🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:28:30 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
<not-me@other.invalid> wrote:

> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:24:01 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:20:46 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> > <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 16:55:57 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> >> 
> >>> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 13:07:10 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> >>> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 07:56:02 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 14:57:10 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> >>>>> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 13:49:10 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 11:12:43 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
> >>>>>>> <not-me@other.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> As I understand it, Outlook can (or could in earlier versions) be
> >>>>>>>> configured to use Outlook Express as a plug-in-like app to read
> >>>>>>>> newsgroups.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> No, it wasn't anything at all like a plug-in app. It simply linked to
> >>>>>>> Outlook Express (and the link could easily be changed to any other
> >>>>>>> program you want). There was simply a button called something like
> >>>>>>> "newsgroups" that, when clicked, started Outlook Express. 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Not sure why this isn't like a plug-in...
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Because no software was "plugged into" Outlook. The only thing in
> >>>>> Outlook was the name of the exe file that would be invoked if you
> >>>>> clicked the button. And also unlike a plugin, it was very easy to
> >>>>> change the name of the exe file to something else.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I didn't way it *was* a plugin.
> >>> 
> >>> No, you said "*like* a plugin." I understand. I was explaining that a
> >>> plugin is software, and since this isn't software, it wasn't at all
> >>> like a plugin.
> >>> 
> >>> But no big deal. I certainly don't want to argue with you about what
> >>> "like" means.
> >> 
> >> But now you confuse me since you seem to be saying that OE is not
> >> software. 
> > 
> > No, no. What I meant was ...
> > 
> >> So, I'll take it that you mean that all that happens to
> >> Outlook is that a link is placed therein, rather than code being
> >> inserted into it. 
> > 
> > Yes, exactly.
> > 
> >> I'm not much less confused by that :-)
> >> 
> >> -- 
> >> Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)
> 
> Finally! We can now shake hands and be friends :-)


LOL! Done!