Nifty macro to remind you to attach attachments ...
  • Register
  • Help
Results 1 to 13 of 13
Like Tree2Likes
  • 2 Post By Only19

Thread: Nifty macro to remind you to attach attachments ...

  1. #1
    IWS
    IWS is offline
    1000+ Posts IWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hawthorn East, Vic.
    Posts
    1,306

    Default Nifty macro to remind you to attach attachments ...

    Ever had that problem where you send an email - meaning to include an attachment but forgetting to attach the attachment....

    Newer versions of Outlook have a tool to avoid that - but I use an old (2003) version of Outlook.

    Problem now solved with this nifty little macro https://sites.google.com/site/markbird/

    Took a few moments to install. Works a treat!

    Advertisement


    Ian.

  2. #2
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    5,070

    Default

    Sure happened to me a few times
    Still, won't get the tool, have to keep flogging my memory.
    "The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it's the illusion of knowledge"
    Stephen Hawking

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    sydney, australia
    Posts
    11,301

    Default

    Thunderbird has such a feature built in.

  4. #4
    Fellow Frogger! Only19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    755

    Default A.D.D. cure?

    What, a cure for A.D.D.? (Attachment Deficit Disorder )
    Kenfuego and Geoff in Gully like this.
    Who needs brakes? They only slow you down ....

  5. #5
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Melbourne Victoria
    Posts
    11,777

    Icon11 The trouble with aging....

    Or A.D.D.O. (Attachment Deficit Disorder Outlook)

    Ken

  6. #6
    IWS
    IWS is offline
    1000+ Posts IWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hawthorn East, Vic.
    Posts
    1,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexander View Post
    Thunderbird has such a feature built in.
    And if Outlook was any good it would have had it built in long ago as well. The open-source email client I used in the mid 90's (Pegasus) had it back then.

    Still, for those stuck with Outlook (for whatever reason) in older versions this little macro is handy.

    Ian

  7. #7
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,685

    Default

    I'm surprised anyone still uses Outlook. There are so many better ways.

    The main reason for using mail clients is the convenient way they store your messages. You don't actually need one at all, it isn't part of the email design. I frequently find myself sending and receiving on the terminal (DOS prompt to Windoze users) when I'm on someone else's machine. It is quite simple, though it tends to be a sign (symptom) of long-term computer users who once used no other way.

  8. #8
    1000+ Posts robmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne / Caulfield
    Posts
    19,050

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seasink View Post
    I'm surprised anyone still uses Outlook. There are so many better ways.

    The main reason for using mail clients is the convenient way they store your messages. You don't actually need one at all, it isn't part of the email design. I frequently find myself sending and receiving on the terminal (DOS prompt to Windoze users) when I'm on someone else's machine. It is quite simple, though it tends to be a sign (symptom) of long-term computer users who once used no other way.
    Most people like to track and keep copies their email. And not to run scripts nor enter complex command line text.

    I used *send mail* for xp for automated stuff. I also use power shell which talks to net framework on Win7 or 8 for automated emailing.

    Sending mail via the command line on windows is similar to having sex on a hammock standing up for most users. Unnecessary, difficult and nor particularly satisfying. But I guess some people find it satisfactory.

    Gmail sends and receives email quicker with less fuss for most people.

    Outlook has pros and cons and for most people is an old friend and fully integrated into their CRM system.

    Life is full of compromise. They masses and marketing decide what is the most frequently used programs.

    The "best" systems/software is often in the eye of the beholder and shunned by the masses.

  9. #9
    1000+ Posts lion5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    1,669

  10. #10
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,685

    Default

    Most people like to track and keep copies their email.
    I sorta said that. There's more around than sendmail. I'll bet I can send or receive a simple message in less time than you can open and use Outlook. It isn't sex on a hammock, or even a black art. It's trivial for unencrypted standard messages. Once upon a time, we all did it.

    On the whole GUIs have been a benefit, but they do hide underlying reality. Just sometimes though reality is simpler and quicker than the GUI. That said, on my main box, I use a GUI. It's because it lies on top of a database. Terminal stuff these days has a throw-away quality if there isn't also a pipe to storage.

  11. #11
    IWS
    IWS is offline
    1000+ Posts IWS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Hawthorn East, Vic.
    Posts
    1,306

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by seasink View Post
    I sorta said that. There's more around than sendmail. I'll bet I can send or receive a simple message in less time than you can open and use Outlook. It isn't sex on a hammock, or even a black art. It's trivial for unencrypted standard messages. Once upon a time, we all did it.

    On the whole GUIs have been a benefit, but they do hide underlying reality. Just sometimes though reality is simpler and quicker than the GUI. That said, on my main box, I use a GUI. It's because it lies on top of a database. Terminal stuff these days has a throw-away quality if there isn't also a pipe to storage.
    Command line may be quicker for you in some instances but I reckon that you are in a tiny minority. The vast majority of users would, I reckon, not even know what that (command line operation) is. And why should they? Like folks driving a car. Most just know that it runs when the key is turned - and they do not need to know more. Same with GUIs on computers I reckon. I certainly have no desire at all to go back to a command line interface.

    Ian.

  12. #12
    1000+ Posts
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    8,685

    Default

    Of course I'm in a minority. So are DS drivers.

    Well over half a century of playing with these infernal devices teaches a ton of short cuts. I suppose the car equivalent is that I can use a crash gearbox, and don't want an AL4. When your auto Cit fails you'll be glad to borrow a manual Excel. When your email fails you might go to the terminal. I didn't say you must, just that you can.

    Open on my GUI desktop as I write is a GUI web browser, a (very) plain text editor and two terminals. Each is available to do what it does with the least effort. The terminals have command memory and a large number of preset shortcuts. I always teach new users about the terminal. They don't use it much at first, but they understand should some rapid fixes become necessary.

  13. #13
    1000+ Posts robmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Melbourne / Caulfield
    Posts
    19,050

    Default

    I certainly have no desire at all to go back to a command line interface.
    That pretty well says what I was alluding to.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •