Ping Blake
 

usenet-news.net

You might be surprised at what is happening with the new server. I just
noticed a whole bunch of older posts coming through while still using just
us.usenet-news.net as my news server. When I changed to
news.us.usenet-news.net a whole bunch more came through. My reader(s) are
so confused that I don't know anymore what is current and what is older.
The date/time tag is not consistent to the header date/time.

Ping Blake
 

On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:07:26 -0400, Cheryl wrote:

> usenet-news.net
>
> You might be surprised at what is happening with the new server. I just
> noticed a whole bunch of older posts coming through while still using just
> us.usenet-news.net as my news server. When I changed to
> news.us.usenet-news.net a whole bunch more came through. My reader(s) are
> so confused that I don't know anymore what is current and what is older.
> The date/time tag is not consistent to the header date/time.

You can't just change the server name. You have to delete the old
one and add a new one. That is necessary when you switch Usenet
providers. You technically haven't really changed providers, but
in this case your provider changed providers.

-sw

Ping Blake
 

On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 16:07:26 -0400, Cheryl wrote:

> usenet-news.net
>
> You might be surprised at what is happening with the new server. I just
> noticed a whole bunch of older posts coming through while still using just
> us.usenet-news.net as my news server. When I changed to
> news.us.usenet-news.net a whole bunch more came through. My reader(s) are
> so confused that I don't know anymore what is current and what is older.
> The date/time tag is not consistent to the header date/time.

i haven't noticed anything strange except for the (40tude dialog) message
'asked for article xxxxxx, returned article 0.' (maybe it's 'message.')
but i haven't changed anything. the message has been appearing for maybe
two or three weeks now, but all the posts seem to be retrieved. i haven't
seen anything out of date.

your pal,
blake

Ping Blake
 

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 21:10:21 -0500, Stu wrote:

> I used Fedora for many years till our provider forced us onto windows
> live, now it's outlook 2007, I won't use windows live.

You seem to very confused about the difference between an operating
system, and email/news client, and a marketing term for a set of
services and software offered by Microsoft.

You really are dumber than dog shit.

-sw

Ping Blake
 

On Oct 30, 10:09*am, Sqwertz > wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 21:10:21 -0500, Stu wrote:
> > I used Fedora for many years till our provider forced us onto windows
> > live, now it's outlook 2007, I won't use windows live.
>
> You seem to very confused about the difference between an operating
> system, and email/news client, and a marketing term for a set of
> services and software offered by Microsoft.
>
> You really are dumber than dog shit.

No he's not. He's *smarter* than dog shit. Not a whole lot smarter,
but smarter.
>
> -sw

--Bryan

Ping Blake
 

On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 20:04:38 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On 31 Oct 2010 00:15:26 GMT, Cheryl > wrote:
>
>>On Fri 29 Oct 2010 10:10:21p, Stu wrote in rec.food.cooking
>:
>>
>>> I used Fedora for many years till our provider forced us onto
>>> windows live, now it's outlook 2007, I won't use windows live.
>>
>>Provider enforced? Provider as in provider of what?
>
> Our ISP told us that we were migrating to windows live, this just
> after they shut down their news server, then shut down their mail
> servers.

That still makes no sense whatsoever. ISP's do not use Windows
Live Anything to serve their customers. And if they don't even
have a mail server, there is absolutely NO possibility that they
could force you to use any specific operating system or mail
client.

You have no clue WTF you're talking about.

-sw

Ping Blake
 

"Sqwertz" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 20:04:38 -0500, Stu wrote:
>
>> On 31 Oct 2010 00:15:26 GMT, Cheryl > wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri 29 Oct 2010 10:10:21p, Stu wrote in rec.food.cooking
m>:
>>>
>>>> I used Fedora for many years till our provider forced us onto
>>>> windows live, now it's outlook 2007, I won't use windows live.
>>>
>>>Provider enforced? Provider as in provider of what?
>>
>> Our ISP told us that we were migrating to windows live, this just
>> after they shut down their news server, then shut down their mail
>> servers.
>
> That still makes no sense whatsoever. ISP's do not use Windows
> Live Anything to serve their customers. And if they don't even
> have a mail server, there is absolutely NO possibility that they
> could force you to use any specific operating system or mail
> client.
>
> You have no clue WTF you're talking about.
>
> -sw

My guess is they are shutting down the regular mail servers as we know it
and forcing customers to Windows Live, a web based system integrated with
Hotmail. I strongly dislike Hotmail, Gmail and the like.

