Very Computer

I have 3 HOTMAIL "free" accounts...why am i losing express???

we are not allowed to open a "BROSWER" at work...
but we can check email via outlook express...

now i just learned that microsoft is shutting this feature off
after january!

what is the deal?

how will people get their mail?!!?

please help me!!!!

Quote:>I have 3 HOTMAIL "free" accounts...why am i losing express???

Spam, spam spam, spam.
Spam, spam spam spam. (sung to the tune of the same name from Monty Python).

one more for the third account.,

Spam, spam, spam, spam.

Quote:> we are not allowed to open a "BROSWER" at work...
> but we can check email via outlook express...

Well, thats no fun. No crossword puzzles at lunch, etc.

Quote:> now i just learned that microsoft is shutting this feature off
> after january!

You just hearing about it? Sept 27, 2004 was when it was announced.

Say "Thank you spammers for screwing this up for all of us". Then contact
your congressman and tell them to get a "REAL" spam law with some teeth in
it (like death sentences or something is my line of thinking, I've offered
7.62mm) and tell them also to quit taking money from the Direct Marketing
Association, no wait, that won't happen, it's money.

Quote:> what is the deal?

Spammers have exploited Hotmail by scripting  it to make accounts (lots of
them can be done this way) and use OE to send the mail then delete the
account. They can't script the web interface but since it uses WEBDav  to
connect OE to Hotmail, it's to send out the spam.

Charging for OE and Outlook usage isn't a new kind of thing (think back to
Yahoo US removing free POP3's a long time ago as well as others and that
also shut down Netscape and Eudora access as well as other programs). It's
not a money maker since OE doesn't show the ads as the web interface does
and wouldn't make make on the web anyway, it's a money loser and a good
write off (remember it's free for some reason).

Quote:> how will people get their mail?!!?

1)  Via the web for Hotmail
2) Pay $19.95 a year and get a 2 gig mailbox. Think of all the forwarded
stuff that can be sent then.
3) find another free service that offers POP3 accounts (no one else uses
WEBDav but Hotmail and MSN and maybe some small local stuff).

Quote:> please help me!!!!

Take an oar, it's a big boat and a lot of people will be in it.

Quote:>I have 3 HOTMAIL "free" accounts...why am i losing express???

> we are not allowed to open a "BROSWER" at work...
> but we can check email via outlook express...

> now i just learned that microsoft is shutting this feature off
> after january!

> what is the deal?

> how will people get their mail?!!?

> please help me!!!!

You are at work.  At work, you are not allowed to use HTTP (web
browsing).  Again, you are AT WORK.  So why are you not using the e-mail
service AT WORK?  When you are at work, and since you are using THEIR
resources - *not* yours - you may very well be required to use what
resources are provided at work to DO YOUR WORK, not horse around with
your personal e-mails (do your personal stuff on your own time).  It all
depends on how regimented is your workplace, but since you are using
resources which are not your property then you obey the rules of the
owner of that property (i.e., your employer).  Are you afraid of talking
with the IT department or your employer about how to accomplish personal
tasks at work?

Wonder if they're at work? <G>

Quote:> Wonder if they're at work? <G>

Per the OP's own statement, "we are not allowed to open a "BROSWER" at
work...".

_Vanguard_ <see_signature> did some thinking and came up with these words:

Maybe you missed the <G>  (meaning Grin or possible sarcasm)  :-)

--
Ron Bogart {}  ????
Associate Expert
Expert Zone - www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone
"Life is what happens while we are making other plans."

That was a joke son.........

zooooooooooooooommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Spam spam spam???  Oh please.

The correct answer is REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE!

MS claims that by charging users, they get a credit card on file which
can be used to identify and prosecute spammers.  Fair enough. So why
not just charge $5 or something if the point is to get a credit card?
Or better yet, why not just require a credit card to be put onto the
file, but not charge it?

And what is MS's problem anyway.  Do they think that they're the only
one's that get spammed?  Gmail doesn't get spammed?  Gmail is giving
free POP access so you can use ANY email client (like Mozilla
Thunderbird which is much better and more secure anyway).

There are 2 reasons:

1) Revenue.  This is a revenue opportunity for MS.
2) Their own lack of willingness to find a better way to filter out
spam.

Interestingly enough, I emailed Hotmail and they have turned my access
back on, and told me that *if* they ever do shut it off again, they
promise to email users in advance to warn them (which they did not do.)
That leads me to believe that they are in fact considering reversing
their policy due to very back P.R. and user reaction.  Afterall, if
they alienate everyone, then no one goes to the Hotmail website, and
it's harder for them to sell advertising.

Anyway, I told them "thanks but no thanks" because after using Gmail
for 3 weeks now, I find it's simply a better product and I actually
prefer their web interface and don't care if I use an email client

You are such a moron it's pathetic.

Quote:> Spam spam spam???  Oh please.

> The correct answer is REVENUE REVENUE REVENUE!

Ummm.. Could you please be a bit more specific? What exactly do you take
exception to?  Why?  What was so wrong with the posting?  Could you put
perhaps a bit more thought into your response? Or does it take too much
effort for you to defend yourself when someone disagrees with you?

You take two things that people use so often and put them together,
Microsoft and Revenue. The oldest and most use and most boring thing someone
could type.

Why not something new? Because you can't come up with anything new, you have
to hold the old party anti-Microsoft line that bores people as it is now.

Free services don't generate money. They're a money loser for a reason. They
get the name out and a nice tax write off to boot. Outlook Express has shown
no ads to generate any revenue, spammers have taken the WEBDav and scripted
it to be able to set up new accounts on the fly and spam the hell outta
people so they put an end to it. If it were me, I'd be charging more, a
least enough to cover the costs.

