powermail-discuss Digest #2713 - Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Re: powermail-discuss Digest #2707 - 10/17/07
by "Joe Hallett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
hotpop?
by "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: powermail-discuss Digest #2707 - 10/17/07
From: "Joe Hallett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2007 13:24:21 -0700
Thanks to those of you who called my attention to the possibility that a
backup operation was somehow causing my "slow addressbook" problem. A
long time ago I had set up a nightly backup of the PM addressbook using
Apple's Backup software...and then I had forgotten about it. After a
weeklong test with Backup turned off, addressbook speed has remained normal.
Joe Hallett
10/17/07
>powermail-discuss Digest #2707 - Wednesday, October 17, 2007
>
> Re: Issues with EPS attachments?
> by "Justin Beek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Slow Address Book
> by "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: PowerMail 5.2.3 db problem. Please help.
> by "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Setting PM as the Default Email Reader
> by "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: No PowerMail selection in iPhoto '08
> by "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Slow Address Book
> by "Rick Lecoat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Slow Address Book
> by "Jim Pistrang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re(2): Powermail support (Was: Re: Exporting from PowerMail - all mail is
> by "Winston Weinmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Slow Address Book
> by "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Slow Address Book
> by "Jim Pistrang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Re: Slow Address Book
> by "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Issues with EPS attachments?
>From: "Justin Beek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:05:43 -0500
>
>We are getting these from non-teachable customers. :(
>
>But yes, ZIPs work just fine!
>
>
>
>On Oct 16, 2007, at 12:47 PM, Mikael Byström wrote:
>
>> Justin Beek asked:
>>
>>> Are we the only ones having this issue?
>>> Is there a fix?
>>
>> Do you zip the files or not? ie do you compress them?
>>
>> If not, that should do the trick.
>> Mikael
>>
>> Tech facts:
>> PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.5 | Powerbook G4/550Mhz | 1GB RAM |
>> 80GB HD
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Slow Address Book
>From: "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:00:33 +0200
>
>Jeremy Hughes said:
>
>>Same here. It's been mentioned on this list on more than one occasion.
>>
>>In our experience, Powermail becomes generally slow and unresponsive
>>(not just the address lookup).
>>
>>We're using Retrospect as our backup program.
>
>That's a known bug, but I don't remember which app is responsible for
>not playing nice with the other. One clue is that I don't have this
>problem with another backup application. So I wouldn't blame Powermail
>for this particular bug necessarily, at least not outside of use with
>Retrospect.
>
>Mikael
>
>Tech facts:
>PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: PowerMail 5.2.3 db problem. Please help.
>From: "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:14:01 +0200
>
>Dan MacMillan said:
>
>>The message database is currently at 2gb, and before I managed to compress
>>it, a problem developed. After a reboot, PowerMail attempted to rebuild
>>the sort indicies, but this failed after about 12 minutes with the
>>following , "A database error occurred" ; "Class=DB ; what=100; when=9;
>>err=158". I restarted PowerMail a number of times, and this rebuild fails
>>in the same fashion each time.
>
>The classic response is to delete the sort index located at "~/PowerMail
>Files/Message Database index" and let the indices rebuild from scratch.
>However your latter "disk full" error could indicate permission problems
>or other filesystem problems, so I would first check the disk with
>appropriate repair application to rule out physical and logical problems
>in the filesystem and then make sure that all files under "PowerMail
>Files" was full readable and writeable for the user in question. The
>latter can be done in the finder by choosing that folder and set the
>proper rights for it and then extend that by clicking "use for included
>objects".
>
>
>Mikael
>
>Tech facts:
>PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Setting PM as the Default Email Reader
>From: "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:21:38 +0200
>
>Georges Piriou suggested:
>
>>In Preferenze>Generale, under Applicazione di posta di default, select
>>Powermail (if Powermail is already installed).
>
>And this will work with the Filemaker function giovanni wants to sue? I
>thought he said that the "Send Mail function.... won't work if Mail
>isn't set as the default reader". You're suggesting he set it not to
>Mail and I imagined he had tried that already.
>
>I'd rather look for the solution in editing the script that I hope
>Filemaker uses for this function, but then again my expectations for
>FileMaker is very low, so I wouldn't bet on that it is possible.
