Please recommend a good newsreader?

[networm]

I read and post to newsgroups daily.

Sometimes I subscribe to a variety of different newsgroups and post in
different newsgroups.

Sometimes in sci.math, sometimes in programming related, sometimes in sports
related, sometimes move on to another nntp server, for example, Micorsoft
News server to ask techinical questions... , etc.

Is there a software can collect what I have post and what other people
replied and present them in front me in an efficient and uniform way, and
with new replies arrival pop-up/notification feature?

Currently I am using Outlook Express. It is not convinient at all.

I post on different groups. Then I have to go back and click on each groups
to see if there are replies to my postings... And a lot of times they don't
get reply. And maybe after 15 days they got reply. I tend to forgot myself.
And some newsgroups are so hot that my postings got washed away in half a
day... then I have to scroll down many message headers to find my own
postings... and a lot of times such searching takes much time. Then I reply
to other people's replies and they reply too and then such tedious procedure
repeats.

If some discussion is meaningful. We'd like to save. But Outlook Express
does not save conversations in a nice-looking way. Maybe I want to save as
PDF. But the layout should be neat and easy to read.

Outlook Express also does not have auto-filling feature. So specify a list
of newsgroups to post is also painful.

Google groups web-based newsreader is a lot better. But still has
shortcomings. The worst shortcoming is it does not allow subscription to MS
newsservers.

Please recommend a good newsreader, does Outlook 2003 has these features?
thank you so much!

 

[Mary Sauer]

http://www.forteinc.com/main/homepage.php

 

[Uncle Joe]

By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost, it
doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply to it,
now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to a
small handful of relevant groups.

 

[Uncle Joe]

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's
time to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring
people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research
your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice
from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

 

[Gregg Hill]

Uncle Joe,

I agree. The least one could do is make note in the message that the message
has been cross-posted. Also, as Lanwench pointed out, do not do it to a lot
of groups. I would say never more than three. This person's post had no
reason to use more than one group.

Gregg Hill

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's time to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost,
it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply
to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to
a small handful of relevant groups.

 

[Echo S]

Is there a software can collect what I have post and what other people
replied and present them in front me in an efficient and uniform way, and
with new replies arrival pop-up/notification feature?

Since you do look in other newsgroups on other news servers, you should
subscribe to alt.comp.software.newsreaders or a similar group and ask your
question there.

 

[networm]

Frankly I don't agree with you!

I have only limited time so I want to cut directly to your point:

Crossing-post and seeking multiple answers at the same time is not a waste
of other people's time and it is not selfish.

You are limited by your viewscope.

You should look at this problem from higher level.

Why newsgroup? You want a place to get particular questions answered and
also for later references for other users. So the more propaganda of the
posts, the better in terms of the efficiency of later references from other
users' point-of-view. The helpers can also be benefited from seeing other
people has already answered partially before him/her. I like to search all
the forums before I post a question. So the more propaganda, the better.

Please remember these and don't limited by your own limited viewscope.

And put your time into more constructive meaningful work!

(Stop here. I don't have time to argue with you...)

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's time to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost,
it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply
to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to
a small handful of relevant groups.

 

[networm]

you should really broaden your viewscope and think more broadly...

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's time to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost,
it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply
to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to
a small handful of relevant groups.

 

[networm]

I don't agree!

Uncle Joe,

I agree. The least one could do is make note in the message that the
message has been cross-posted. Also, as Lanwench pointed out, do not do it
to a lot of groups. I would say never more than three. This person's post
had no reason to use more than one group.

Gregg Hill

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's time
to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In Uncle Joe <Uncle (e-mail address removed)> typed:
By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost,
it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply
to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to
a small handful of relevant groups.


I read and post to newsgroups daily.

Sometimes I subscribe to a variety of different newsgroups and post
in different newsgroups.

Sometimes in sci.math, sometimes in programming related, sometimes
in sports related, sometimes move on to another nntp server, for
example, Micorsoft News server to ask techinical questions... , etc.

Is there a software can collect what I have post and what other
people replied and present them in front me in an efficient and
uniform way, and with new replies arrival pop-up/notification
feature?

Currently I am using Outlook Express. It is not convinient at all.

I post on different groups. Then I have to go back and click on each
groups to see if there are replies to my postings... And a lot of
times they don't get reply. And maybe after 15 days they got reply.
I tend to forgot myself. And some newsgroups are so hot that my
postings got washed away in half a day... then I have to scroll down
many message headers to find my own postings... and a lot of times
such searching takes much time. Then I reply to other people's
replies and they reply too and then such tedious procedure repeats.

If some discussion is meaningful. We'd like to save. But Outlook
Express does not save conversations in a nice-looking way. Maybe I
want to save as PDF. But the layout should be neat and easy to read.

