"Rudolf Polzer" <AntiATField_adsgohere@durchnull.de> wrote:
> Scripsit illa aut ille Tim Hammerquist <tim@vegeta.ath.cx>:
> > Disaster graced us by uttering:
> > > To continue I'm certainly not going to install something that
modifies
> > > OE that doesn't come from MS. I don't care how much someone screams
> > > it's virtues.
> >
> > There are, of course, other options.  You will never find me
suggesting
> > you _PATCH_ Outlook Express.  However, if I'm not feeling sufficiently
> > diplomatic, you _might_ catch me suggesting you _DELETE_ Outlook
> > Express...  and Netscape Messenger, too. =)
>
> What's so bad about NM? It has exactly five bugs:
>
> 1. It looks ugly.
> 2. Is has the same design mistake as OE: it displays messages using the
>    HTML renderer, so security holes in it may be also exploited using
>    mail. At least it's easy to disable JavaScript in mail.
> 3. It looks ugly.
> 4. The message-id bug: if you don't have an own domain, you have to put
>    double qoutes around the mail address since otherwise NM would use
>    the domain part in the MID and can then potentially create ununique
>    MIDs. But this wouldn't harm Disaster because he has his own domain.
> 5. Did I mention it looks ugly?
>
> So I think: if Disaster accepts irreparable damage to his eyes, he could
> use NM.

Disaster abhors ugly looking programs. Layout is very important as far as
I care!
--
Kind regards
Disaster
Disaster's Fan Fiction - http://www.disfanfic.net
DSE - For the Public - http://www.disfanfic.net/DSE
JAE FAQ - http://www.evafaq.com
Pen^3's JAE FAQ - http://faq.pen3.cjb.net
Convention Reports - http://www.disfanfic.net/conventions