GMail doesn't get spam you say, well just wait till they find ways to abuse
it. You think they won't? You truly are a moron.

Yahoo has already gone the way of charging for POP accounts a long time ago.
Free Internet Sevice died as well. Anything free carrys a cost to someone.
People * and complain because they can't have it for free all the time.
You're just aother moron in th elong line of whining and *ing and crying
and use the excuse that they're just making more money.

So, you gots your rocks off my screamin revenue and Microsoft at the top of
your lungs. What a moron.

Sorry, I'm not one of these idiots who thinks MS is evil.  Try someone else.

Quote:> Free services don't generate money. They're a money loser for a
> reason. They get the name out and a nice tax write off to boot.
> Outlook Express has shown no ads to generate any revenue, spammers
> have taken the WEBDav and scripted it to be able to set up new
> accounts on the fly and spam the hell outta people so they put an
> end to it. If it were me, I'd be charging more, a least enough to
> cover the costs.

MS doesn't need to make money from its users for Hotmail my friend.  They
general plenty of money from other sources, and they generate plenty of
dough from the ads on the website and their other web ventures as well.

Quote:

> GMail doesn't get spam you say, well just wait till they find ways
> to abuse it. You think they won't? You truly are a moron.

I didn't say Gmail doesn't get spam chicky-poo.  I clearly said that they
deal with it.  So do the others.  You're so hot to sound bright behind that
keyboard of yours that you're not reading what others are saying.  I think I
said that I had no problem paying a small fee, but to charge over the amount
that they want to charge just to a get a credit card seems too expensive.
They're the one that say it's spam. I beg to differ.

Quote:> So, you gots your rocks off my screamin revenue and Microsoft at
> the top of your lungs. What a moron.

I don't have a problem with them making bucks me-buck-oe.  My problem is
that they don't have the balls to come out and say that.  They use the spam
excuse instead.  And my other gripe was that they cut users off without
warning.  If they were bright, they would give you some warning, and maybe
even offer you an incentive to join -- a small discount or somthing for the
first year.  I don't mind paying.  What pissed me off is that they simply
cut users off with no advance email a week or so before to warn you.

And like I said, they sent an email out to me when I complained saying that
they had "made a back-office change" so I could keep my access and that if
they do decide to make a change, they will give me warning before.  Sound
like they made a mistake, because most companies would apologize but explain
why again and ask me once again to join.

So calm down sonny. I've got no fixation with Microsoft making money.  It's
the way they did this that pisses me off.

Go have a drink or something.

Still a moron drink or no drink.

Come out screaming revenue revenue revenue like the sky is falling or
something.

Well, if you're going to indulge in such an deep discussion, I'll
obviously have to pass this one up.  You're way too bright for me. Neat
approach though. Instead of discussing thing like an *, you simply
sit back and scream "moron" and "pathetic".  Enjoy.

No one screaming here, (no caps used) but at least I know how to just post a
reply just once.

No need for duscussion as it's a moronic point they want to make which is
based on absolutely nothing they know. If they had evidence to the contrary
they would post it but like those in the past, it's easier to say it's a
revenue thing than to bring out any facts. It's always easier to jump on the
bandwagon after the fact and not bring up any facts upon which to base their
accusations.

The reasons Microsoft gave, spammers scripting WEBDav and abusing it is
exactly what is gong on. Why they chose the route they took is not uncommon
since a free service is a non-revenue model. Ads have never been able to
sustain free services. If you look at the short history of the Internet, you
will see many examples of free services going under or being bought out or
for that matter, being sued by someone else. The web inerface is less prone
to being abused than the way it works now and will be ceasing the free
access to help stop the abuse. Yahoo like others dropped free access long
ago with minor exceptions outside of the US.

So it's easier for the morons to come out of the closet and scream they want
more revenue than base it upon the facts as they are and have been easy to
see,  and see that the one thing bringing down the Internet is not Microsoft
but the spammers abusing it. If Microsoft chooses to make money on
something, fine, others are trying to do the same.

You gmail may be safe for now but it like all the rest will be abused, you
can count on it. They may have some filters up now but given time, those
will have to be updated and eventually, who is going to foot the bill for
all this free service? If you don't see ads now, expct some in the future
and if not ads, expect a fee to be added to access the free service.

And as I've stated in the past, don't be suprised when one day the ISP upon
which you connect starts charging for additional services such as email in
the future. Anti-spam methods are the one thing that is costing more and
more ISPs to put money into it than to put it in other areas. Eventually, it
will cause them to stop it as part of their Internet package and access to
the Internet will be what you pay for each month and anything else, you will
pay extra for. Look at the way USENET is now. Why do the ISPs not maintain
propagation to their news servers for all messages and groups on USENET?
Why, because it would cost too much. Expect email to be the same way
eventually. Why do I know this? Because I know people having to deal with
that side of it and have told me so numerous times. It's costing them more
and more each year. I know of several ISPs that have had to fold because of
the abuse, not from within their services but from outside. People don't
want spam and want someone else to deal with it and that ends up being laid
upon the doorstep of the ISP. If the ISP has to generate more revenue, are
you going to scream then that it's just a ploy to generate money for them or
understand that it's costing them more to deal with the junk and accept the
fact they are using it for that purpose?

The spammers will eventually ruin it all. Spammers and the Direct Marketing
Association see it as free speech. Free speech is not forcing unwanted
material upon someone to have to dispose of.

So, base your argument upons facts and not on the old anti-Microsoft line
which has grown old and stale. You lost the argument when you and the others
in the same class always start screaming revenue...

Quote:> Well, if you're going to indulge in such an deep discussion, I'll
> obviously have to pass this one up.  You're way too bright for me. Neat
> approach though. Instead of discussing thing like an *, you simply
> sit back and scream "moron" and "pathetic".  Enjoy.