Outlook Express also does not have auto-filling feature. So specify
a list of newsgroups to post is also painful.

Google groups web-based newsreader is a lot better. But still has
shortcomings. The worst shortcoming is it does not allow
subscription to MS newsservers.

Please recommend a good newsreader, does Outlook 2003 has these
features? thank you so much!

 

[Gordon]

Frankly I don't agree with you!

I have only limited time so I want to cut directly to your point:

Crossing-post and seeking multiple answers at the same time is not a
waste of other people's time and it is not selfish.

That's fine, but NOT to more than THREE CLOSELY RELATED groups, which yours
most definitely are NOT.
What have groups concerned with developing vba got to do with choosing a
newsreader? Nothing at all.

 

[Uncle Joe]

Of course you don't agree. Who among us would
have expected you to suddenly become contrite,
thoughtful, and sensitive to others who unfortunately
waste their valuable time researching and posting
replies to your inane questions?

I don't agree!

Uncle Joe,

I agree. The least one could do is make note in the message that
the message has been cross-posted. Also, as Lanwench pointed out,
do not do it to a lot of groups. I would say never more than three.
This person's post had no reason to use more than one group.

Gregg Hill

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's
time to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring
people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause,
research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite
forums...not realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar
advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as
not caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"
in message

In Uncle Joe <Uncle (e-mail address removed)> typed:
By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who
read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted
this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the
crosspost, it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see
something and not reply to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it
should be to a small handful of relevant groups.


I read and post to newsgroups daily.

Sometimes I subscribe to a variety of different newsgroups and
post
in different newsgroups.

Sometimes in sci.math, sometimes in programming related,
sometimes
in sports related, sometimes move on to another nntp server,
for
example, Micorsoft News server to ask techinical questions... ,
etc.

Is there a software can collect what I have post and what other
people replied and present them in front me in an efficient and
uniform way, and with new replies arrival pop-up/notification
feature?

Currently I am using Outlook Express. It is not convinient at
all.

I post on different groups. Then I have to go back and click on
each
groups to see if there are replies to my postings... And a lot
of
times they don't get reply. And maybe after 15 days they got
reply.
I tend to forgot myself. And some newsgroups are so hot that my
postings got washed away in half a day... then I have to scroll
down
many message headers to find my own postings... and a lot of
times
such searching takes much time. Then I reply to other people's
replies and they reply too and then such tedious procedure
repeats.

If some discussion is meaningful. We'd like to save. But
Outlook
Express does not save conversations in a nice-looking way.
Maybe I
want to save as PDF. But the layout should be neat and easy to
read.

Outlook Express also does not have auto-filling feature. So
specify
a list of newsgroups to post is also painful.

Google groups web-based newsreader is a lot better. But still
has
shortcomings. The worst shortcoming is it does not allow
subscription to MS newsservers.

Please recommend a good newsreader, does Outlook 2003 has these
features? thank you so much!

 

[Gordon]

Frankly I don't agree with you!

I have only limited time so I want to cut directly to your point:

Crossing-post and seeking multiple answers at the same time is not a
waste of other people's time and it is not selfish.

And you've also posted this same question in windows xp basics AND all THESE
groups as well,
windowsxp.help_and_support, windowsxp.device.driver.dev (what the HELL has
THAT got to do with a newsreader?), windowsxp.general, and
windowsxp.setup_deployment (again, what the HELL has THAT got to do with a
newsreader?)

You are rapidly going to get plonked or thrown into the Bozo bin if you
don't amend your posting manner.

 

[Alan Smith]

Dear Net Police:

Sorry, it may not be something you like but it is not illegal. If you don't
like it then you have choices: ignore the message, block the poster.

Or post in a relevant newsgroup- your subject matter is not relevant to the
newsgroup. That is at least as bad.

Uncle Joe,

I agree. The least one could do is make note in the message that the
message has been cross-posted. Also, as Lanwench pointed out, do not do it
to a lot of groups. I would say never more than three. This person's post
had no reason to use more than one group.

Gregg Hill

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's time
to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In Uncle Joe <Uncle (e-mail address removed)> typed:
By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost,
it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply
to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to
a small handful of relevant groups.


I read and post to newsgroups daily.

Sometimes I subscribe to a variety of different newsgroups and post
in different newsgroups.

Sometimes in sci.math, sometimes in programming related, sometimes
in sports related, sometimes move on to another nntp server, for
example, Micorsoft News server to ask techinical questions... , etc.

Is there a software can collect what I have post and what other
people replied and present them in front me in an efficient and
uniform way, and with new replies arrival pop-up/notification
feature?

Currently I am using Outlook Express. It is not convinient at all.

I post on different groups. Then I have to go back and click on each
groups to see if there are replies to my postings... And a lot of
times they don't get reply. And maybe after 15 days they got reply.
I tend to forgot myself. And some newsgroups are so hot that my
postings got washed away in half a day... then I have to scroll down
many message headers to find my own postings... and a lot of times
such searching takes much time. Then I reply to other people's
replies and they reply too and then such tedious procedure repeats.

