chrislott Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 The web mail at SC offers a link "Download All Attachments (in .zip file)" for messages that have attachments. Unfortunately it seems to be inoperable. When I click it, my browser shows a blank page, no download. I also tried right-clicking the link and doing "Save as" but that yields nothing either. I have tried with Firefox 0.91 and IE 6. Downloading the files individually works. If this reaches someone with Admin privs who wants to examine the message, it is in my inbox with subject "RE: modification to lc too". It has about 5 source-code files attached, nothing large, nothing binary. Please advise, thanks. chris... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 I don't think anything having to do with zip format works on webmail. I POP my mailbox every day to my local machine, so do not use that functionality. I just tried what you mentioned and can confirm it does not work. I know that downloading folders to zip format also does not work but downloading them to mbox format does work fine. If this is a problem for you, contact support<at>spamcop.net and request the modification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 No, I don't think it works/ It;'s been brought up before, but can see nothing that's been accomplished. Along the same line, when I was bumped up to Moderator, I lost the capability of archiving my PM folders. JT's been queried about this also, but .. no fix to date. One of the things I'm wondering about goes along with some of the ancient history. For example, recall that there is actually a left-hanging note that JT might not go with this softwware ... along with that is that there's a spell-check option available with a paid-for version .... is it possible that this is still free-trail set-up and the .ZIP option is also a paid function? Just a thought at the moment. At present, I'm looking at like a 2-week backlog on responses from JT on other issues, so not really inclined to send more e-mail his way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenUnderwood Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 Wazoo...We are talking about SpamCop webmail, not the forum software. <kind slap up side the head to shake out the cobwebs> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted July 16, 2004 Share Posted July 16, 2004 OK, I'll take that ... one of those interesting complaints that I can't recall seeing over in the newsgroups, only here ... but then again, just reminding myself, that I never bothered with the spamcop.mail newsgroup ... geeze, you're right .. not a good morning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrislott Posted July 18, 2004 Author Share Posted July 18, 2004 So maybe the most constructive proposal at this point would be to remove that link since it's inoperable. Making it work probably has to go back to the Horde implementors. I have tried contacting support at spamcop via email in the past, and I may be misreading the attitude, but there seems to be kind of a take-it-or-leave-it situation for feature requests such as this. These forums are helpful in that people respond, sometimes confirming problems that I see, but not helpful in that the people here do not seem empowered to make improvements. I enjoy the protection from spam that sc offers but feel that the current level of service and support is rather modest, even below what I should expect for $30/year. Maybe my expectations are unrealistic, but I depend on email, so I hope that SC's new corporate owner invests sufficient resources to fix glitches and make it a rock-solid service. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wazoo Posted July 18, 2004 Share Posted July 18, 2004 So maybe the most constructive proposal at this point would be to remove that link since it's inoperable. Making it work probably has to go back to the Horde implementors. As said before, I don't have that knowledge, but know that this has been a complaint for quite a while, so can only go with the assumption that it's not just a simple flag setting somewhere. I have tried contacting support at spamcop via email in the past, and I may be misreading the attitude, but there seems to be kind of a take-it-or-leave-it situation for feature requests such as this. I can't speak for JT, but bottom line is that he's the only one responding to the support e-mail address, know that he has a number of corporate clients in addition to the SpamCop e-mail users, so I'd rather suggest that some things just boil down to the availability of time and resources ...??? These forums are helpful in that people respond, sometimes confirming problems that I see, but not helpful in that the people here do not seem empowered to make improvements. Correct in that judgement. Answers can only be provided by the folks that have been down that road before or in most cases, a question asked from the one that knows and then the answer shared ... but access to the real code, hardware, accounts, etc. is limited to JT for the most part (I really have no idea if he's actually got any staff there) I enjoy the protection from spam that sc offers but feel that the current level of service and support is rather modest, even below what I should expect for $30/year. Maybe my expectations are unrealistic, but I depend on email, so I hope that SC's new corporate owner invests sufficient resources to fix glitches and make it a rock-solid service. Not to dash your hopes, but to the best of my knowledge, the IronPort deal basically was for Julian's side of the house .. the reporting and BL stuff ... JT's part of the system shares some resources (for reporting) but basically the e-mail side of the house is JT's own business concern, so I'm not sure that there's any direct connection between JT and the IronPort folks. Again, this is based on what little I've picked up from what little has actually been made public over the actual business structure .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.