Also, there is no "good way" to deliver ads in an e-mail interface, period!
Sure there is. I utilize 'empty' space within the interface itself for Google ads. They're non-intrusive. I just wish they were relevant to the email that was being read.:(
Would you have a problem with a ninety gig file (or ninety gigs worth of split files if you have a per-email size limit) coming in to my email account if I was a member? You shouldn't, because after all, you did offer unlimited space.
Ok you got me.. There would be a problem as I don't have that much disk space, but that's easily alleviated. Unfortunately you would have to wait until I installed a new drive for you.
I would much rather see a solid number (one gig at gmail per your example)
I would be very surprised if gmail allowed you to receive a single 1GB file. The time it would take to spam/virus scan that file (I assume they do that) would be too resource intensive.
..and know exactly what my limits are than merely guess with an "unlimited" claim. Unless you have some sort of magical unlimited-space hard drive / set of drives, there is a limit, no matter how high it may be.
I see your point. I guess my mistake is that I assume reasonable use:P
Claiming to offer "unlimited space" (or unlimited bandwidth, or any of the other impossible offers) has always turned me off to trying out a new service.
Why is that? I just don't understand that. The domain accounts are pay accounts. For the 'unlimited users', I've never thought anyone should be restricted to a set amount of users. Personally, I hate that. The disk space is just a bonus, and this is merely email. Most people POP their email anyways. After I don't know how many years, I still only have 100MB of email.
Do you have a Gmail account? It seems to me 1GB on a free account would be more of a turn off than no restriction on a paid account.. Oh well.
Wow. The whole Gmail thing must have really buggered up (y)our buisness.
No, not really. I just anticipated more people willing to pay than there really are. My domain customers have unlimited disk space, and unlimited #'s of users, but most people seem to look over that for whatever reason. -shrug- I'm surprised more people don't want their own domain names.. I think people are just used to changing their email address.
After discovering that not many people wanted to pay, I wanted to deliver ads based on email content before Google came out with Gmail, but I still haven't thought of a good way to do it yet:(
Though you may be right, I probably would be pissed if this were my only source of income:)
True, but do you see AOL certifications? Red Hat does more than sell a collection of free applications, and it took them a while to get this far. I would also suggest that they did better than they should have during the IPO, giving them the freedom to explore other avenues of revenue.
Also note, that Red Hat has changed what their 'free' distribution is. While that's easy to do when you provide a product, turning a 'free' service into a 'paid' service for existing users isn't received anywhere near as warmly.
AOL is a business, businesses don't do "free" without some catch. Their free mail offering is nothing more than a hook to get the AOL brandname back into peoples' minds
Ahhh but as a 'free' webmail provider myself, I can tell you the conversion rate from free to "paid something" is quite small. They're going to have to pull in a LOT of free users, or provide something out of the ordinary to get people to pay up.
I wouldn't suggest trying to leverage 'free' into 'paid' as a business model.
On a sidenote, I seriously doubt that he is the very first one to have thought of swarming. Swarming has been around since before 1999 (when he claims he invented it). He *may* be the first one to have applied it to p2p/networking however.
I rememeber the CIO of the bank I worked for wanting to spread data around on everyone's HD instead of getting a new RAID for the server. People were getting 4GB HD's, and only using 500MB or so, this was probably back in '97.
It wasn't a bad idea, there just wasn't a good way to implement it (on Win95 desktops even - shudder).
What you need to do is to reject the email BEFORE you accept it in the queue. That is, after DATA is complete, scan the email and if it fails the test, then reject it at the MTA level. If you accept the email in MTA (ie. after DATA is complete), then DO NOT bounce it because the headers do not have the real FROM: anyway (in case of spam)
I run a free email service, and I've just started doing this to my own users with simscan.
Now those Nigerian bastards can't create a free account and spam others from me, hoorah!
This can also be done with roaming profiles on windows. Just a heads up. Windows loses on cost though..
IMHO. Both are messy substitutes for Directory integration. Your applications should be installed on the server, and save data to the server. Any information they require that's user based needs to come from the directory schema.
Home directories mount from the file server.
No more workstation specific info, and no more passing 'crap' around to all the workstations.
See Netware and Pegasus Mail for an easy to follow implementation of this method.
Because companies want to use their existing infrastructure? Are you seriously suggesting you can sell linux on the workstation by telling companies to throw away their windows "investment" server side at the same time?
AD supposedly supports LDAP. So you LDAP to AD.
I did it with NDS years ago. I assume AD would do it. Then again, MS just introduced salvage to Win2003.-shrug-
they stole code BOTH from Microsoft (modyfing microsoft binaries and such) AND from ReactOS? Gosh, talk about being chum in the shark pool at feeding time! It must really suck to be ashkor.
