powermail-discuss Digest #2839 - Thursday, June 12, 2008
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Ira Lansing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Richard Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: typing speed (was: Importing from Entourage 2004?)
by "Barbara Needham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "cheshirekat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
by "Jefferis Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Jeremy Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
by "Graham B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
by "Barbara Needham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Peter Baral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Bill Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Tim Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Bill Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Jim Pistrang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re(2): Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Raphaël PAREJO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Peter Baral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Don Zahniser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
by "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Dave N" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: Review of Power Mail
by "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Ira Lansing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:15:44 -0700
>
>Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
>From: "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:12:21 -0500
>
>yeah, I have left my opinion already there a while ago - under the
>comments as "mStudios" - it is a lopsided and not very well informed
>review, which is too bad.
>
>---marlyse
I too read the review and was disappointed with it, BUT it should serve
as a wake up call to CTM Developers. All of us who actually use
PowerMail know how good it is--even if the interface is old fashioned
and you have to use SpamSieve (or some other product) for effective spam
filtering (criticisms in the article). We know it can do things the way
we want them to be done (most of the time!), not the way the developer
wants it to be done.
I don't know how software companies survive in today's market, but I
imagine it requires NEW users, not just a static, satisfied user base.
A review like the one in MacWorld does not generate new users.
--Ira
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:22:32 -0500
Unfortunately you are absolutely correct Ira with your points - maybe
more so a reason why I thought it important to leave my comment, because
a lopsided review ALWAYS hurts a company, but especially in such a situation.
---marlyse
------------ former message(s) quotes: -------------
>>
>>Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
>>From: "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 18:12:21 -0500
>>
>>yeah, I have left my opinion already there a while ago - under the
>>comments as "mStudios" - it is a lopsided and not very well informed
>>review, which is too bad.
>>
>>---marlyse
>
>I too read the review and was disappointed with it, BUT it should serve
>as a wake up call to CTM Developers. All of us who actually use
>PowerMail know how good it is--even if the interface is old fashioned
>and you have to use SpamSieve (or some other product) for effective spam
>filtering (criticisms in the article). We know it can do things the way
>we want them to be done (most of the time!), not the way the developer
>wants it to be done.
>
>I don't know how software companies survive in today's market, but I
>imagine it requires NEW users, not just a static, satisfied user base.
>A review like the one in MacWorld does not generate new users.
>
>--Ira
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Richard Hart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 14:53:36 -0700
Well, all of the comments left below the MacWorld "review" got their
attention.
The publication has posted (and mailed to commentors) as special response.
Very defensive. And unusual.
Richard Hart
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Marlyse Comte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 17:03:17 -0500
I just saw that and thought the same.
Of course I do understand that they "have to" stand behind their review
- on the other hand, I guess they did get a bit embarrassed to see ONLY
comments of opposite viewpoint and none of their own... hopefully it
makes them realize that maybe, just maybe, their reviewer didn't do the
best job this time around.
---marlyse
------------ former message(s) quotes: -------------
>Well, all of the comments left below the MacWorld "review" got their
>attention.
>The publication has posted (and mailed to commentors) as special response.
>Very defensive. And unusual.
>
>Richard Hart
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: typing speed (was: Importing from Entourage 2004?)
From: "Barbara Needham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:41:19 -0700
Jefferis Peterson on 6/10/08 said
>However, there is a very noticeable delay when typing in a new email while
>PM is downloading new email. That doesn't happen in Entourage...
Yes, there is. I usually just wait.
--
Barbara Needham
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "cheshirekat" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:00:28 -0600
Well, I learned a long time ago that MacWorld reviews are worthless.
It's not a place I consider when I'm looking for reviews. However,
PowerMail is a solid program and the review did not give it justice -
even worse, the rating was way off the mark and an insult. That low of a
rating gives the impression that people using PowerMail will be pulling
their hair out with frustration. We all know that isn't so.
I responded to the review a little while ago. I hope that those reading
that many people disagree with the review might not take MacWorld
reviews so seriously and give PowerMail a hands-on review themselves. I
sure don't see their reviews as anything but noise. I don't even read
their reviews unless something specific is brought to my attention.
Maybe the noise will work in PowerMail's favor as it buries the useless
review.
On Wed, Jun 11, 20085:03 PM, the following words from Marlyse Comte
[EMAIL PROTECTED], emerged from a plethora of SPAM ...
>I just saw that and thought the same.
>
>Of course I do understand that they "have to" stand behind their review
>- on the other hand, I guess they did get a bit embarrassed to see ONLY
>comments of opposite viewpoint and none of their own... hopefully it
>makes them realize that maybe, just maybe, their reviewer didn't do the
>best job this time around.
