🚀 go-pugleaf

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. 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. I'm not much less confused by that :-)

-- 
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)