Helloooo! They _are_ Microsoft attempting to inject FUD into GPL and Open Source projects, duh!
Please leave your conspiracy badge at the door when you leave.
The technique uses two methods to trace a document: first, by analyzing a document to identify characteristics that are unique for each printer, and second by designing printers to purposely embed individualized characteristics in documents.
Sorry to rain on your parade, Homeland Security, but if counterfeiters can counterfeit hard currency worth a damn, they can certainly hack a printer to make it quickly change configurations at the drop of a hat. Get your marker and bic pens ready, all ye counterfeiters!
So what? Anyone can file the inside of my handgun so it doesn't match the bullet that was pulled out of the victim.
You put locks on your house, yet they're quite easy to pick.
This is just another tool in a very large arsenal.
I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to get at there. Firefox profiles are stored in C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data\Firefox\... The problem is that changes in most of the Documents and Settings\username folder is copied to the domain server and back upon logging in and logging off. If a user jumps around machines a lot, this can cause copying entire profiles over the network. The Documents and Settings\username\Local Settings directory is exempt, and is intended for things such as Internet cache, which don't need to remain consistent across multiple machines. This is where Firefox's Internet cache should reside (but keep user configuration in its current location).
Right.. I thought that the cache directory location might be stored in the profile file. The profile file can be migrated with the Windows 'profile' stuff, because at each workstation you'd need to set the cache dir for that user.
This is where Win98 shines:P No profiles, just use programs that don't require registry migrations;) (More call center fun!)
To install Mozilla by downloading the.zip file and installing manually, follow these steps:
Click the mozilla-win32-talkback.zip link or the mozilla-win32.zip link to download the.zip file to your machine.
Navigate to where you downloaded the file and double click the compressed file. Note: This step assumes you already have a recent version of WinZip installed, and that you know how to use it. If not, you can get WinZip and information about the program at www.winzip.com.
Extract the.zip file to a directory such as C:\Program Files\Mozilla 1.7.
To start Mozilla, navigate to the directory you extracted Mozilla to and double click the Mozilla.exe icon.
I completely agree (but from a Firefox standpoint; I haven't used Mozilla in ages). There needs to be serious consideration of usage in corporate settings on Windows desktops. Features such as an MSI package to ease in deployment across Active Directory networks is needed.
Ahh kinda like ZenWorks, or the NAL. But IMHO, that's still too much work. There's no good reason you can't just copy files from your server to the local machine to do an upgrade, with a flag file as the indicator.
There are other minor problems (such as placement of Firefox cache in Application Data instead of Local Settings\Application Data, causing the entire cache to be synchronized with the domain server on logon and logoff), so if they aren't already, Firefox developers should be sure to test on machines with multiple user profiles with reduced privileges. These things, although inconsequential to regular users at home, are quite important for acceptance in corporate Windows networks.
Did you look in the profile for your directory?
http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.7/install ation.html#files
God I hate Windows networks. I used to think maybe it was just me, having only used Netware,OS/2, Unix. But nope, now I have first hand experience that Windows is a PITA.;)
Slashdot Mirror
Sure there is. I utilize 'empty' space within the interface itself for Google ads. They're non-intrusive. :(
I just wish they were relevant to the email that was being read.
Ok you got me.. There would be a problem as I don't have that much disk space, but that's easily alleviated. Unfortunately you would have to wait until I installed a new drive for you.
I would much rather see a solid number (one gig at gmail per your example)
I would be very surprised if gmail allowed you to receive a single 1GB file. The time it would take to spam/virus scan that file (I assume they do that) would be too resource intensive.
I see your point. I guess my mistake is that I assume reasonable use :P
Why is that? I just don't understand that. The domain accounts are pay accounts. For the 'unlimited users', I've never thought anyone should be restricted to a set amount of users. Personally, I hate that. The disk space is just a bonus, and this is merely email. Most people POP their email anyways. After I don't know how many years, I still only have 100MB of email.
Do you have a Gmail account? It seems to me 1GB on a free account would be more of a turn off than no restriction on a paid account.. Oh well.
No, not really. I just anticipated more people willing to pay than there really are. My domain customers have unlimited disk space, and unlimited #'s of users, but most people seem to look over that for whatever reason. -shrug- I'm surprised more people don't want their own domain names.. I think people are just used to changing their email address.
After discovering that not many people wanted to pay, I wanted to deliver ads based on email content before Google came out with Gmail, but I still haven't thought of a good way to do it yet :(
Though you may be right, I probably would be pissed if this were my only source of income :)
True, but do you see AOL certifications? Red Hat does more than sell a collection of free applications, and it took them a while to get this far. I would also suggest that they did better than they should have during the IPO, giving them the freedom to explore other avenues of revenue.
