H�kan Waara wrote:
> Peter Lairo wrote:
>> 5. The original solution (to have the unread/tolal messages right
>> after the folder names ("ExampleFolderName (3/14500)") was much
>> cleaner and took up less valiuable space.
> It's your choice! If you think it stinks, you don't have to write a
> newspost about it. You can just turn off the columns - and you will get
> back the old behaviour.
Not quite H�kan.
If I turn off the collumns, I cannot see the unread/total mail counts
*at all*. Whereas with the original system, I could *always* see the
unread/total mail counts, if the folder name wasn't too long.
Currently, a *defined* amount of space is being use up by each collumn,
regardless of how long the folder name may be and regardless of how many
messages are there. This static approach is just inefficient. The
original system was more adaptive to the individual folders.
The original system was much better because it made more effective and
efficient use of the limited space.
--
Regards,
Peter Lairo
