main

main@lists.alug.org.uk

10372 discussions

Re: [Alug] mail config
by Ricardo Campos 20 Dec '01

20 Dec '01

>Is there a more > simple method of configuring a windows machine to collect and send mail on > a home network? for pop3 and smtp servers, add the ip addresses rather than the host names OR set up a DNS server and add that server to your Windows IP configuration OR add the IP to the Host files on the windoze machines i.e. 10.0.1.1 ducati.jenbass (or whatever) (and I get the impression, you'd probably enjoy the setting up a DNS server more! ;) Ricardo "There are several codes, and I know several of them." -Mr. Precise. http://www.rscampos.net -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

1 0

mail config
by Jenny_Hopkins＠toby-churchill.com 20 Dec '01

20 Dec '01

Hello list. I've got fetchmail and exim working now on my linuxbox, but am having problems getting the two windows machines on my home network set up correctly. I want to tell the windows machine Ducati that Rebecca uses to get its mail from my box Bascule. Bascule knows that Rebecca is 'Rebecca(a)Ducati.jenbass'. Outlook Express on Ducati, however, is asking for mail servers information when I try and set it up, and will only accept a POP3-style input, rather than 'Bascule.jenbass'. Is there a more simple method of configuring a windows machine to collect and send mail on a home network? Thanks, Jenny.

1 0

Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by Edenyard 19 Dec '01

19 Dec '01

On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:55:40 +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > Edenyard: >> Sounds a bit like the state of play with this wretched DOS browser. >> Sort-of almost works, but.... > It's not really the fault of the browser, but the fault of the web developer > if there are anything other than cosmetic problems because you're not using > a CSS-ready browser. Absence of flash, javascript, etc, should not make a > site inaccessible. (Absence of cookies is trickier, but arachne does > cookies, IIRC.) > I seem to remember, when Arachne V1.70r3 was announced, much trumpetting over the claim that it supported CSS. In the config, there's the option: "Enable style sheets (CSS/1.0)" and it's set to 'on' here. Not that I really understand enough about web pages to say whether it's ever been an advantage to me. But I just thought I'd mention it!! Gerald.

1 0

Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by MJ Ray 19 Dec '01

19 Dec '01

Edenyard: > Sounds a bit like the state of play with this wretched DOS browser. > Sort-of almost works, but.... It's not really the fault of the browser, but the fault of the web developer if there are anything other than cosmetic problems because you're not using a CSS-ready browser. Absence of flash, javascript, etc, should not make a site inaccessible. (Absence of cookies is trickier, but arachne does cookies, IIRC.) -- MJR

1 0

Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by Ricardo Campos 18 Dec '01

18 Dec '01

> If a Netscape 6 should come floating by, I'll have a >go at that, but isn't it true to say that the higher a >version number is, the slower it runs on old hardware? I was lazy too, and was comparing Netscape 4.77 to "Mozilla 5". Mozilla won, of course. But this thread prompted me to upgrade to Netscape 6. What a *very* sensible thing to do!!!! I'm lucky in that hardware isn't a problem for me, but I must say that Netscape 6 is (so far) utterly robust, a doddle to expand (i.e. plugins), and the caching is the best I've seen. Netscape 6 gets my thumbs up. Bigtime. :) (And the Linux version seems much quicker than the windows version! Ha!) Ricardo -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

2 1

Highspeed access for everyone...
by Simon 18 Dec '01

18 Dec '01

Well most of you guys will probably already have heard about this, but since I haven't seen any posts I thought I'd be first to get flamed/thanked... http://www.btopenworld.com/satellite/index.html BT are going to be rolling out a satellite solution 500k down 150k upstream, and (obviously) it's not area dependant.. Bit pricy though £140 +vat per month!! still it's a start, us who live in the outback can get a decent net connection before too long... Just been to the BT account manager for our company and he said that if a good case can be put forward it's easily possible to get it before the official roll-out date in April 2002.. Simon "It's hard to be fit as a fiddle when you're shaped like a cello"

1 0

Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by Edenyard 18 Dec '01

18 Dec '01

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 11:39:26 +0000, MJ Ray wrote: > You might like to take a look at "dillo", which is a very fast browser that > will display pages, although it's still a long way from supporting enough to > render them all correctly. It also misses JavaScript, cookies, etc, so > you'll need another browser on-hand for some sites. > Sounds a bit like the state of play with this wretched DOS browser. Sort-of almost works, but.... > > Another option is to add an offline browsing cache, such as wwwoffle, to > your current setup. That has its own quirks, but it's quite useful. > Ah - that does sound interesting. I'll look into it. Thanks for the tips. Gerald. -- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/

1 0

Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by Ricardo Campos 18 Dec '01

18 Dec '01

> Dennis: > > Netscape 6 is very bloated and slow... [...] > > The latest 6.x is a lot better. I agree, the version of Netscape (6.2 I think) I downloaded on Sunday loads up faster, and parses web pages faster than Netscape 4.77. Ricardo -- Get your free email from www.linuxmail.org Powered by Outblaze

1 0

Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by MJ Ray 18 Dec '01

18 Dec '01

Dennis: > Netscape 6 is very bloated and slow... [...] The latest 6.x is a lot better. > well thats what ive been told. [...] Untethered bungees are a good idea. ;-) > Try galeon (spelling?) its abit faster... or you could go for lynx if you > realy want some speed ;) Galeon is only faster if you run Gnome already. Otherwise skipstone, I think, or dillo if you really want speed, or w3m for text mode. -- MJR

1 0

Re: Re: [Alug] Netscape 4.77 cache question
by Dryden 18 Dec '01

18 Dec '01

> Fair enough! You know that a lot of what I do is based either on > laziness or ignorance and that's how I come to be using 4.77 - it came > with slackware 8! I did install the Mozilla that came with same, but that > seemed to take forever to load up and about the same time to actually do > anything. If a Netscape 6 should come floating by, I'll have a go at > that, but isn't it true to say that the higher a version number is, the > slower it runs on old hardware? Don't forget I'm on an ex- skip P166MMX. > before you groan and give up on me totally, let me tell you that this is > quite an upgrade from my trusty 486DX4100 which I use for my work. Netscape 6 is very bloated and slow... well thats what ive been told. Im also guessing that its got alot of problems as no distro i know of has it... but then im not 100% about that :) oh and im in hte same boat i upgraded from a 486DX4 100MHz to a P 133, and i agree mozila is very slow. Try galeon (spelling?) its abit faster... or you could go for lynx if you realy want some speed ;) Dennis Dryden ********************************************************************** IMPORTANT: This email and its attachments are intended for the addressee only and may be confidential. If they have come to you in error you must take no action based on them nor must you copy or show them to anyone; please telephone us immediately. The contents of this email and attachments represent the views of the sender and are not necessarily the representative of the views of The College of West Anglia **********************************************************************

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

main