DescentBB

I'm sure most of you know this already and fewer actually USE outlook express. (a smart choice on the whole).

I was wondering, is this a valid move or are they just reaccerting control over the world on a whole? I understand the whole do away with \"Archaic\" DAV, but why can't they patch OE to match the new tech. Instead they require you to d/l and install \"Windows Live Hotmail\".

bah

Anyone have a good simple mail handler out there? I don't like TB; it's a bit too cumbersome to set up.

Incidentally, Opera 10 is out now and is working really well.

Yes I know, I’m stupid…we already established that!

I used to use Eudora way back, I think it's free now.

I don't use local mail clients, too much of a security hole. I only use the web interfaces for all my email addresses.

I use Outlook (non-Express) at work - still works fine with Hotmail.

Personally, I'm slowly migrating all my email traffic to my GMail account, which still works via the old POP3 protocol.

http://www.eudora.com/ Link for Eudora

I also use Outlook at work and at home. Don't mind it at all.

Duper wrote:I don't like TB; it's a bit too cumbersome to set up.

I've been using TB since it came out. I tried many other clients already, including Outlook, but there's nothing as easy and fully-featured than TB.

OE is someting no one really should use at all.

Krom wrote:I don't use local mail clients, too much of a security hole. I only use the web interfaces for all my email addresses.

Not sure what difference that would make...
Doesn't sound like a reasonable explanation.

Uhh... hm. I don't really know either; most alternatives seem to be long dead. I just use Thunderbird when I'm at home (while most of my mail is web-accessible, it's handy to have it aggregated in one place).

I don't like Hotmail but I do understand MS's reasons for migrating the Hotmail users to Windows Live Mail (much better, more features, not stuck in the \"I.T. Stone Age\" of online email systems, more user functions, blah blah blha ... the list goes on and on) ... and I don't particularly care for most of the Windows Live products.

I use Outlook (not Outlook Express) at work and I'll say it's \"O.K.\" and integrates very nicely in a mostly Windows based large Enterprise using Microsoft Exchange (that's where the full Outlook really shines).

I also use the full Outlook at home for several email accounts (IMAP, POP) for myself and the family. Works very well.

I also use TB for a couple of my other email accounts and while it's setup is a bit different from how Outlook Express sets up, TB is better about giving not only the needed tools for setting up, but includes more options/features in the setup than most free email clients. It's also rock steady.

Find what suits your fancy and work with it.

well the only accounts of the 4 i have that are useable via a mail client is G-mail and my ISP. Both hotmail and Yahoo have \"special requirements\" now.

MS wants you to use their software and Yahoo wants you to pay to use pop3. o_0

bleh. it's getting to be too much hassle. I don't use messengers so I could really care less about integration and features. (no offense anyone.) They just have the appeal of pile of rocks to me is all. And as I'm not a rock hound, that equals about ziltch.

All the same, thanks for all the input!

TB FTW!

Go TB. It's pretty easy to set up.

Live Mail specifically requires Outlook/Outlook Express to interact with it through IMAP/POP3/something similar? That's a little bit daft... these days lock-in doesn't really work.

Grendel wrote:Go TB. It's pretty easy to set up.

actually, i didn't find it that way. setup separate accounts was like running a relay race with hurtles.

Not sure what you did, but I didn't have trouble setting up my 6 or 7 accounts at all. Very straight forward.

Myself I use Outlook coupled with Neo Pro as its a far more versatile e-mail management interface than Outlook alone.

On a sort of related subject, what is the most secure way of managing sensitive/confidential work emails? Krom, you suggested that managing email through a local client is potentially hazardous - it that soley due to the possibility of imbedded/attached malware?

Gekko71 wrote:Krom, you suggested that managing email through a local client is potentially hazardous - it that soley due to the possibility of imbedded/attached malware?

Krom's statement is based on his personal beliefs with a mixture of some rumours. It is not grounded on any technical facts.

Grendel wrote:Not sure what you did, but I didn't have trouble setting up my 6 or 7 accounts at all. Very straight forward.

I guess our idea of straight forward vary. .. but then again, you're an "engineer"!

hey, what version are you using? Mine is 2.0.0.22. Is that current?

