1rmfepo101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: <001801d2522c$e52e4860$af8ad920$@net> It may have been interpreted that I used Outlook Express... Not true I use the full blown Outlook which Microsoft still offers! Best regards, Paul McInnish Deputy Sheriff (Retired) Amateur (Ham) Radio: K4BET 'Riding a motorcycle is hours & hours of pure fun & joy interrupted by brief moments of sheer stark unadulterated terror!' -----Original Message----- From: Ham-Computers [mailto:ham-computers-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Jim Hill Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 2:47 AM To: Computers (or other) used for amateur radio, communications, or experimenting Subject: Re: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client Hi Kurt: thanks to you (and the others for tips and why they are good choices). However, I have heard Microsoft no longer offers Outlook Express, but obviously it still works. I'm guessing they don't support win10, and possibly win7. I'm running win XP, 7, and 10 on various computers, but XP is only on those computers that are not suitable for upgrades, and also for older hardware and software. I suggest you have Malwarebytes installed on your computer (there's a good free version), and also make an image file so you can recover in case you are unlucky. I use Terabyte International Image for Linux (works fine on win setups), but it is a little "techie". I have heard that Macrum is good, but have not tried it. If you are "dragged" again, win7 is very much like XP, and win10 is somewhat different - some things are better and some worse, but the plusses exceed the minuses in my opinion. I still have a hard drive with win7 installed, which I can use in place of my win10 drive by moving cables. It was handy when coming "up to speed". I could use win 7 and tinker with win10, but now I use win10 and start up 7 primarily to get Microsoft updates. Jim At 07:46 PM 12/8/2016, you wrote: >I've used Outlook Express for about twenty years, still do, does all >you mention, fast, efficient, using version 6 right now. Tried >Thunderbird, looked/worked like a Chinese/East Indian copy of a ripped >off version of Outlook Express, clunky, not nearly as easy or >efficient, everything about it quite odd. I get up to 800-900 e-mail a >day, filter them into several dozen folders, click the folder, speed >read the subject line at about six a second, delete them as fast, >over-all a few minutes, then spend just a little time >reading/responding to what I kept/care about. I've also tried various >versions of Outlook as well. A lot of bells and whistles not needed for basic e-mail, so I dumped it. > >As for "support", if it worked to begin with, it'll work forever. I >only upgraded to 6 because I got drug into Windows XP and 4 wouldn't >play nice with it or I'd still be using that. So long as it works with >your OS, you don't need "support", just something functional from day one. > >Now if you've upgraded to something like windows 10, which in a year >and a half I have yet to see play nice with anything, including itself, >find something simple that works and if so, great, but can't help you >with specifics on that OS yet. > >Kurt > >______________________________________________________________ >Ham-Computers mailing list >Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers >Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net > >List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF >** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** > > >This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email >list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html ______________________________________________________________ Ham-Computers mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/ham-computers Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Ham-Computers at mailman.qth.net List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF ** For Assistance: dfischer at usol.com ** This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html From kd7jyk at earthlink.net Sat Dec 10 00:25:46 2016 From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 21:25:46 -0800 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Looking for a good email client References: <20161208074333.RAAK4066.fed1rmfepo202.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> <20161209074801.YNES4024.fed1rmfepo101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo305.cox.net> Message-ID: <6A75597ECED34BBA84E0489D0AB0E03B@mainframe> "However, I have heard Microsoft no longer offers Outlook Express, but obviously it still works." Plenty of old disks out there, I have, many, many copies on CD and floppy. Yes, what they used to offer for 3.11, 98, XP, et cetera, the for the most part they don't any more, but there are still many millions of copies out there for free. "I suggest you have Malwarebytes installed on your computer" I have it on the computer that matters. "and also make an image file so you can recover in case you are unlucky" I have backups of important data and if I lose a disk, I pull a new one out of many, many computer and bankers boxes of HDs with OSs on them. The nice thing about technology, it has advanced to where almsot everyting before now is free for the asking, hardware and software alike. "If you are "dragged" again, win7 is very much like XP, and win10 is somewhat different - some things are better and some worse, but the plusses exceed the minuses in my opinion." That just happened in October, still trying to get used to 7 Professional. The new browsers