>
>I think that for several apps that uses email as a function it would be
>nice if Apple provided a gateway so we could choose ourselves what app
>to use, instead of tying us to their particular app. Are they MS-
>wannabes or what's going on?
>
>
>Mikael
>
>Tech facts:
>PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: No PowerMail selection in iPhoto '08
>From: "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:26:10 +0200
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] told
>
>>Thank you! I was using the older version of iPhoto Mailer Patcher. I
>>downloaded 4.1, and it works perfectly with the newest version (7.1) of
>>iPhoto, even though the documentation doesn't mention it.
>
>WHy not give the developer a heads up as he seems to not being aware of
>that it is working. Or maybe he just doesn't want to support it (but
>then again why not just say that you're on your own).
>
>Mikael
>
>Tech facts:
>PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Slow Address Book
>From: "Rick Lecoat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:25:16 +0100
>
>On 17/10/07 (23:00) Mikael said:
>
>>That's a known bug, but I don't remember which app is responsible for
>>not playing nice with the other. One clue is that I don't have this
>>problem with another backup application. So I wouldn't blame Powermail
>>for this particular bug necessarily, at least not outside of use with
>>Retrospect.
>>
>>Mikael
>
>IIRC, the standard best-practice advice is to quit PM before doing a
>backup; not because of any particular bugs in any particular software,
>but because it is deemed 'best' to close down a database of any sort
>before backing up or copying it.
>
>I find this to be something of a problem, because I want to do regular
>backups, but I *don't* want to regularly shut down PM -- due to the
>clearing of the Recent Mail Window. (My person soapbox that one, I know,
>but it's a substantial problem for me).
>
>I have considered simply preventing any receive or send operations (and
>not performing any other actions in PM) for the duration of a backup,
>but leaving PM running... but I'm nervous about doing so on account of
>the best-practice advice noted above.
>
>What do other list members think about this? Would I be likely to f**k
>up my database doing backups this way? (Backups are made to external
>drive using SuperDuper, btw).
>
>Thanks in advance;
>--
>G5 2GHz x2 :: 2GB RAM :: 10.4.9 :: PM 5.5.2 :: 3 pane mode
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Slow Address Book
>From: "Jim Pistrang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 06:42:26 -0400
>
>Hi Rick,
>
>>What do other list members think about this? Would I be likely to f**k
>>up my database doing backups this way? (Backups are made to external
>>drive using SuperDuper, btw).
>
>I also run SuperDuper, which backs up my drive in the middle of the
>night. I have had to restore my PM database on a few occasions, never
>with any problem. I do NOT have PM checking mail on a scheduled basis,
>so my database is not active during the backup (assuming that I am sleeping).
>
>Jim
>
>--
>Jim Pistrang
>JP Computer Resources
>Certified Member, Apple Consultants Network
>413-256-4569
><http://www.jpcr.com>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re(2): Powermail support (Was: Re: Exporting from PowerMail -
>all mail is Unread)
>From: "Winston Weinmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 10:14:31 -0400
>
>Mikael -
>
>I am not sure I fully understand your comments. If I did not support CTM
>I would not bother to give an opinion on features. I'd just go
>elsewhere. In particular, I have focussed on behavior which in any other
>software would be considered "beta" level. or worse. Having great
>features does not excuse having a basic action like printing not work as
>expected.
>
>>please support CTM by patiently ask for requests
>Have I been impatient? How do you define patience? Have my comments not
>been constructive?
>
>>engage in a dialog
>Dialog goes two ways (by definition). Has CTM responded to my observations?
>
>>try to be little understanding
>There is a difference between asking for major new features (which I
>have not done) and asking for a basic feature which does not work
>properly be fixed. The failing is not even mentioned in PowerMail's help
>or in CTM's online information. How hard would it be to note the problem
>in the documentation, along with the work-around?
>
>>one day CTM will have to make a move
>To fix defects or add features?
>
>>your point will not be made stronger by just repeating it now and then
>My experience has been that regular follow-up on anything you would like
>to see done makes it more likely to happen. This goes for plumbing work,
>car repair, getting shirts from the cleaners, writing computer software
>and pretty much any other area where one wants to see action sooner
>rather than later. Lack of follow-up often has the opposite result.
>(However since my original comments on HTML printing I have only
>mentioned HTML printing when it seemed appropriate. I have not started
>new discussions on the issue. It was relevant to this thread,)
>
>Also, new users join the discussion list from time to time. Should
>someone not warn about the HTML problem, given that CTM does not mention it?