2.0.0.23. Make sure you set it to check for updates.

Well so far I've yet to see someone who uses a web email such as gmail, hotmail, or yahoo mail catch an email worm. The vast majority of emails containing viruses and worms are automatically filtered out of those webmail systems and you never even see them. Granted that applies even if you are using a POP client to access them.

On the other hand I have seen plenty of people using outbreak (outlook) and outbreak express on their unfiltered ISP accounts catch email worms. But hey, maybe it was just my personal beliefs and rumors I had to clean off those systems and not actually email worms.

well, if you're getting your web mail through OE, germs shouldn't be an issue as it's already gone through their system. As for my ISP,(comcast) I don't really use it for much. In fact, I don't think I've even given it to anyone.

I'm also a bit paranoid about spam via my ISP email account and will blow it away without opening. (I get your stuff through gmail Vulcan) heh (and yeah, I have the preview panel disabled.)

btw. Thanks Gren.

Krom wrote:But hey, maybe it was just my personal beliefs and rumors I had to clean off those systems and not actually email worms.

I've seen people downloading and opening the same email worms through their webmailers.

I use a program called E-Prompter. It's not a mail program per say but it allows you to d/l the mail and see if it's useful. Otherwise mark it as delete and it will automatically delete it from the server. Then you can use your Outlook etc to d/l only the emails you want.

http://www.eprompter.com/

CDN_Merlin wrote:I use a program called E-Prompter. It's not a mail program per say but it allows you to d/l the mail and see if it's useful. Otherwise mark it as delete and it will automatically delete it from the server. Then you can use your Outlook etc to d/l only the emails you want.

That's got to be a joke. You're using a program to download an email to see if it's useful, and if it is you're downloading it again with a mail client? Nice one.

You know what I do?

I use Thunderbird to download the mail to see if it's useful or not. If it isn't, I delete it too.

You see the difference?

(Actually not quite true, because I have only IMAP accounts, but the process is very similar. )

Thomas01 wrote:That's got to be a joke. You're using a program to download an email to see if it's useful, and if it is you're downloading it again with a mail client? Nice one.

It downloads headers, instead of the whole email which is an email setting his client anyways

... so in a way ... yes kind of a redundant, but for your lack of knowledge before scoffing it = THOMAS FAIL

BUBBALOU wrote:... so in a way ... yes kind of a redundant, but for your lack of knowledge before scoffing it = THOMAS FAIL

I prefer the "lack of knowledge" bit for the FAIL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMAP

Reason I use it is ebcause it the email contains a virus, trojan etc I don't get infected because it only uses plain text and not anything else. So I bypass having to d/l tons of spam and sort through them later.

Thomas01 wrote:I prefer the "lack of knowledge" bit for the FAIL.

hindsight is a wonderful thing

CDN_Merlin wrote:Reason I use it is ebcause it the email contains a virus, trojan etc I don't get infected because it only uses plain text and not anything else. So I bypass having to d/l tons of spam and sort through them later.

That's because by downloading only the header you can tell whether its a virus or not?

Can I hire you for working as my virus scanner?

Thomas, by downloading the header, I can tell wether it's useful or crap. If it's crap I delete it. if it's from someone I know and it has an attachment, I can see what it's called and delete it if I want. Anyways, enough about this.

Merlin, sorry, Duper asked for a mailer to use, and you came up with a suggestion which is more than just useless for basically everyone. Its funcionality is implemented in Thunderbird, Outlook, Outlook Express, and literally every email client program I even heard of. Ok, in Outlook and Outlook Express only in the 2007 versions and later, but still...

I do admit that similar software had its purpose 10 years ago when POP3 ruled the world, when mail clients didn't do more than being plain mail clients, and when SPAM and virus filters were either not at all or only poorly implemented.

Nowadays, I think it's not a good idea to suggest its use to anybody, because as Bubbalou already found out, it's entirely redundant, and more than that, it can't compete with virus scanners and SPAM filters in modern email clients, and if it displays mails in plain texts I highly doubt that you can decode most character sets and encodings in your head better than a real mail client.

I'm not even saying that it takes up another (wasted) space in your Windows tray.

So, as often as you suggest the use of this software I'll redicule it. With reason, I believe.

I was using full blown Oulook 2007 at home... but massive overkill for my Gmail syncing over IMAP... I'm using Windows Live Mail now on Windows 7 Home (Part of the Windows Live Essentials).

Pretty lightweight and spiffy.