On 2007-10-23, <bill@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> <bill@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote: > Hi All > > Since the topic at the moment is Outlook Express ... I have a problem which > is puzzling > > If I open up a message and click on reply to sender OE says it experienced a > problem and has to close and OE shuts down, but if I right click the message > and choose reply to sender I can write my message and send ... no problem. > Anyone any ideas on a fix ? Tried re-installing etc with no success. > > regards > > Bill > > In cold but sunny Norton in the Moors North Staffs UK Unless I'm mistaken, this newsgroup is soc.genealogy.computing, not a general-purpose Windhose support group. Asking non-genealogy-related Windhose questions here is just as off topic as if I were to ask Linux-specific questions unrelated to genealogy. Please take the non-genealogy-related Windhose stuff somewhere more appropriate. -- Robert Riches spamtrap42@verizon.net (Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

"tim sewell" <postmantim3@myfairlyobviousspamtrapoptusnet.com.au> wrote > Tiff files can be saved with LZW compression, which is lossless. P.S. I have just run a simple test to see how much space is saved by using the LZW compression. I converted five scans from LDS films of parish registers, all 8497 kB uncompressed (2480*3507 pixels, 8bps greyscale) and all with significant background 'mess'. The compressed files range from 6309 kB to 7022 kB, averaging 6609 kB, or about 78% of original size. HTH, -- Tim S. (please delete myfairlyobviousspamtrap if you wish to reply directly)

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 01:08:25 -0700, Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:45:58 GMT, David Harper ><devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> declaimed the following in > soc.genealogy.computing: >> >> M$ doesn't need encouragement. They invented the concept of "embrace >> and extend", remember :-) >> > "Embrace"? With a stiletto up the sleeve, targeted at the kidneys, > maybe <G> And "extend" implies they should still /accept/ the former > capability.... > "Embrace and Ignore" is probably more accurate <G> I've heard it said that "Microsoft follows standards the way that caribou follow fish".

"Henry & Carolyn" <hvharen@kent.net> wrote in message news:13hqaesibqn57e2@corp.supernews.com... >I just recently installed FTM 16 and my relationships seem to have gone >screwy. My mother's sister has now somehow become my half-aunt...and >others that came up as related before now come up not related. I am >getting confused! > There's been a lot of folk complaining about FTM16 - have a look and see whether there's a User's Group. This must have happened to somone else. Lesley Robertson (who's not "upgrading")

Henry & Carolyn wrote: > I just recently installed FTM 16 and my relationships seem to have gone > screwy. My mother's sister has now somehow become my half-aunt...and > others that came up as related before now come up not related. I am getting > confused! > TIA GIGO Hugh W -- For genealogy and help with family and local history in Bristol and district http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Brycgstow/ http://snaps4.blogspot.com/ photographs and walks GENEALOGE http://hughw36.blogspot.com/ MAIN BLOG

Hi All Since the topic at the moment is Outlook Express ... I have a problem which is puzzling If I open up a message and click on reply to sender OE says it experienced a problem and has to close and OE shuts down, but if I right click the message and choose reply to sender I can write my message and send ... no problem. Anyone any ideas on a fix ? Tried re-installing etc with no success. regards Bill In cold but sunny Norton in the Moors North Staffs UK ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Lee Bieber" <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.computing To: <gencmp@rootsweb.com> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 9:08 AM Subject: Re: Outlook Express > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 20:45:58 GMT, David Harper > <devnull@obliquity.u-net.com> declaimed the following in > soc.genealogy.computing: > >> >> M$ doesn't need encouragement. They invented the concept of "embrace >> and extend", remember :-) >> > "Embrace"? With a stiletto up the sleeve, targeted at the kidneys, > maybe <G> > > And "extend" implies they should still /accept/ the former > capability.... > > "Embrace and Ignore" is probably more accurate <G> > -- > Wulfraed Dennis Lee Bieber KD6MOG > wlfraed@ix.netcom.com wulfraed@bestiaria.com > HTTP://wlfraed.home.netcom.com/ > (Bestiaria Support Staff: web-asst@bestiaria.com) > HTTP://www.bestiaria.com/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > GENCMP-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes > in the subject and the body of the message

On 23 Oct 2007 in soc.genealogy.computing, wrote: > Anyone any ideas on a fix ? http://xnews.newsguy.com/ -- Joe Makowiec http://makowiec.org/ Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe

Steve Hayes wrote: > On Fri, 19 Oct 2007 15:45:45 -0400, Jim Elbrecht <elbrecht@email.com> wrote: > >> I don't seem to be having any luck finding recent discussions of this- >> so I'll throw this out and see if there is a better way. >> >> I use Steed's Brother's Keeper and recently started using a laptop. at >> some point I added some data to my desktop -- then I added some to my >> laptop. Now I'm not sure what I added to either. >> [and somewhere along the line I must have unchecked 'put changes in >> bkaudit.txt file' in BK's options, so I can't go that way] > > I know it's too late in your case, but I avoid such problems by tansferring my > data from desktop to laptop and back again. I originally used floppy disks, > then stiffies, then a Zip disk, now a flash drive. > > A simple batch file does it. > > I do the same with Brother's Keeper as Steve, but use my home network. Jim

"Roger Donne" <roger@donne.free-online.co.uk> wrote > Now I've looked at the 'Save as' options I can see that, as you say, the > TIF file was saved with no compression and the PDF file was saved with ZIP > compression and Quality '80' (whatever that means). Should the file sizes > be more or less the same when similar compression is applied? Roger, I suspect that the answer to that is 'it all depends...'. Tiff files can be saved with LZW compression, which is lossless. Presumably that will give you better quality results than any lossy compression. But whether you could detect the difference would be another question altogether. HTH, -- Tim S. (please delete myfairlyobviousspamtrap if you wish to reply directly)

I found it quite good to give me an idea of some things that need looking at - any little hints help. Early on I imported some GedComs without fully checking the details in them - have regretted that ever since - it has pointed out some possible errors in my early files. Helen Castle Narangba "Tom de Neef" <tdeneef@qolor.nl> wrote in message news:471b8006$0$245$e4fe514c@news.xs4all.nl... > Amazing how many inconsistencies you can find in a genealogical database. > I would get rich if my users pay 1 cent per 'error'. > But it is all for free, so never mind that. > The point is this: everyone who has put a lot of effort in building up > his/her database is upset when it appears to have more than just a few > errors. And most recording programs do not do a very good job in > verifying. Download Genealogica Grafica from > http://home.versatel.nl/genealogicagrafica/ and see what it detects in > your data. (You will need to export to a gedcom in order to interface with > the program. It has been tested on gedcoms with nearly a million persons. > It is fast!) > Tests include: > - link inconsistencies > - loops > - loose ends (unconnected groups of persons) > - date inconsistencies > - unlikely situations > When you let the program produce a map of birthplaces, it will also find > misspellings in placenames. > And it will also make graphicals of trees, inbreeding patterns and > relationships. The Help is extensive. > Hope this is a useful aid. > Tom >

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:39:31 +1000, "tim sewell" <postmantim3@myfairlyobviousspamtrapoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > >"tim sewell" <postmantim3@myfairlyobviousspamtrapoptusnet.com.au> wrote > >> Tiff files can be saved with LZW compression, which is lossless. > >P.S. > >I have just run a simple test to see how much space is saved by using the >LZW compression. > >I converted five scans from LDS films of parish registers, all 8497 kB >uncompressed (2480*3507 pixels, 8bps greyscale) and all with significant >background 'mess'. > >The compressed files range from 6309 kB to 7022 kB, averaging 6609 kB, or >about 78% of original size. > >HTH, My experience with LZW compression of TIFF files is that the processing time costs me more than the extra file space. I'm basically talking high resolution photos though, not the type of image you'd likely archive for it's text. For documents that I've scanned and saved to CD, I've found that scanning to TIFF, then converting the TIFF files to a PDF document works really well. If the PDF is high enough quality, it's even possible to OCR the PDF file using OmniPage pro. The size of the TIFF files isn't really important, since they are only a temporary medium, and are erased after the PDF document is created. -- Charlie Hoffpauir http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~charlieh/

Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > On Mon, 22 Oct 2007 12:09:18 +0100, Mike Williams > <nospam@econym.demon.co.uk> declaimed the following in > soc.genealogy.computing: > > >> [1] The only time I do like to use MSOE is for posting binary images to >> usenet newsgroups. My preferred news client produces posts which are RFC >> standards compliant, and people using MSOE can't see my images because >> MSOE doesn't support the relevant RFCs correctly. > > You are enabling M$ to keep violating the RFCs in that behavior... > <G> M$ doesn't need encouragement. They invented the concept of "embrace and extend", remember :-) David Harper Cambridge, England

Mike Williams wrote: > Wasn't it David Harper who wrote: [SNIP] >> On my Windows XP machine, Outlook Express looks for the address book in >> this folder: >> >> C:\Documents and Settings\<USER>\Application Data\Microsoft\Address Book >> >> where <USER> is the Windows user name. [SNIP] > Aha. That information allowed me to solve the same situation on my > computer. The "Application Data" folder is one of those places that Windows tries to hide from over-inquisitive users with "here be dragons!"-style warnings. Most Windows users are blissfully unaware of its existence, because the file manager hides it quite effectively. You only really notice it if you fire up a DOS (sorry, Command Prompt) window. David Harper Cambridge, England

I just recently installed FTM 16 and my relationships seem to have gone screwy. My mother's sister has now somehow become my half-aunt...and others that came up as related before now come up not related. I am getting confused! TIA Carolyn

Tom de Neef wrote: > Tests include: > - link inconsistencies > - loops > - loose ends (unconnected groups of persons) > - date inconsistencies > - unlikely situations Any decent genealogy software will check for these and more (such as duplicate persons). What makes your software any better? Disadvantages appear to include; - only runs on one OS - inconvenience of exporting to GEDCOM - any errors found have to be corrected manually (in the master database) Doesn't sound that impressive, really. Peter

"john" <deo-c989@myamail.com> wrote in message news:471c9ee3$0$19121$426a74cc@news.free.fr... > Roger Donne wrote: >> "Roger Donne" <roger@donne.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:13hm59er1lgqv89@corp.supernews.com... >>> Any recommendations or comments on software packages for scanning paper >>> documents and managing the resulting files? I'm looking for something >>> which will scan to a format like pdf. Subsequently I would like to >>> combine the files with other digital image files in a variety of formats >>> and organise the lot into a database which would be easy to search or >>> retrieve from. I do have genealogical software which allows images to >>> be associated with people and events in the database, but I was looking >>> for something separate to this. >>> Regards: Roger Donne >>> >> Thanks to all who replied. Xnview plus Picasa seems to be a good >> combination to try, particularly since it's free! It does mean >> restricting the scanned image formats to those which Picasa supports. >> That means scanning documents to tif as opposed to the pdf format which I >> had in mind. Still, with Xnview I could convert files to pdf at a later >> date if I change my mind. There does seem to be an impact in terms of >> the storage requirement. As a test, I tried scanning a single A4 sheet >> of typescript with Xnview at 300dpi and saving the result as a pdf and a >> tif. The tif was about 50% larger than the pdf file (25MB as opposed to >> 16MB) with no difference in quality of the image as far as I could see. >> Regards: Roger Donne > Possibly the TIF file was saved with no compression and whereas > compression has been applied in creating the PDF. > I didn't think of that, just applied the defaults as proposed by Xnview. Now I've looked at the 'Save as' options I can see that, as you say, the TIF file was saved with no compression and the PDF file was saved with ZIP compression and Quality '80' (whatever that means). Should the file sizes be more or less the same when similar compression is applied? Roger Donne