work with the new sites and I can watch streaming video, with all the new office products, I can read new files, other than that, I go back to XP when I need to do most things. I didn't buy 10, but a friend did. It took Dell and Microsoft about three months to get it to work as expected, "turn it on and do something you expect". On a daily basis settings change and programs disappear. Upgrades have taken up to three hours to install and happens at random. A few of the newer programs work on it, nothing up to the point it was made, that is, prior to 10 do, even in "compatibility mode" and microsoft can't make it. There is no reference to the OS by build number, in fact, when you dig down in the computer, it doesn't even say Windows 10, as far as we can tell, it's a beta version from at least six months prior to them announcing it was available. It's not mine, so I really don't care what problems she has, but it's interesting to hear the near daily complaints and listen and watch the computer manufacturer and microsoft fight on the phone and try and fix it remotely, which as far as we can tell works as much as a few hours a week. I'm just rambling at this point... Almost forgot, check oldversion.com for older software. I get a lot of functional stuff from there. Kurt From WA5CAB at cs.com Thu Dec 15 01:00:59 2016 From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 01:00:59 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Problem with SVCHOST.EXE on an XP Machine Message-ID: I still run XP on one of our machines for various reasons. I accidentally discovered an OS problem this morning. I started Task Manager to check free ram and noticed that although nothing was doing anything, the CPU Utilization was steady at 50%. A little checking revealed that it was being caused by one of the two running copies of svchost.exe belonging to SYSTEM. Has anyone encountered this before? And if so, what was the fix (short of attempting to reinstall the OS, which I'm not even sure is possible anymore)? Robert Downs - Houston wa5cab dot com (Web Store) MVPA 9480 From ka4inm at gmail.com Thu Dec 15 07:59:50 2016 From: ka4inm at gmail.com (Ron Youvan) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 07:59:50 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Problem with SVCHOST.EXE on an XP Machine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Robert WA5CAB Downs wrote: > I still run XP on one of our machines for various reasons. I accidentally > discovered an OS problem this morning. I started Task Manager to check free > ram and noticed that although nothing was doing anything, the CPU > Utilization was steady at 50%. A little checking revealed that it was being caused > by one of the two running copies of svchost.exe belonging to SYSTEM. Has > anyone encountered this before? And if so, what was the fix (short of > attempting to reinstall the OS, which I'm not even sure is possible anymore)? As operating systems became more complex Microsoft decided to run more software functionality from a dynamic link library (DLL) interface. However DLLs are unable to launch themselves and require at least one executable program, i.e. svchost.exe, is needed to bridge between the library process and the operating system. To this LINUX user it looks like a good thing. -- Ron KA4INM - Youvan's corollary: Every action results in unwanted side effects. From kd7jyk at earthlink.net Thu Dec 15 20:25:43 2016 From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 17:25:43 -0800 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Problem with SVCHOST.EXE on an XP Machine References: Message-ID: : As operating systems became more complex Microsoft decided to run : more software functionality from a dynamic link library (DLL) interface. : However DLLs are unable to launch themselves and require at least one : executable program, i.e. svchost.exe, is needed to bridge between the : library process and the operating system. So does that mean he needs a way to find out what has called up the instance that's using so much CPU? As for re-install, XP calls out for verification, which as far as I know, doesn't work any more. On the plus side, computers are free by the truckload for the asking and XP is common, so find a high-end computer that blows what you have out of the water with a good copy of XP on it, copy your files over and keep going. That's what I do. Kurt From WA5CAB at cs.com Fri Dec 16 00:46:47 2016 From: WA5CAB at cs.com (WA5CAB at cs.com) Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:46:47 -0500 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Problem with SVCHOST.EXE on an XP Machine Message-ID: <139ad11.63dfebbd.4584d9c6@cs.com> No. I knew what had done the calling (svchost.exe). And I could ID which instance of svchost.exe was the culprit but not what dll's it had called up. FWIW, when I rebooted the machine after installing some updates and security fixes late last night, the problem disappeared. In a message dated 12/15/2016 19:49:45 PM Central Standard Time, kd7jyk at earthlink.net writes: > > So does that mean he needs a way to find out what has called up the > instance > that's using so much CPU? > > Robert Downs - Houston wa5cab dot com (Web Store) MVPA 9480 From kd7jyk at earthlink.net Fri Dec 16 00:53:02 2016 From: kd7jyk at earthlink.net (KD7JYK DM09) Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 21:53:02 -0800 Subject: [Ham-Computers] Problem with SVCHOST.EXE on an XP Machine References: <139ad11.63dfebbd.4584d9c6@cs.com> Message-ID: <63F27FE841D14967AE8215146112FD4B@mainframe> Glad it worked out OK. Kurt