Windows problems

[Carroll Robbins]

"DGDevin" <DGDevin@invalid.invalid> wrote on Fri, 6 Aug 2010 20:57:21 -0700
in <98OdndKdgqUmRMHRnZ2dnUVZ_uidnZ2d@earthlink.com>

>Huh, well my aging memory recalls anti-spam forums in years past echoing
>with cries that if only certain ISPs would block Port 25 blah blah blah the
>spam load would be greatly diminished for reasons I won't pretend to have
>the technical knowledge to understand (I had the impression it allowed
>people to do an end run around their ISP's mail servers, or something). And
>when I set up OE in XP Mode last week my ISP told me to use a different
>port. Not a big deal, if it works then I'm happy.

They meant block port 25 except for the ISP's own SMTP server. They thought
that was obvious. Blocking port 25 doesn't stop users from avoiding their
ISP's SMTP servers. Some ISP's don't block the port but redirect all port
25 traffic to their own servers. It does stop users from inadvertently
spewing spam. For most users it doesn't matter. For some it does.
--
Carroll B. Robbins, Jr.

 

[DGDevin]

"Char Jackson" <none@none.invalid> wrote in message
news:7nop5659nalv7b11fk1hupc526ckct7695@4ax.com...

>>Well, Windows Live did the same thing for me earlier today except it make
>>a
>>mistake I had to fix on the outgoing mail server. Apparently it has
>>become
>>standard-issue.
>
> First of all, you insist on calling it Windows Live when it's Windows
> Live Mail, a totally different program.

Hammer, mallet--if you know what tool I'm asking for why be picky about the
name?

> Second, you prove my point
> when you say you had to fix something that the autoconfigure missed.

Actually I'm proving my point, as my wife's new Mac got everything right
first try, but I had to fix Windows 7's attempt at setting up my e-mail.

> Third, savvy users will want to configure their (multiple?) email
> accounts manually so as to get things right the first time. But maybe
> all of that is just me. I'm glad it worked out for you.

I actually prefer to do it manually so I know what the settings should look
like if and when I have to mess with them later. That's how I recognized
what this Windows auto-configuration program had missed. But I still think
it's slick when software can set itself up properly.

 

[Ken Blake]

On Fri, 6 Aug 2010 21:52:52 -0700, "DGDevin" <DGDevin@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

> "Char Jackson" <none@none.invalid> wrote in message
> news:7nop5659nalv7b11fk1hupc526ckct7695@4ax.com...
>
> >>Well, Windows Live did the same thing for me earlier today except it make
> >>a
> >>mistake I had to fix on the outgoing mail server. Apparently it has
> >>become
> >>standard-issue.
> >
> > First of all, you insist on calling it Windows Live when it's Windows
> > Live Mail, a totally different program.
>
> Hammer, mallet--if you know what tool I'm asking for why be picky about the
> name?


If you call something by the wrong name, you run the risk of confusing
everyone reading your message. I, for one, didn't know what you were
talking about.

 

[DGDevin]

"Ken Blake" <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:udsq56tshgv6a3aonfjfddf1ersufd4bra@4ax.com...

> If you call something by the wrong name, you run the risk of confusing
> everyone reading your message. I, for one, didn't know what you were
> talking about.

Well that makes two of us. ;~)

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:59:17 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:56:07 -0700, Ken Blake
> <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote:
>
>
>>> But I wonder - did you mean the cycle time was 11.5 milliseconds, or 11.5
>>> microseconds?
>>
>>
>> I thought I meant milliseconds, but I don't remember for sure.
>
>
>
> I was wrong. It's microseconds. See
> http://ed-thelen.org/1401Project/1401GuidePosterV9.html

Thanks for the link. I'm about to go off on a tanget to look at it

Thanks for your link too, relic.

Time for two trips down memory lane...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

 

[Chuck]

I don't know what started this--But-- the earliest computer I saw still
in operation around the middle 60's was owned by an insurance company,
Franklin Life, in Springfield Illinois. It was vacuum tube based, with
hexagon? equipment bays full of 6146 tubes. You could walk into the
center of the bay, which just had room for one or two and a Tektronix
Oscilloscope on a cart. The diagnostics called out a defective drawer,
and the scope was used to see which section of the drawer had failed.
Don't remember much else, other than a wall full of line printers
connected to the beast!

Another monster of the time (but small in size), 1967-68, was used by
the military, and had a very large number of sub miniature tubes in
rows(used as flip flops). Never mind what it was used for. It was setup
with a punch card in a holder, or a small patch panel for testing, and
the output usually went to an ASCII caps only printer referred to as a
"Mighty Mite".

On 8/9/2010 7:45 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:59:17 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 20:56:07 -0700, Ken Blake
>> <kblake@this.is.invalid.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>> But I wonder - did you mean the cycle time was 11.5 milliseconds, or 11.5
>>>> microseconds?
>>>
>>>
>>> I thought I meant milliseconds, but I don't remember for sure.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was wrong. It's microseconds. See
>> http://ed-thelen.org/1401Project/1401GuidePosterV9.html
>
> Thanks for the link. I'm about to go off on a tanget to look at it
>
> Thanks for your link too, relic.
>
> Time for two trips down memory lane...
>

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 239:51 -0400, Chuck wrote:

> I don't know what started this

These things start at the drop of a hat

We geezers love to reminisce, after all (and maybe brag?).

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)