Searching \ for '[PIC]Tight Loop for Input Detection' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/microchip/ios.htm?key=input
Search entire site for: 'Tight Loop for Input Detection'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[PIC]Tight Loop for Input Detection'
2008\12\19@142120 by olin piclist

face picon face
Multiple spam filter nonsense in subject line removed.

Larry Bradley wrote:
> My mail program always sends multi-part, even if there is no HTML in
> the body of the message - it's a lot easier that way.

If you're trolling for a high spam score and greater annoyance factor.  If
however you're asking 2000 others for free help, it's not a good idea.

While certain things should perhaps work, the fact remains they don't
universally.  Actually Outlook Express, which is what I'm using, does seem
to handle multi-part messages, but is more annoying in how it handles the
plain text part and replies to it.  Even though I have all the HTML and
other such silliness turned off, I think when I reply to such a message it
goes out in multi-part too.  I forget exactly, but there is more hassle
associated with replying to such a message than simple plain text messages
wrapped to more than 80 characters.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

2008\12\19@143443 by Larry Bradley

flavicon
face
Good point, Olin. I've been using this client for a couple of years now with no complaints. But I don't normally spend a lot of time on lists, so perhaps the exposure to the same group of people hasn't been happening.

I'll look into it. I have Outlook Express on my machine, so I can check it out.

Thanks.




Original Message:
>
Multiple spam filter nonsense in subject line removed.

Larry Bradley wrote:
> My mail program always sends multi-part, even if there is no HTML in
> the body of the message - it's a lot easier that way.

If you're trolling for a high spam score and greater annoyance factor. If
however you're asking 2000 others for free help, it's not a good idea.

While certain things should perhaps work, the fact remains they don't
universally. Actually Outlook Express, which is what I'm using, does seem
to handle multi-part messages, but is more annoying in how it handles the
plain text part and replies to it. Even though I have all the HTML and
other such silliness turned off, I think when I reply to such a message it
goes out in multi-part too. I forget exactly, but there is more hassle
associated with replying to such a message than simple plain text messages
wrapped to more than 80 characters.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014. Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

2008\12\19@143626 by olin piclist

face picon face
Olin Lathrop wrote:
> I forget
> exactly, but there is more hassle associated with replying to such a
> message than simple plain text messages wrapped to more than 80
> characters.

That should have been "wrapped to no more than 80 characters".
                                 ^^


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2008 , 2009 only
- Today
- New search...