>
>
>---marlyse
>
>
>------------ former message(s) quotes: -------------
>
>
>>Well, all of the comments left below the MacWorld "review" got their
>>attention.
>>The publication has posted (and mailed to commentors) as special response.
>>Very defensive. And unusual.
>>
>>Richard Hart
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
"Let us be grateful to people who make us happy; they are the charming
gardeners who make our souls blossom." -Marcel Proust
* Mac Pro 2 GHz Quad Xeon * OS X 10.4.10 * 5 GB RAM *
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
From: "Jefferis Peterson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 07:24:59 -0400
Any suggestions? No reply means no solutions?
>
> what are the best replacements for Entourage's NewsGroup reader? I like
> being able to have newsgroup access inside my mail program. But PM doesn't
> offer that...
>
> I tried using the Emailchemy converter program recommended on CTV for my
> Entourage Database rge and for other files, but the demo wasn't able to make
> the conversion. I tried exporting to .eml but PM won't import them into
> folders as they are now. I can drag and drop every box I have, but I found
> that sub folder .mbox don't import with the parent folder. So it is a bit of
> a hassle.
>
> And I guess there is no way to export and import mail rules from Entourage?
> that would save a lot of time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jefferis Peterson, Pres.
Web Design and Marketing
http://www.PetersonSales.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Jeremy Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:36:52 +0100
Dave N (10/6/08, 23:22) said:
>Review of PowerMail in new July 2008 MacWorld magazine
>
>And PowerMail didn't do well. It got only 2.5 Mice out of 5
My main problem with PowerMail is that it uses a monolithic database
format that can't be larger than 2 GB. Currently, I have to compact the
database at least once a week to avoid corruption :(
I don't know if any of its competitors have this problem - Apple Mail
certainly doesn't.
Apart from the inconvenience of having to compact the database regularly
(it takes about 30 minutes to do this on my 2GHz iMac), another problem
with the monolithic file format is that incremental backups (Retrospect,
Time Machine, whatever) have to back up the entire database each time it
changes. With Apple Mail, all that gets backed up are the changed mailboxes.
This wasn't mentioned in the review. If it had been, I think it would
have justified a 2-mouse rating.
If CTM can fix this problem, I would be happy to continue using and
recommending PowerMail over other clients. Searching and filtering are
much better than Apple Mail. PowerMail is great at handling a large
email corpus (I have over 300,000 emails) - so long as you don't get
anywhere near the 2 GB limit.
I haven't contributed to the discussion on the MacWorld web page,
because I'm hopeful that CTM will reconsider their previous decision to
leave this problem unfixed, and I don't want to leave negative comments
in a public forum. PowerMail has other weaknesses, besides those
mentioned in the review, but the 2 GB limit is its most serious weakness
for me personally.
Jeremy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
From: "Graham B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:39:12 +1000
I like Vienna
<http://www.vienna-rss.org/vienna2.php>
Straightforward, open source, and easy to use.
Graham
>Any suggestions? No reply means no solutions?
>
>>
>> what are the best replacements for Entourage's NewsGroup reader? I like
>> being able to have newsgroup access inside my mail program. But PM doesn't
>> offer that...
>>
>> I tried using the Emailchemy converter program recommended on CTV for my
>> Entourage Database rge and for other files, but the demo wasn't able
to make
>> the conversion. I tried exporting to .eml but PM won't import them into
>> folders as they are now. I can drag and drop every box I have, but I found
>> that sub folder .mbox don't import with the parent folder. So it is a
bit of
>> a hassle.
>>
>> And I guess there is no way to export and import mail rules from Entourage?
>> that would save a lot of time.
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Jefferis Peterson, Pres.
>Web Design and Marketing
>http://www.PetersonSales.com
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
From: "Barbara Needham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 05:47:21 -0700
Jefferis Peterson on 6/12/08 said
>Any suggestions? No reply means no solutions?
>
>>
>> what are the best replacements for Entourage's NewsGroup reader? I like
>> being able to have newsgroup access inside my mail program. But PM doesn't
>> offer that...
>>
>> I tried using the Emailchemy converter program recommended on CTV for my
>> Entourage Database rge and for other files, but the demo wasn't able
to make
>> the conversion. I tried exporting to .eml but PM won't import them into
>> folders as they are now. I can drag and drop every box I have, but I found
>> that sub folder .mbox don't import with the parent folder. So it is a
bit of
>> a hassle.
>>
>> And I guess there is no way to export and import mail rules from Entourage?
>> that would save a lot of time.
I don't know the answers to most of your questions.
If you can export from Entourage to an Apple OS X Mail format then PM
can import it. Or some other intermediate one.
This is the answer I do know, IF you want text only:
MacSoup is my newsreader of choice.