Ping Blake
 

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 00:00:57 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

> My guess is they are shutting down the regular mail servers as we know it
> and forcing customers to Windows Live, a web based system integrated with
> Hotmail. I strongly dislike Hotmail, Gmail and the like.

If they shut down their email servers, then users are free to use
any mail servers they wish, web based, pop3, IMAP - free or paid.
Not just Windows Live Hotmail. They can't "force" anyone to use a
Windows Live Mail client. That's totally up to the individual.

But that does shed some light on what he might have been trying to
say. Maybe they suggested it as one possible server and client.
And as he admits, he did switch to a local client other than
Windows Live Mail.

-sw

Ping Blake
 

On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 23:12:03 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 21:06:24 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 20:04:38 -0500, Stu wrote:
>>
>>> On 31 Oct 2010 00:15:26 GMT, Cheryl > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri 29 Oct 2010 10:10:21p, Stu wrote in rec.food.cooking
om>:
>>>>
>>>>> I used Fedora for many years till our provider forced us onto
>>>>> windows live, now it's outlook 2007, I won't use windows live.
>>>>
>>>>Provider enforced? Provider as in provider of what?
>>>
>>> Our ISP told us that we were migrating to windows live, this just
>>> after they shut down their news server, then shut down their mail
>>> servers.
>>
>>That still makes no sense whatsoever. ISP's do not use Windows
>>Live Anything to serve their customers. And if they don't even
>>have a mail server, there is absolutely NO possibility that they
>>could force you to use any specific operating system or mail
>>client.
>>
>>You have no clue WTF you're talking about.
>>
>>-sw
>
> Actually that's where you're wrong.
>
> Our ISP shut down the newsgroup servers, then told all it's users that
> they were migrating to windows live (hotmail). They migrated us all,
> and now they only use a server as a pipe to redirect our mail to
> Microsoft nothing more, it does not receive mail so it can not be
> considered a mail server.
>
> As for the mail client, they needed one that was port configurable,
> and our ISP said to use Outlook Express because Microsoft preferred
> it used with windows live. It was just a coincidence that we used
> Outlook that came with our Office Professional 2007, we have the same
> office only version 2010 on the laptop and other desktop.

So in other words they didn't "force" you to use WLM. All email
clients are "port configurable".

And of course Microsoft would "prefer" you use their client
(probably not for any legitimate reason other than Plans for World
Domination)

-sw

-sw

Ping Blake
 

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 00:40:51 -0500, Sqwertz wrote:

> I do not use my ISP's DNS servers...I'm using OpenDNS.com for resolution,

I forgot the "Why": Because it's 25% faster and more reliable than
my ISP's DNS resolution.

-sw

Ping Blake
 

On Oct 30, 11:00*pm, "Ed Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "Sqwertz" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 30 Oct 2010 20:04:38 -0500, Stu wrote:
>
> >> On 31 Oct 2010 00:15:26 GMT, Cheryl > wrote:
>
> >>>On Fri 29 Oct 2010 10:10:21p, Stu wrote in rec.food.cooking
> m>:
>
> >>>> I used Fedora for many years till our provider forced us onto
> >>>> windows live, now it's outlook 2007, I won't use windows live.
>
> >>>Provider enforced? *Provider as in provider of what?
>
> >> Our ISP told us that we were migrating to windows live, this just
> >> after they shut down their news server, then shut down their mail
> >> servers.
>
> > That still makes no sense whatsoever. *ISP's do not use Windows
> > Live Anything to serve their customers. *And if they don't even
> > have a mail server, there is absolutely NO possibility that they
> > could force you to use any specific operating system or mail
> > client.
>
> > You have no clue WTF you're talking about.
>
> > -sw
>
> My guess is they are shutting down the regular mail servers as we know it
> and forcing customers to Windows Live, a web based system integrated with
> Hotmail. * I strongly dislike Hotmail, Gmail and the like.

Why? Their spam filters work great. Now getting rid of news servers
did suck, but GoogleGroups works OK.
You're just an old man who doesn't like change.

--Bryan

Ping Blake
 

On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 07:34:41 -0500, Stu wrote:

> On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 00:14:23 -0500, Sqwertz >
> wrote:
>
>>So in other words they didn't "force" you to use WLM. All email
>>clients are "port configurable".
>
> That's not true, do your homework before making such a blanket
> statement

You know of a client that ISN'T? Name one MUA that has been
releases/updated in the past 6 years where you can't set the ports
it uses to connect with the server(s).

It's YOU who hasvn't done your homework, asswipe.

-sw