Unfortunately that thread has an error in the header that eternal September won't process. What I tried to say was, look inside the item, and see what wire is in use, and you will see the futility of using ridiculously expensive mains cables. Also of course what about the house wiring or would Russ suggest replacing all of that all the way back to your power station? Brian
Not an error, just a different encoding of a pound sign, I suspect Outhouse can't cope with it ...
More likely to be ES. I sometimes have to edit the punctuation in the headers of messages I'm replying to, before ES will accept it. This results in a new thread starting.
Your screen reader is going to make this mostly unintelligible, because the post is in fact, unintelligible.
*******The message is stored on the Howard server. This link opens in your web browser.
Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?XLPE_HiFi_mains_lead=2e_Bargain_at_=c2=a31000_for_1_metre?=
This was recently discussed in E-S.support, the usage of encoding by clients in message headers (and posting on E-S with such).
Re: =?utf-8?Q?Accented_letters_2_=C3=A8=C3=A8=C3=A8?= =?utf-8?Q?=C3=A8=C3=A0=C3=A0=C3=A0?=
It's possible Outlook screwed up the quoting of the stuff, rather than re-encoding it. One way to find out, would be to use port 119, then use a copy of Wireshark to snapshot the "POST" attempt.
USENET is not something that the Microsoft developers are skilled at. They could not make a compliant tool for it, if their lives depended on it. Windows Live Mail was no better than Outlook.
Paul
ES won't accept non 7-bit characters in headers, unless they're encoded properly, therefore it's the client that's broken not the server. In the original thread the pound sign was QP encoded, so outlook decoded it on receipt but failed to re-encode it on send.
Well, I could probably fix it if I figured out the character set in use, but life is too short. Brian
This is something I am quite passionate about to be honest. When they built Outlook Express there were some rough edges, ie no way to change the quote position without bodging cocking up outgoing encoding as we have discussed and things like periodically losing its way to display email after being in another identity etc. All probably fixable. However instead of fixing their client they kept on inventing new ones each time a version of Windows came out, totally different some more accessible than others, but mostly worse. Then they dropped Usenet even from Outlook as well adding stupid ribbon menus to stuff that nobody understood or appreciated. The latest email client is a messy slow boring half baked mess. I really don't get itt. Email is in many ways one of the main things computers in the hands of the public get used for, yet getting it to just work seems to be beyond them. Brian
Yes, the Windows 10 "Mail" is a parody of itself.
Surely the staff must have made their "eating broccoli" face when creating it :-)
I set up a virtual machine with its own email server installed, just to practice using it. And there would be cases where I couldn't remember how to get a certain feature to pop up in the interface. The Mail.App did not grow on me, as I used it.
I think they do these things, to help Mozilla sell more copies of Thunderbird.
Paul
I think part of the problem with outlook express was that it used an old version of the IE rendering engine (a thing called Trident) for HTML display. As such it became a security nightmare to maintain because in inherited the many failings of the rendering engine. It also got all the quirks of whatever version of IE was installed.
Later versions of Outlook (the full fat version, not "express") switched to using a HTML engine used by Word - and that is why outlook can still end up rendering HTML that does not look the same as in a modern browser. (its support for CSS and many other modern web things is poor)
Most recent web based versions of outlook use the webkit engine, which is full featured.
Not sure what the various windows "mail" clients use, but then who cares? :-)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.