--
Barbara Needham
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Peter Baral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:52:16 +0200
I can second Jeremy's opinion. The monolithic database together with
the 2 GB limit made me switch to Apple Mail about a year ago. Better
rich-text integration and support for new OS technologies and better
IMAP support have been the other reasons. Apple Mail's support for
iCal event scheduling und To-Do lists, while far away from prefect,
let's me use my mail client as sort of a PIM.
But, nevertheless, I sympathize very much with PowerMail and CTM dev
and I hope that version 6 will be a big jump towards a modern and
robust Mail client.
Peter
Am 12.06.2008 um 13:36 schrieb Jeremy Hughes:
> ... PowerMail has other weaknesses, besides those
> mentioned in the review, but the 2 GB limit is its most serious
> weakness
> for me personally.
>
> Jeremy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Bill Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 09:32:57 -0400
Sorry to say, I also switched from PowerMail to Thunderbird last year,
because of the lack of support in PowerMail for imap (slow and
crash-prone) and html (extra keystrokes to read an ever-increasing
amount of mail). Thunderbird also seems to respond more promptly to
Applescript shortcuts, but that could be a subjective judgment.
BILL.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Tim Hodgson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 14:52:47 +0100
On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:32 pm -0400, Bill Lane wrote:
>Sorry to say, I also switched from PowerMail to Thunderbird last year,
I don't think I've come across a mailing list before where so many of
its members are no longer using the app under discussion. Should CTM be
disheartened by the loss of users or encouraged by their lingering
interest? :-)
--
TimH
PowerMail 5.6.2 (build 4501) | OS X 10.4.11 | PowerBook G4/1.25GHz | 2 GB RAM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Bill Lane" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:24:10 -0400
My wife still uses PowerMail, which is my reasonable excuse. But I must
confess, I'm also fascinated by the fierce loyalty of the listmembers,
and curious to see whether this developer can turn things around...
BILL.
Tim Hodgson wrote:
> I don't think I've come across a mailing list before where so many of
> its members are no longer using the app under discussion. Should CTM be
> disheartened by the loss of users or encouraged by their lingering
> interest? :-)
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Jim Pistrang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:54:13 -0400
Hi Tim,
>I don't think I've come across a mailing list before where so many of
>its members are no longer using the app under discussion. Should CTM be
>disheartened by the loss of users or encouraged by their lingering
>interest? :-)
I would think (& hope) encouraged. I think that many of the former
users left reluctantly due to a missing feature or capability. CTM
can't do everything for everybody, but hopefully they're addressing the
critical needs. (Note to CTM - it would be nice to know what's on the list)
Jim
--
Jim Pistrang
JP Computer Resources
Certified Member, Apple Consultants Network
413-256-4569
<http://www.jpcr.com>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 16:12:42 +0100
On 12/6/08 Peter Baral wrote:
>..........made me switch to Apple Mail about a year ago.....
Out of curiosity, how did you get your PM mail into Apple Mail?
cheers,
Chris
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re(2): Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Raphaël PAREJO" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:40:10 +0200
I Hope the same, many features of PowerMail seems now obsolete, except
for the exceptional robust database.
--
Raphaël Parejo
An old user...
>I can second Jeremy's opinion. The monolithic database together with
>the 2 GB limit made me switch to Apple Mail about a year ago. Better
>rich-text integration and support for new OS technologies and better
>IMAP support have been the other reasons. Apple Mail's support for
>iCal event scheduling und To-Do lists, while far away from prefect,
>let's me use my mail client as sort of a PIM.
>
>But, nevertheless, I sympathize very much with PowerMail and CTM dev
>and I hope that version 6 will be a big jump towards a modern and
>robust Mail client.
>
>Peter
>
>Am 12.06.2008 um 13:36 schrieb Jeremy Hughes:
>
>> ... PowerMail has other weaknesses, besides those
>> mentioned in the review, but the 2 GB limit is its most serious
>> weakness
>> for me personally.
>>
>> Jeremy
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Peter Baral" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:49:25 +0200
That's what I did (IIRC):
- drag-and-drop of all mail folders to the Mac desktop (format: Mac OS
X Mail). This results in mbox files on the desktop
- imported into Mail using Mail's Import command.
Peter
Am 12.06.2008 um 17:12 schrieb Chris:
> On 12/6/08 Peter Baral wrote:
>
>> ..........made me switch to Apple Mail about a year ago.....
>
> Out of curiosity, how did you get your PM mail into Apple Mail?
>
> cheers,
>
> Chris
>
>
>
>
--
Peter Baral Medienwerkstatt Muehlacker
Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.
+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: <http://www.medienwerkstatt-online.de>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 17:16:17 +0100
Well if it's any consolation, I am extremely happy with Powermail - been
using it for years (Claris Emailer before that) and I find it is stable,
does exactly what I need from an email application, without any
distractions and fancy footwork, and the spam filter is second to none.
Rock on Powermail! :)
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com
_____________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Don Zahniser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:48:43 -0400
On Jun 12, 2008, at 9:52 AM, Tim Hodgson wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:32 pm -0400, Bill Lane wrote:
>
>> Sorry to say, I also switched from PowerMail to Thunderbird last
>> year,
>
> I don't think I've come across a mailing list before where so many of
> its members are no longer using the app under discussion. Should
> CTM be
> disheartened by the loss of users or encouraged by their lingering
> interest? :-)
>
Right now I am using Apple Mail in preference to PowerMail, but I do
keep the latter installed. The main thing that drove me out of
PowerMail was the inflexible (to me) message access options. I like
to keep an empty Inbox, and also like to have my messages filed in
ways that make sense to me. It is also very important to me to be
able to flag messages as needing action. I _don't_ want to have to
constantly refile messages in and out of a 'todo' mailbox. Apple
Mail's Flag function with a smart folder serves me admirably. With
PowerMail, I can label messages and then Search them, but it is
clunky, awkward and too many steps. If I could save 'Search'
criteria for instant access (instead of having to re-input), or if
the Search function were scriptable, allowing me to save searches as
Applescripts, I would probably go right back to PowerMail.
I did try Thunderbird, and found that (at least on my hardware) the
interface felt unfinished and inconsistent (e.g. - why should I have
to double-click a 'reveal triangle' when the folder is highlighted,
but only single-click when it is not?). I was also very frustrated by
the lack of Services.
I don't care about the idea of PowerMail's interface being 'old-
fashioned', if I understood the criticism correctly. I moved to
PowerMail from Claris Emailer (which my wife still uses on her Quadra
650), and still like the way it is laid out.
At worst, we'll continue to use PowerMail here, when I manage to drag
Lady Technophobe kicking and screaming from System 7 to OS X. Her
video card appears to be giving out, and I have a nice G3 iMac
waiting for her. :^)
- Don
Don Zahniser
PowerBook G3 (Pismo), 768 MB RAM, OS X 10.4.11
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
From: "Chris" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 18:02:49 +0100
On 12/6/08 Peter Baral wrote:
>- drag-and-drop of all mail folders to the Mac desktop (format: Mac OS
>X Mail). This results in mbox files on the desktop.....
Thanks Peter, I didn't realise that you could create mbox files that way.
Chris
>Am 12.06.2008 um 17:12 schrieb Chris:
>
>> On 12/6/08 Peter Baral wrote:
>>
>>> ..........made me switch to Apple Mail about a year ago.....
>>
>> Out of curiosity, how did you get your PM mail into Apple Mail?
>>
>> cheers,
>>
>> Chris
>>
>--
> Peter Baral Medienwerkstatt Muehlacker
> Verlagsgesellschaft m.b.H.
> +---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
> E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Web: <http://www.medienwerkstatt-online.de>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Dave N" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 10:22:15 -0700
Well the Claris Emailer Talk list is/was like that too! :-)
What does that mean?!
Dave N
in reply to ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), Tim Hodgson's message of 6:52 AM, 6/12/08
>I don't think I've come across a mailing list before where so many of
>its members are no longer using the app under discussion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:47:46 -0500
Bill Lane sez:
>Sorry to say, I also switched from PowerMail to Thunderbird last year,
>because of the lack of support in PowerMail for imap (slow and
>crash-prone) and html (extra keystrokes to read an ever-increasing
>amount of mail).
Oddly enough major selling points to me for Powermail were that it did
do IMAP and did not do HTML. I've had a lot less call for IMAP in the
last couple of years due to it being less of an option by providers
(Apple and some corporate nets use it; a few others). But I still have
little use for HTML mail since 99% of it is spam for me.
I haven't reached the 2GB limitation, but I can see where that can be a
problem for some folks and find that to be much more of an issue than
IMAP and HTML -- specifically HTML.
I haven't left any messages at MacWorld because I'm not registered there
and don't want to. I've got enough registrations to worry about. I've
reached my personal 2GB limit on what I want to register to read or post
to. If I can use BugMeNot.Com to read and sometimes post, I do that.
--
Michael Lewis
Off Balance Productions
240-271-9889
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.offbalance.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail
From: "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 12:51:15 -0500
Dave N sez:
>What does that mean?!
It means that no email client can be all things to all people. There
will always be some things a client won't do for some people, and all
those things might be different, and trying to implement them all could
drive a developer out of business or insane or both.
--
Michael Lewis
Off Balance Productions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.offbalance.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of powermail-discuss Digest