If some discussion is meaningful. We'd like to save. But Outlook
Express does not save conversations in a nice-looking way. Maybe I
want to save as PDF. But the layout should be neat and easy to read.

Outlook Express also does not have auto-filling feature. So specify
a list of newsgroups to post is also painful.

Google groups web-based newsreader is a lot better. But still has
shortcomings. The worst shortcoming is it does not allow
subscription to MS newsservers.

Please recommend a good newsreader, does Outlook 2003 has these
features? thank you so much!

 

[Brian Tillman]

Please recommend a good newsreader, does Outlook 2003 has these
features? thank you so much!

Outlook uses Outlook Express as its newsreader. See if you like this one:
http://xnews.newsguy.com/

 

[Brian Tillman]

By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

No! Crossposting is a Good Thing, because a real newsreader knows that a
message has been crossposted and will show the message to the reader only
once. It's multiposting that's bad.

 

[Gordon]

No! Crossposting is a Good Thing, because a real newsreader knows
that a message has been crossposted and will show the message to the
reader only once. It's multiposting that's bad.

But not twice, to SIX different groups each time, at least THREE of which
were completely irrelevant!

 

[Brian Tillman]

But not twice, to SIX different groups each time, at least THREE of
which were completely irrelevant!

Granted.

 

[Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]]

In

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's
time to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring
people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research
your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice
from
within another forum.

Precisely so - that's why crossposting is better than multiposting. You've
got these backwards. Crossposting means, everyone sees everyone else's
replies, and nobody has to waste their time. Multiposting means, an
individual message is posted to each group, and nobody knows that some other
kind soul poured a lot of effort into answering the identical question in
another group.

http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

Again, I agree when it comes to multiposting. Not crossposting, because one
of the benefits of same is that there's only one message/thread - in
multiple groups - so everyone knows what else has been done.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the
crosspost, it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something
and not reply to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should
be to a small handful of relevant groups.

 

[Gregg Hill]

OK, using your "logic", you should post your messages in thousands of
newsgroup, thereby guaranteeing that you get a rapid response that will be
viewable later by the maximum number of people.

Pure F***ING rubbish, you moronic turd.

Post in a max of three related groups. What you propose is the equivalent of
SPAM.

Gregg

you should really broaden your viewscope and think more broadly...

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that it wastes nobody's time
to
cross-post a message requesting aid. There are many good, caring people
who populate forums such as microsoft.public.outlook,
microsoft.public.word,
and microsoft.public.public.frontpage.client who do pause, research your
problem, and respond to you from within in their favorite forums...not
realizing
someone else was doing the same research and writing similar advice from
within another forum.

Cross-posting is nasty and selfish. It reveals a cross-poster as not
caring
about the burdens he/she places on others.

"Lanwench [MVP - Exchange]"

In Uncle Joe <Uncle (e-mail address removed)> typed:
By cross-posting, you waste the time of many good people who read,
research, and try to answer your question(s). You cross-posted this
message on approximately eight newsgroups. That's ridiculous.

Although there are perhaps irrelevent groups included in the crosspost,
it doesn't exactly "waste anyone's time" to see something and not reply
to it, now, does it?
Crossposting is better than multiposting. Although, yes, it should be to
a small handful of relevant groups.


I read and post to newsgroups daily.

Sometimes I subscribe to a variety of different newsgroups and post
in different newsgroups.

Sometimes in sci.math, sometimes in programming related, sometimes
in sports related, sometimes move on to another nntp server, for
example, Micorsoft News server to ask techinical questions... , etc.

Is there a software can collect what I have post and what other
people replied and present them in front me in an efficient and
uniform way, and with new replies arrival pop-up/notification
feature?

Currently I am using Outlook Express. It is not convinient at all.

I post on different groups. Then I have to go back and click on each
groups to see if there are replies to my postings... And a lot of
times they don't get reply. And maybe after 15 days they got reply.
I tend to forgot myself. And some newsgroups are so hot that my
postings got washed away in half a day... then I have to scroll down
many message headers to find my own postings... and a lot of times
such searching takes much time. Then I reply to other people's
replies and they reply too and then such tedious procedure repeats.

If some discussion is meaningful. We'd like to save. But Outlook
Express does not save conversations in a nice-looking way. Maybe I
want to save as PDF. But the layout should be neat and easy to read.

Outlook Express also does not have auto-filling feature. So specify
a list of newsgroups to post is also painful.

Google groups web-based newsreader is a lot better. But still has
shortcomings. The worst shortcoming is it does not allow
subscription to MS newsservers.

Please recommend a good newsreader, does Outlook 2003 has these
features? thank you so much!