Also note, that Red Hat has changed what their 'free' distribution is. While that's easy to do when you provide a product, turning a 'free' service into a 'paid' service for existing users isn't received anywhere near as warmly.
Ahhh but as a 'free' webmail provider myself, I can tell you the conversion rate from free to "paid something" is quite small. They're going to have to pull in a LOT of free users, or provide something out of the ordinary to get people to pay up.
I wouldn't suggest trying to leverage 'free' into 'paid' as a business model.
I run an email service, and it cracks me up everytime I get an email like this:
"Hi, Please cancel my account - john. It gets way too much spam!"
Umm yeah, SpamAssassin is good, but not that good.
Uh oh. Because some of us aren't actually programmers and just use what's in front of us to make things work :)
I KNOW I've used strcat, but I don't know how many other people are using my, admittedly bad yet functional, code.
I rememeber the CIO of the bank I worked for wanting to spread data around on everyone's HD instead of getting a new RAID for the server. People were getting 4GB HD's, and only using 500MB or so, this was probably back in '97.
It wasn't a bad idea, there just wasn't a good way to implement it (on Win95 desktops even - shudder).
I run a free email service, and I've just started doing this to my own users with simscan.
Now those Nigerian bastards can't create a free account and spam others from me, hoorah!
Ahhh the perlis of being modded up. All of a sudden you're referring to your sample size among penis threads.
IMHO. Both are messy substitutes for Directory integration. Your applications should be installed on the server, and save data to the server. Any information they require that's user based needs to come from the directory schema.
Home directories mount from the file server.
No more workstation specific info, and no more passing 'crap' around to all the workstations.
See Netware and Pegasus Mail for an easy to follow implementation of this method.
AD supposedly supports LDAP. So you LDAP to AD.
I did it with NDS years ago. I assume AD would do it. Then again, MS just introduced salvage to Win2003.-shrug-
Helloooo! They _are_ Microsoft attempting to inject FUD into GPL and Open Source projects, duh!
Please leave your conspiracy badge at the door when you leave.
Ok..Thanks. Just trying to keep up to date :)
OT Q: Are you using ReactOS as your primary OS yet?
No wonder I can't get the latest Thunderbird.
Mozilla.org doesn't respond, so I check slashdot. Sure enough..
You KNOW they're going to get a file, why not just link to a torrent?
So what? Anyone can file the inside of my handgun so it doesn't match the bullet that was pulled out of the victim.
You put locks on your house, yet they're quite easy to pick.
This is just another tool in a very large arsenal.
What's your Ebay id? I'd like to be sure I don't get any 'sloppy seconds'.
Why did I read that in the voice of Pinky, with a gaggling laugh at the end?
Oh sorry, I was trying to set the outgoing message, but the kids had just come home from school.
Thanks, I'll fix that.
What have we become?!
Right.. I thought that the cache directory location might be stored in the profile file. The profile file can be migrated with the Windows 'profile' stuff, because at each workstation you'd need to set the cache dir for that user.
This is where Win98 shines :P No profiles, just use programs that don't require registry migrations ;) (More call center fun!)
Manual Installation With the .zip File
To install Mozilla by downloading the .zip file and installing manually, follow these steps: .zip file to your machine. .zip file to a directory such as C:\Program Files\Mozilla 1.7 .
Click the mozilla-win32-talkback.zip link or the mozilla-win32.zip link to download the
Navigate to where you downloaded the file and double click the compressed file. Note: This step assumes you already have a recent version of WinZip installed, and that you know how to use it. If not, you can get WinZip and information about the program at www.winzip.com.
Extract the
To start Mozilla, navigate to the directory you extracted Mozilla to and double click the Mozilla.exe icon.
Ahh kinda like ZenWorks, or the NAL. But IMHO, that's still too much work. There's no good reason you can't just copy files from your server to the local machine to do an upgrade, with a flag file as the indicator.
There are other minor problems (such as placement of Firefox cache in Application Data instead of Local Settings\Application Data, causing the entire cache to be synchronized with the domain server on logon and logoff), so if they aren't already, Firefox developers should be sure to test on machines with multiple user profiles with reduced privileges. These things, although inconsequential to regular users at home, are quite important for acceptance in corporate Windows networks.
Did you look in the profile for your directory?l ation.html#files
http://www.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla1.7/instal
God I hate Windows networks. I used to think maybe it was just me, having only used Netware,OS/2, Unix. But nope, now I have first hand experience that Windows is a PITA. ;)