More progress

Report · May 10, 2009

I think the bottleneck holding up attachments is fixed: [Yes, straight in. Thanks to whoever sorted that one out]

Report · May 10, 2009

Yea, I noticed that, too. And I may be wrong, but I think it was resolved before this latest update where they added the much needed breadcrumbs at the bottom and almost fixed the subject header for email replies.

Report · May 10, 2009

Kath-H wrote:
I think the bottleneck holding up attachments is fixed: [Yes, straight in. Thanks to whoever sorted that one out]

Kath,

I had noticed that graphic files were being released much faster for about a week, but some other files were still getting stuck.

Report · May 10, 2009

Aha! It's queued!

Let's observe it for a while.

Report · May 10, 2009

I didn't catch when it appeared, but the PDF is there now.

(Wait...<clicks link>... Yep. C++ Performance from, I'm guessing, his blog?)

Report · May 10, 2009

Mark A. Boyd wrote:
I didn't catch when it appeared, but the PDF is there now.
(Wait...<clicks link>... Yep. C++ Performance from, I'm guessing, his blog?)

Mark I downloaded the pdf at 9:44 pm EDT. The link was hot at that point.

This is information only for your test. Nothing else.

Could have been hot earlier than that. But this is the point I saw and tried download. I waited until the message I have quoted above showed up on forum to type this response.

Report · May 10, 2009

That is 3 minutes earlier than I tried it. So all we really know so far is that this particular attachment spent less than two hours in the queue - on a Sunday - on Mother's Day.

Report · May 10, 2009

Truce!

Just trying to help.

Curious, the time I downloaded the file is when I first saw the thread show up on my computer.

Although I had been off computer for about two hours, I had been back on about 10 minutes, before this subject popped up.

So I can't hazard an opinion otherwise.

Report · May 10, 2009

Truce? I wasn't being confrontational.

Just noting that you saw the file 3 minutes [before] I did, making it approximately 2 hours before any of us noticed that the file was out of the queue. No arguments. No jibes. No underhanded remarks. Just plain old documentation of our observations for Ramón.

No jive!

Message was edited by: Mark A. Boyd - added the somehow missing "before"

Edited again. Looked it up and like the alternate spelling for gibes. It's more fitting in here.

Report · May 11, 2009

I was just asking for a Truce.

Not that this thread was confrontational. But; just trying to call a Truce from those that have been pounding me in other threads.

This is the way communications should go. Post a Question, someone offers information. If it something so natural or logical to the person asking the question, just accept it in spirit intended, and move on.

When I offer information or opinions I assume there are hundreds if not thousands of people that don't post but are looking, they may have just joined the forums. Not everyone is an expert. heck I don't even call myself an expert. I have had some experince with Acrobat (used since version 4; even then I don't call myself an experience).

Report · May 11, 2009

PjonesCET wrote:
... even then I don't call myself an experience).

Oh yes, you are an experiece PJ!

Report · May 11, 2009

John Joslin wrote:
PjonesCET wrote:
... even then I don't call myself as experienced).
Oh yes, you are an experiece PJ!

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

I don't know why I have a Problem with Proofreading I read through three times before sending and even edited to correct misspelling.

Report · May 11, 2009

Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling

but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use

your tools old boy. ;-D

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling

but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use

your tools old boy. ;-D

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

S.D.A. wrote:
Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling
but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use
your tools old boy. ;-D
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:
There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Hmm?? I didn't type the space between Intended. because I shifted to plain text so that I could run spell check. and everything check. Curios.

So far as I know, Outlook is the only one that has a Grammar Check.

Although I use SeaMonkey, I can use FireFox, Safari/Konquerer, OmniWeb, Opera, iCab. None have Grammar Checkers. As far as I know, Office is Primarily a Corporate Program, and is not available for Mac Platform

Report · May 11, 2009

PjonesCET wrote: As far as I know, Office is Primarily a Corporate Program, and is not available for Mac Platform

Office is available for the Mac.In fact, even Windows can run on the Mac

PjonesCET wrote:
Hmm?? I didn't type the space between Intended. because I shifted to plain text so that I could run spell check. and everything check. Curios.

Spell checks won't always help... see the case above. You meant 'Curious' but typed 'Curios'. Curios is a word in the dictionary

Report · May 11, 2009

Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling

but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use

your tools old boy. ;-D

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

Uh oh. I'm betting you didn't really send this twice.

S.D.A. wrote:
Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling
but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use
your tools old boy. ;-D
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:
There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

Mark A. Boyd wrote:
Uh oh. I'm betting you didn't really send this twice.
S.D.A. wrote:
Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling
but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use
your tools old boy. ;-D
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:
There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Something odd is going on. Maybe Outlook is not such a good application to use on Adobe Forums. And I did not type the space between the I and N in intended.

BTW: I've did a Google search for Outlook for Mac. There is none, it was discontinued as of the 2004 version The MacBU took over the project and rolled it into Entourage. Entourage is so convoluted, and complex to use. I don't even use it.

Report · May 11, 2009

PjonesCET wrote:
BTW: I've did a Google search for Outlook for Mac. There is none, it was discontinued as of the 2004 version The MacBU took over the project and rolled it into Entourage. Entourage is so convoluted, and complex to use. I don't even use it.

True. It has been discontinued since OS X but Entourage isn't convoluted nor complex. At least no more so that Outlook was. I found it very easy to set up and use even in an Exchange server environment.

Report · May 11, 2009

And I did not type the space between the I and N in intended.

The upper case I is correct. The space is correct. You just left off another lower-case i from intended.

Report · May 11, 2009

Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling

but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use

your tools old boy. ;-D

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling

but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use

your tools old boy. ;-D

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling

but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use

your tools old boy. ;-D

On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:

There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

Report · May 11, 2009

S.D.A. wrote:
Well, if you used Outlook or an e-mail app that not only checked spelling
but grammar as well; you would be well on your way. Got to learn how to use
your tools old boy. ;-D
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 08:40:04AM -0600, Phillip Jones typed:
There I do again. I left off one d and changed what I ntended to say.

looks like SDA is once again going through another period of : Can you hear me now! Can you hear me now! Can You hear me now!; again with out wanting to.Something in his system is doing something funny.

If its because he is sending through email rather than through web browser, could be he has a bad file left on his mail file from his ISP.

I use to have 10-20 or more duplicate copies of messages from people sending email from aol. turns out aol was sending Malformed header info and would cause multiple copy's to be generated. The only way My ISP could cure the problem was completely kill my mailbox after I signed off at night and create a new one before I signed on in the morning. of course during that period I had no mailbox messages to me were bounced and lost. But It would cure the problem