Roger Donne wrote: > "Roger Donne" <roger@donne.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message > news:13hm59er1lgqv89@corp.supernews.com... >> Any recommendations or comments on software packages for scanning paper >> documents and managing the resulting files? I'm looking for something >> which will scan to a format like pdf. Subsequently I would like to >> combine the files with other digital image files in a variety of formats >> and organise the lot into a database which would be easy to search or >> retrieve from. I do have genealogical software which allows images to be >> associated with people and events in the database, but I was looking for >> something separate to this. >> Regards: Roger Donne >> > Thanks to all who replied. Xnview plus Picasa seems to be a good > combination to try, particularly since it's free! It does mean restricting > the scanned image formats to those which Picasa supports. That means > scanning documents to tif as opposed to the pdf format which I had in mind. > Still, with Xnview I could convert files to pdf at a later date if I change > my mind. There does seem to be an impact in terms of the storage > requirement. As a test, I tried scanning a single A4 sheet of typescript > with Xnview at 300dpi and saving the result as a pdf and a tif. The tif was > about 50% larger than the pdf file (25MB as opposed to 16MB) with no > difference in quality of the image as far as I could see. > Regards: Roger Donne > > Possibly the TIF file was saved with no compression and whereas compression has been applied in creating the PDF.

"peter" <nospamjynyl@yahoo.co.nz> schreef in bericht news:1193027685.463602@ftpsrv1... > Tom de Neef wrote: >> Tests include: >> - link inconsistencies >> - loops >> - loose ends (unconnected groups of persons) >> - date inconsistencies >> - unlikely situations > > Any decent genealogy software will check for these and more (such as > duplicate persons). > > What makes your software any better? > If you use a program that does decent tests, Genealogica Grafica may not offer you anything in this area. However... most programs don't. (Tests on gedcoms from Legacy, PAF, Aldfaer, BK, FTM, you name it: inconsistencies galore.) In the area of date consistencies, Genealogica Grafica will find _all_ inconsistencies (using an artificial reasoning technique). Here is an example, pulled from a gedcom produced by Family Historian: The person named Laurentinus is male. Neither birth nor death dates are recorded. Birth and death of his mother and father are not known either. But a grandmother on mother's side is born in 1603. Thus his mother must have been born after 1616. Therefore his birthdate can not be before 1629 (assumption that mothers are >=13 when delivering). Laurentinus has a child in 1635. Thus he must have been born before 1622 (similar argument). Hence one of the dates must be wrong since there is a contradiction: born <1622 AND born >1629. Often such discrepancies point to a link to the wrong child. > Disadvantages appear to include; > - only runs on one OS > - inconvenience of exporting to GEDCOM > - any errors found have to be corrected manually (in the master database) > Very true. Tom

In article <p64oh394ccsja0d1f371hgv7vrr8l922vr@4ax.com>, Denis Beauregard <denis.b-at-francogene.com@fr.invalid> wrote: > multiposting : posting the same message to many newsgroups (in this > context) separately, i.e. the message in newsgroup A has a different > time stamp compared to the message in newsgroup B and the line > newsgroups has one newsgroup only. > crossposting : posting the same message to many newsgroups but as a > single message. The important thing for me is that, if you cross-post to two or three groups that I take - I see only one posting. If you multi-post I see them all (wastefully). But!! It is rare for any post to need cross-posting at all (and should never be multi-posted). On the very rare occasions where a cross-posting is necessary it is *never* an appropriate thing to be done by anyone who doesn't know there way around very well. [follow ups set to sgb only] -- John

"Roger Donne" <roger@donne.free-online.co.uk> wrote in message news:13hm59er1lgqv89@corp.supernews.com... > Any recommendations or comments on software packages for scanning paper > documents and managing the resulting files? I'm looking for something > which will scan to a format like pdf. Subsequently I would like to > combine the files with other digital image files in a variety of formats > and organise the lot into a database which would be easy to search or > retrieve from. I do have genealogical software which allows images to be > associated with people and events in the database, but I was looking for > something separate to this. > Regards: Roger Donne > Thanks to all who replied. Xnview plus Picasa seems to be a good combination to try, particularly since it's free! It does mean restricting the scanned image formats to those which Picasa supports. That means scanning documents to tif as opposed to the pdf format which I had in mind. Still, with Xnview I could convert files to pdf at a later date if I change my mind. There does seem to be an impact in terms of the storage requirement. As a test, I tried scanning a single A4 sheet of typescript with Xnview at 300dpi and saving the result as a pdf and a tif. The tif was about 50% larger than the pdf file (25MB as opposed to 16MB) with no difference in quality of the image as far as I could see. Regards: Roger Donne