MSN Messenger problem

Probably not directly on topic so my apologies but perhaps
someone on this Newsgroup may have some information on the
following.

I recently heard on the Media that MSN Messenger offers voice to
voice and video to video links and gave us an example of its quality
by conducting the interview through MSN Messenger. I use Skype
for voice and (sometimes), Paltalk for video. Is this new version
compatible and why also, when I downloaded it on my PC I got
named as my daughter's version, even though I used a different
password. I doubt she used my email address when she registered
with them yet whenever I open it I see here name and her contacts.
What have I done wrong and how do I first of all extricate myself
and then set up a new registration for myself, but then is MSN's new
version of Messenger worth it? Your advice would be greatly
appreciated.
--
Derrick Fawsitt

The full Messenger 7 is now available for download, and is combatable with
Skype, used it myself yesterday.

As for the rest sorry haven't a clue

Cheers

"Derrick Fawsitt" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Probably not directly on topic so my apologies but perhaps
> someone on this Newsgroup may have some information on the
> following.
>

SNIP

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 21:03:25 +0100, Derrick Fawsitt wrote in
<news:(E-Mail Removed)>

> I recently heard on the Media that MSN Messenger offers voice to
> voice and video to video links and gave us an example of its quality
> by conducting the interview through MSN Messenger. I use Skype
> for voice and (sometimes), Paltalk for video. Is this new version
> compatible

I'm not sure what you mean by "compatible", but it is compatible with
previous versions of MSN Messenger, but not with Skype. The latest version
was only released three days ago and is version 7. Voice is on a par with
or better than Skype IME. Of course the latter has no video - yet. MSN
has two forms of audio/video

1) Video Conversation where the codecs used are meant to be an improvement
on previous versions. The audio is meant to be better synchronised with
video, and quality of latter is *meant* to be an improvement, even allowing
full screen video.

2) Separate webcam and audio links. Even though this is meant to be
inferior to (1) I have found it better and synchronisation is very good.
When I use 2, the data upload is between 25-30 KB/sec, as fast as my
connection will allow.

> and why also, when I downloaded it on my PC I got
> named as my daughter's version, even though I used a different
> password. I doubt she used my email address when she registered
> with them yet whenever I open it I see here name and her contacts.
> What have I done wrong and how do I first of all extricate myself
> and then set up a new registration for myself, but then is MSN's new
> version of Messenger worth it? Your advice would be greatly
> appreciated.

Go to the Run box above the "Start" button and type the following into it:

control userpasswords2

That will bring up another box with two tabs at the top. Go to the
Advanced tab and click "Manage Passwords". There you'll see all the
accounts and you should be able to delete the one causing the problems.
You may also see a .Net passport. That can be removed, as if it is the
default one you are seeing, it will reappear if still listed.

Overall, I find MSN quality excellent for both voice and video. But if you
are using WinXP you might prefer the less bloated Windows Messenger. It
too does audio/video.

--
Mike Coleraine 55.13°N 6.69°W posted 10/04/2005 20:38:50 UTC

In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Mike Tullett
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 21:03:25 +0100, Derrick Fawsitt wrote in
><news:(E-Mail Removed)>
>
>> I recently heard on the Media that MSN Messenger offers voice to
>> voice and video to video links and gave us an example of its quality
>> by conducting the interview through MSN Messenger. I use Skype
>> for voice and (sometimes), Paltalk for video. Is this new version
>> compatible
>
>I'm not sure what you mean by "compatible", but it is compatible with
>previous versions of MSN Messenger, but not with Skype. The latest version
>was only released three days ago and is version 7. Voice is on a par with
>or better than Skype IME. Of course the latter has no video - yet. MSN
>has two forms of audio/video
>
>1) Video Conversation where the codecs used are meant to be an improvement
>on previous versions. The audio is meant to be better synchronised with
>video, and quality of latter is *meant* to be an improvement, even allowing
>full screen video.
>
>2) Separate webcam and audio links. Even though this is meant to be
>inferior to (1) I have found it better and synchronisation is very good.
>When I use 2, the data upload is between 25-30 KB/sec, as fast as my
>connection will allow.
>
>> and why also, when I downloaded it on my PC I got
>> named as my daughter's version, even though I used a different
>> password. I doubt she used my email address when she registered
>> with them yet whenever I open it I see here name and her contacts.
>> What have I done wrong and how do I first of all extricate myself
>> and then set up a new registration for myself, but then is MSN's new
>> version of Messenger worth it? Your advice would be greatly
>> appreciated.
>
>Go to the Run box above the "Start" button and type the following into it:
>
>control userpasswords2
>
>That will bring up another box with two tabs at the top. Go to the
>Advanced tab and click "Manage Passwords". There you'll see all the
>accounts and you should be able to delete the one causing the problems.
>You may also see a .Net passport. That can be removed, as if it is the
>default one you are seeing, it will reappear if still listed.
>
>Overall, I find MSN quality excellent for both voice and video. But if you
>are using WinXP you might prefer the less bloated Windows Messenger. It
>too does audio/video.
>
Mike, thank you so much for the above, it worked, I have got my own
relationship with MSNM, without my daughter's name and friends popping
up. What I do with it now is another matter, it has even been suggested
that the audio quality, (all I am really interested in), is actually
better than Skype, this I have to hear. As I have not yet used it I will
reserve my judgement.
Meanwhile, thanks again, much appreciated.
Derrick
--
Derrick Fawsitt