Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Sat, 18 Nov 2006 10:59:38 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I don't see anything in the knowledge base for that anywhere.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Canazzi" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2006 10:16 AM
Subject: Possible Solution To Outlook Express Crashing JAWS
> Hi List,
>
> Since we're on this issue quite a bit, here's one thing I got from =
> someone on the beta list.
>
> In JAWS 7.1, a new feature which is supposed to help with off-the-shelf =
> HTML interfaces--such as help screens for third party applications and =
> alternative browsers was instituted. It is called generically, FSDom =
> support. In April of 2006, a Windows update was incompatible with this =
> new interface. Generally what this patch seemed to do was to cause =
> Outlook Express itself to crash when you received or composed messages =
> and then closed either a message or the program itself. Now I realize =
> that the issue here is involving JAWS itself crashing, but when JAWS is =
> hooked into custom scripts with a program, it sometimes can also be made =
> to crash when another program within which it is operating crashes =
> independently.
>
> There is supposedly a Microsoft knowledge base article about how to keep =
> Outlook Express from crashing and making it generally more stable. It =
> involves undoing the patch and updating it with some other patch that =
> doesn't cause the problem itself. =20
>
> The issue is made much more complex by the fact that many people never =
> experienced the outlook Express problem itself at all. I am one of =
> those who has never had an issue. But many people do. It's a bit of a =
> mine field to navigate, but maybe those people having difficulties with =
> JAWS crashing when Outlook Express exits could look through the =
> Microsoft knowledge base and see if applying the patch may solve the =
> JAWS crash itself.
>
> This may sound like a long shot, but I believe it's worth a try.
>
|
|
|