Meta: long-link test for your news reader

[trader4]

Google Groups here. The long link is OK and I don't see any problem with Stormin's post. Maybe time for someone to rethink which client is brain damaged.

[Mark Lloyd]

[snip]

A lot of free ones add their spam.

I'd never post anything with Google.

[Joe]

Using Google Groups with Safari on iMac running Leopard OS. FWIW, the URL popped up almost instantly.

Joe

[Mark Lloyd]

Are you saying it did in mine? I said it did not wrap.

The OTHER text wrapped (words are significant).

[Twayne]

Not split; works fine here. OE6.

It's not OE that "splits" the links; it's a case of improperly set defaults. I use a combo of FF and TB along with IE7/OE6 but each have their plusses & minusses. Actually I've quit using TB & should uninstall it; I just tried it because I had downloaded FF again to fiddle with.

HTH

Twayne

[George]

I just checked using Google groups and "Stormin Mormans" post is broken there too just as David described.

I might suggest that OE is brain damaged because it defaults to top posting for everything. Top posting makes sense for one to one correspondence in email but it breaks the idea of threading which works nicely in newsgroups. This is especially true in this group where 99.5% of the posts are bottom posted. Its like one person on the interstate deciding they would really like to drive north in the south bound lane.

[David Nebenzahl]

On 2/6/2009 6:55 AM [e-mail] spake thus:

It's OE. Outlook plays by Microsoft's made-up "rules" for formatting emails and Usenet posts, which are different from the long-standing and agreed-upon ones used by *every other mail/news client*, which is why Stormin's malformatted posts look OK when viewed by the same software which generated them.

More proof of brain damage is the oft-seen text above, "- Show quoted text -", probably a result of concurrent brain damage between Google Groups and Outhouse Express.

[trader4]

I thought I just saw a couple replies from people using OE that said the link was fine.

[David Nebenzahl]

On 2/6/2009 11:07 AM [e-mail] spake thus:

Yes, the link came out fine (not truncated or chopped) in OE 6. That's not the issue; what was being discussed here was how Stormin' Mormon's posts contained the quoted text below his sig, which made them disappear when replied to with any standards-compliant client (not OE).

Do try to keep up.

[David Nebenzahl]

On 2/6/2009 9:57 AM George spake thus:

Thank you, and I agree. However, in fairness, OE isn't necessarily brain-damaged *in this instance*, because one can change its top-posting behavior, as evidenced by many posters here who use it and who bottom post. (It shouldn't default to top-posting, I agree, but that's a different rant for a different day.)

[HeyBub]

Microsoft runs on 90%+ of the world's computers and most of those folks use OE or Outlook or Vista's Windows Mail program. Microsoft is, therefore, the "keeper of the standard." It is incumbent upon the wannabes to conform to the way Microsoft does things, not the other way 'round. "*Every other mail/news client*" don't make up 10% of the world's effort.

As to the "Show quoted text" you never see that on my posts. Again, I think you may be blaming Microsoft for something that is really the fault of those who refuse to conform to Microsoft's standards.

I don't want you to think that just because I own a shit-load of Microsoft stock (quarterly divident checks are running $2,400), I will defend them no matter what. I'll be the first to jump down their throat when they do something inexcusable.

Fortunately, that has never happened...

[Oren]

No, I was saying my Agent did not wrap the link. Same as yours.

[benick]

I thought I just saw a couple replies from people using OE that said the link was fine.

You did...I use Microsoft Mail and it's fine...Some just suffer from MDS...(Microsoft Derangement Syndrome)...LOL...

[George]

But thats hardly accurate. Microsoft has frequently been a "wannabe" and found itself chasing the taillights of others. They completely missed the idea of the Internet and scrambled to cobble IE together. They had to use the common and standards based TCP/IP and DNS for connectivity because their methods were extremely desktop centric and woefully lacking. Currently they have been chasing Googles taillights for years because they completely missed the idea that powerful search tools would be a key and lucrative thing.

[HeyBub]

You are correct that in some areas Microsoft has had to play catch-up. In some of those cases (Internet Explorer vs. Netscape), Microsoft won the game and gets to keep the ball. In other areas, such as search engines, the 'game' is more like a Rugby scrum, with Microsoft refusing to concede defeat. In the case of newsreaders, Google may be advancing the ball; but not entirely because of its expertiese. Recall that Google got into this area by the simple expedient of purchasing Deja News in 2001.

Still, Microsoft probably has more experts - designers, technicians, psychologists, artists, PhD mathematicians, programmers, system designers, herbalists, etc. - working on computer compatability and usage issues than there are employees in the National Bureau of Standards.