>
>Commenting "now and then" on a major failing in software I use more
>often than any other seems entirely appropriate. I encourage others to
>do the same for features they would like to see improved or added.
>
>Thanks.
>
>- Winston
>
>
>Mikael Byström wrote:
>
>>Winston, please support CTM by patiently ask for requests and engage in
>>a dialog and try to be little understanding that while CTM are, unlike
>>many other companies developing email software, charging for it, they do
>>provide an alternative that have many features others do not. That gap
>>is closing, yes, and one day CTM will have to make a move, but the call
>>is theirs. That does not mean you shouldn't express your opinion in a
>>constructive manner, but please understand that your point will not be
>>made stronger by just repeating it now and then.
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Slow Address Book
>From: "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 09:41:21 -0500
>
>CTM clearly stated in the past to NOT have PM open when doing a backup
>and that this can leave you with a corrupted database. CAN, not
>necessarily does.
>
>A while back somebody was so kind to post a little script which will
>shut PM down and that you can have SuperDuper run as part of the daily
>backup before the real backup begins. Since I run this, I feel MUCH more
>comfortable that I can trust my backed up data and my backed-up PM
>databases will be integer when I need them.
>
>---marlyse
>
>
>------------ former message(s) quotes: -------------
>
>
>>Hi Rick,
>>
>>>What do other list members think about this? Would I be likely to f**k
>>>up my database doing backups this way? (Backups are made to external
>>>drive using SuperDuper, btw).
>>
>>I also run SuperDuper, which backs up my drive in the middle of the
>>night. I have had to restore my PM database on a few occasions, never
>>with any problem. I do NOT have PM checking mail on a scheduled basis,
>>so my database is not active during the backup (assuming that I am
sleeping).
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>--
>>Jim Pistrang
>>JP Computer Resources
>>Certified Member, Apple Consultants Network
>>413-256-4569
>><http://www.jpcr.com>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Slow Address Book
>From: "Jim Pistrang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:39:26 -0400
>
>Hi Marlyse,
>
>Actually, I also use a shutdown script. The person who initiated this
>message was reluctant to shut down PM because they didn't want to lose
>their Recent Mail Window. Guess it's a choice they'll have to make.
>
>Jim
>
>>CTM clearly stated in the past to NOT have PM open when doing a backup
>>and that this can leave you with a corrupted database. CAN, not
>>necessarily does.
>>
>>A while back somebody was so kind to post a little script which will
>>shut PM down and that you can have SuperDuper run as part of the daily
>>backup before the real backup begins. Since I run this, I feel MUCH more
>>comfortable that I can trust my backed up data and my backed-up PM
>>databases will be integer when I need them.
>
>--
>Jim Pistrang
>JP Computer Resources
>Certified Member, Apple Consultants Network
>413-256-4569
><http://www.jpcr.com>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Subject: Re: Slow Address Book
>From: "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 12:43:08 -0500
>
>Ah, I get it - had not paid attention to the full thread.
>
>I do understand the issue with the Recent Mail window.
>
>How I overcome this limitation is to shut down PM manually after reading
>my email for the last time on a day - mostly I remember now as I have
>gotten into the habit, but if not, the script does it's job.
>
>---marlyse
>
>
>------------ former message(s) quotes: -------------
>
>
>>Hi Marlyse,
>>
>>Actually, I also use a shutdown script. The person who initiated this
>>message was reluctant to shut down PM because they didn't want to lose
>>their Recent Mail Window. Guess it's a choice they'll have to make.
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>>CTM clearly stated in the past to NOT have PM open when doing a backup
>>>and that this can leave you with a corrupted database. CAN, not
>>>necessarily does.
>>>
>>>A while back somebody was so kind to post a little script which will
>>>shut PM down and that you can have SuperDuper run as part of the daily
>>>backup before the real backup begins. Since I run this, I feel MUCH more
>>>comfortable that I can trust my backed up data and my backed-up PM
>>>databases will be integer when I need them.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>End of powermail-discuss Digest
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: hotpop?
From: "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:30:54 +0200
Anyone have any of the free (or paid for) email POP accounts at hotpop.com?
Mikael
Tech facts:
PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of powermail-discuss Digest
