How to autodial on Windows (was Re: Can PMMAIL (win) do this?)

Steve Lamb PMMAIL Discussion List <PMMAIL-L@VM.EGE.EDU.TR>
Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:11:11 -0700


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

On Sat, 17 Apr 1999 02:43:35 +0300, Cristian Secara wrote:

>Yes, I know what I am doing.

    Apparently not.

>1. Yes, some overhead. So what ?

    Hundreds of people have to transfer that and most don't use it.  HTML in
lists is considered very bad.

>2. I give more importance to what a message says and looks, than carrying
>about few bits overhead

    Then turn off HTML since you obviously don't mind how it looks.

>3. On short messages, the overhead is little when comparing to the header of >the received message

    Even on short messages the overhead is, at minimum, comparable to the
headers.

>4. The overhead of my messages is comparable with some others gigantic >signatures and/or excessive quoting

    Ah, let's go back to this...

>5. Please evaluate the percent of the overhead of this message, sent one day
>by Steve Lamb, another one that addressed a reproach to me regarding HTML
>overhead:

    No, it wasn't a reproach.  That one was poiting out that a feature in
PMMail/2 isn't in PMMail98...  YET.  You forgot the important part.  I
porvided a lot of information with that one word.  I also see a good example
of a lack of excessive quoting.  ;)

>===
>>It's not there.
>
>    Yet.
>
>--
>             Steve C. Lamb             | Opinions expressed by me are not my
>    http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus    | employer's.  They hired me for my
>             ICQ: 5107343              | skills and labor, not my opinions!
>---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
>--xHFwDpU9dbj6ez1V
>Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
>MessageID: Mc4+DKdpZZZ1/OaBwa/1goApDLzEJGDY
>
>iQA/AwUBNvlQpXpf7K2LbpnFEQLvtgCfXZ3EEA7U2MlUC1B3kKjw5Y2cz+EAoMIQ
>BY5/v+t0vx7TFN14kJK2qZJD
>=ZzTu
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>--xHFwDpU9dbj6ez1V--
>===


    OK....   The overhead in your last message, not including the headers to
split out the MIME parts...
===
- --_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_4862832=_=_=_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<HTML>


</U><FONT FACE="Arial" DEFAULT="FACE"><FONT SIZE="2" POINTSIZE="10"
DEFAULT="SIZE">On Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:15:15 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<FONT COLOR=808080>&gt;&gt;To be honest, IE5 is *way* better than 4 was, give
it a try!<BR>
&gt;That isn't the point. The point is some people don't want to use IE<BR>
&gt;ever.<BR>
<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"><BR>
The point is IE4 upgrade also introduced some other OS improvements to Win95
OSR2 (e.g. the ability to allow all uppercase names; there were many others,
I cannot recall them now).<BR>
I personally prefer to have a more stable and (few) more features on my OS
and ignoring the presence of IE.<BR>
I was expecting the same with IE5. But they solved 1 bug and introduced 5
more bugs :) No, it's not the moment for upgrading to IE5. It's still under
development, even if officially released ...<BR>
<BR>
Best wishes,<BR>
    Cristi<BR>
<BR>

</HTML>


- --_=_=_=IMA.BOUNDARY.HTML_4862832=_=_=_--
===



Yours:
{morpheus@teleute:/home/morpheus}wc bahb
     32     151    1087 bahb

Mine:
{morpheus@teleute:/home/morpheus}wc bahb
     18      51     638 bahb

    My 638 bytes of "overhead" consisted of the proper SIG marker (DASH,
DASH, SPACE, NEWLINE), a signature of under 4 lines (proper netiquette), and
the authentication information provided by PGP.

    Your 1087 bytes of overhead excluded your rather short signature and is
almost an exact duplicate of the non-HTML version except that the quoted area
is light grey instead of default.  Of course, the quotes are already denoted
by the conventional > quote marker so even the color change serves no
purpose.

    In short, I am keeping within convention and provide useful information
whereas yours provides nothing which isn't already apparent in the original.

>For PGP public key email me with the subject "SEND PGP KEY"

    Which I find ironic because you criticize my use of PGP as "overhead."
:)

- --
         Steve C. Lamb         | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
         ICQ: 5107343          | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
- -------------------------------+---------------------------------------------

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.0 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc

iQCVAwUBNxfRn6C6xbtZwvdnAQHJCQP+JXvHuzWLFMqNolRsnWGKdymX4flhPlRu
cITYUWQPDN0u5V2iTFMb2rR6X/rMEHyhrM8AY9tS35prQvD8uoMs6SbyIS3uKDmD
p+XI5s6xMF93USQ6wXGGkU4ZpUIrI2DGktmp4WjwyVlfpX6SIhT5ixhBsmCQYXdZ
kXnrmMpSStw=
=+Dsx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----