__/ On Friday 26 August 2005 15:08, [Els] wrote : \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> Well, I knew of that possibility already. (I was one of the technical
>>> reviewers for "Firefox and Thunderbird Garage")
>> I am sincerely impressed, yet by no means surprised.
> Thank you :-) </blush>
>>> But I don't like it much, as I have then to count which number the
>>> wanted tab has. After having more than 6 tabs open, this is too much
>>> hassle. I prefer Opera's method in that: ctrl-tab will switch between
>>> the last two openened, regardsless of how many tabs are physically
>>> between them.
>> I guess it is all a matter of habit. I think I would have spent a lot of
>> 'brain RAM' keeping track of which tab I opened last. I then risk getting
>> that information overload threshold, which distracts me.
> Well, I ususally only switch between two, max 3 at one time - so the
> brain power is saved by not having to deal with the 20-odd other tabs
> that are open at the same time :-)
Do you not suffer from that spatial clutter? I bet you cannot read the tab
titles, not even with a high-resolution dual-head. Firefox doesn't allow
for vertical alignment of tabs, yet. Must be like hell working on your
browser... CTRL+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W+W, which luckily in
Firefox requires 2 persistent keystrokes (Linux at the least).
>> In practice, I
>> only navigate using the digits for tabs 1 to 3, maybe 4. That's where I
>> usually have fundamental stuff like my portal and a CMS.
> Big difference - only using 1 to 4 tabs, yes, easy to remember which
> tab number you need.
It's usually quite consistent too, which serves as a mnemonic. When I come
to think of it, it is reminiscent of my placement of applications on the
display. XMMS between screen 1 and 2, desktop junk on the left, browser on
the right screen (which has better definition) and the rest is tossed at
>> CTRL+Home gets me to my portal where everything remains in the same
>> position -- all 300 or so links that are logically categorised. I can't
>> use the Internet without my portal anymore. When my site is down, I must
>> use a local copy of it.
> I have started such a page, for the most used links. Still should add
> more links to it really. Much easier than relying on the browser,
> especially when you use different computers. I now have
> favourites/bookmarks spread over three browsers - note to self: really
> should get them on that portal page...
At risk of crossing the line onto self-promotion, many things I learned from
experience are here < http://www.schestowitz.com/Portal/ >.
>>>>> Outlook Express...
>>>> You, madam, made me spill my Coke.
>>> That should have been rum&coke really - and thanks for reminding me, I
>>> need to buy some coke today to go with my rum :-)
>> See comment that begs to be made... yet to be articulated below...
>>> And I didn't even do it on purpose - I really use OE for mail.
>> People should spend money on rum, not expensive operating systems and
>> commercial software.
> Well, rum could easily become the more expensive of the two. I bought
> WinXP, and Trillian Pro. I've got a 'borrowed' copy of an expensive
> graphic program, and the rest is all open source and share- and
Hmmmm... if only I could find shareware beer...
>>> Well, I did misinterpret it: I really thought I had you spill your
>>> coke... you shouldn't have spoiled it by saying it was a joke ;-)
>> I was fairly sure it would be offensive. Text is too ambiguous -- no tone
>> of voice.
> I'm not easily offended :-)
> (and I was asking for it - using OE! <g>)
I am just as guilty as you are. I have just set up a professor with OE. I
told him that he should use Thunderbird, but sitting here at the office
downloading and installing it would have been bad use of my time. *grin*
...at least I told him it was cr*p... same about Windows...
>>>> I used OE myself until last year.
>>> Why did you ditch it? Thunderbird? I've done that for a short while,
>>> but didn't like it.
>> Until I moved to Thunderbird, I had to manually export all my monthly
>> archives on the 1st of each month.
> Either you have a small harddisk, or you get a very big lot of mail to
> archive! Last time I archived is months ago, and my inbox currently
> holds 743 messages (including today's spam). Anything I need archived
> goes in subfolders, which I occasionally store elsewhere on the HD, or
> on CD.
CD's are hard to mirror, so I keep everything on a single physical
hard-drive. My obsession with archives sometimes scares me.
>> I chose to export it to HTML using a Ruby script.
> Is that easy to do? My mails are in flat text, but there are HTML
> attachments and pics and sound files and stuff. How is that all stored
It outputs rich HTML. Then again, by importing OE to Thunderbird, which is a
> you get MBOX archives, which MHonArc, for instance, handles gracefully.
>> Having your mail locked in a proprietary format is risky.
>> Thunderbird with all the enhancements gives me more than Outlook (not
>> Express) has ever offered me. Oh, and it's free...
> I wouldn't pay for Outlook either - but I'm happy with OE. I'd prefer
> Dialog to take care of my mail though, but it lacks a couple of things
> to be useful as a mailclient for me.
As time goes by, I am beginning to lean towards Web-based because I back my
webspace up very frequently, it backs 'itself' up and it keeps mail away
from me. I remember the days when I woke up looking forward to mail in my
box. I am the complete opposite now.
> I hate Thunderbird's 'extra line' bug. (extra empty line between
> different quoted bits)
I never noticed that one. Perhaps it got fixed?
>> Good luck with SuSE. I tried many distros, but SuSE (which I use most of
>> the time) is king.
> Queen ;-)
Roy S. Schestowitz "How do I set my laser printer on stun?"