Error - template LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the LAYOUT-DATA-WRAPPER template could not be found.

Error - template STYLE-SHEET not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the STYLE-SHEET template could not be found.

Error - template SUB-TOP-BANNER not found

A configuration error was detected in the CGI script; the SUB-TOP-BANNER template could not be found.
Subject:
From:
Sheldon Schuster <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
PCSOFT - PC software discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 30 Mar 1998 04:49:05 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (45 lines)
Other than a nice PIM (Personal Information Manager) in Contacts, if you are
just using the Internet Mail Only option, I say no. I find OE faster and
less clunky in reading mail full screen, especially html mail. And Word
Mail, if you have Office 97, doesn't do it for me either, except to increase
the resource load and slow it down.

Cordially,

Sheldon Schuster

mailto:[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sunday, March 29, 1998 10:58 PM
Subject: [PCSOFT] Windows Outlook 98 - worth the upgrade?


>-----Original Message-----
>From: Drew Dunn <[log in to unmask]>
>To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Wednesday, March 25, 1998 7:02 PM
>Subject: Re: [PCSOFT] What about Windows Outlook 98?
>
>
>>I'm using it (you're looking at the result).  I shifted from my tried and
>>true UNIX email program to Outlook 98 and I wouldn't change back.  It
>>strikes me as a combination of Outlook Express and Outlook 97, with the
>good
>>parts of each.  It's not a slow resource hog like Outlook 97, and it's got
>>way more features than Outlook Express.
>>
>>It also works quite nicely on a fairly slow P150 that I use for Internet
>>stuff, so I'm happy.
>
>So far I've been quite happy with Outlook Express.  I use the program
>strictly for email.  I use the filters and the HTML capability.  So my
>question is: is there an overriding reason why I should upgrade to Outlook
>98? Can someone here give me a specific reason why I would be much better
>off with this upgrade?  Otherwise, I don't think I'll bother with the three
>hour download.
>
>- Jack Petrilli
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV