Re(2): Identifying the problems that 'smart' folders may solve part 1
[A-NO-NE Music <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 23.3.2006 um 9:19 Uhr:] >I >didn't feel it benefits my workflow so I never opened RMW again. So did I. -- http://www.subhash.at
Re: Identifying the problems that 'smart' folders may solve part 1
Mikael Byström / 2006/03/22 / 12:39 PM wrote: >One conclusion I made from the "RMW in the browser" discussion is that >the recent messages listing seem to be a vital part of how PowerMail >users interact with their email messages. At least for users being on >this list. >It's also true for me. Without it, I may have never have chosen PowerMail. Interesting. I never felt using that feature. When I tried it, I didn't feel it benefits my workflow so I never opened RMW again. -- - Hiro [PROTECTED] <[PROTECTED]> <[PROTECTED]>
Re: Script activation
Hi Nick, >Is there any way to add a key stroke to activate the "delete message >now" script? You can do this with the OSX Keyboard Shortcuts in System Preferences. Make a new Application Keyboard Shortcut for PowerMail, and in the Menu Title field enter two spaces and then the EXACT name of the script. I have the script in the Custom Scripts section of the menu. If it's in a different section you may need to experiment with a different number of spaces. Jim -- Jim Pistrang JP Computer Resources Certified Member, Apple Consultants Network 413-256-4569 http://users.crocker.com/~pistrang
IMAP doesn't update
I have one IMAP account, set to "check for new mail every 1 minute" but it *never* checks for mail it seems. The only way I can update my mail is to open the Background Process window and terminate the IMAP connection. Then I use the Connect command to re-establish the connection and then I finally get new mail as well. This seems rather stone age to me. Is PM really that bad in handling IMAP or have I done some mistakes in my settings? Max Gossell -- PowerMail 5.2.3 OSX v10.4.5 Dual G4 1.2 GHz / 1GB RAM
Re: IMAP
Barbara Needham said: >I don't. That's the drawback >But I don't have a huge list of contacts, either. So you just use the email button in the address window when you want to send a message to the specific contact? PM 5.2.3 Swedish | OS X 10.3.9 | Powerbook G4/400Mhz | 1GB RAM | 30GB HD
Re: Identifying the problems that 'smart' folders may solve part 1
Mikael Byström said: > It's "virtual" in the sense that the messages are actually stored (from >the user standpoint at least) in "concrete" folders, often in a well- >known folder structure created by the user him/herself. Should better have read: "It's "virtual" in the sense that the messages shown in the RMW are actually stored..." And the word "work" fell away here: >MAIL FILTERS >Filters are different because they typically at least >· *work* on concrete messages, ie on the messages themselves, rather than on a virtual representation PM 5.2.3 Swedish | OS X 10.3.9 | Powerbook G4/400Mhz | 1GB RAM | 30GB HD
Re: IMAP
Mikael Byström on 3/22/06 said >Barbara Needham said: > >>I don't like any of their address books. [I use Palm address book] >How do you sync, Barbara? I don't. That's the drawback But I don't have a huge list of contacts, either. -- Barbara Needham
Identifying the problems that 'smart' folders may solve part 1
Please, pretty please take part in this discussion! One conclusion I made from the "RMW in the browser" discussion is that the recent messages listing seem to be a vital part of how PowerMail users interact with their email messages. At least for users being on this list. It's also true for me. Without it, I may have never have chosen PowerMail. Another main reason for me is because I think PowerMail don't get into the way of my interaction with my email much. Behind that feat is that PowerMail has a simple yet powerful way to handle large amount of messages and that the interface generally is quite intuitive to move about in the email browser space. It's not without glitches and contradictions, however. I have been a vocal supporter in the past (already in 2003) of "smart" folders in the fashion to fuse saveable search criteria and the recent mail window. RECENT MAIL WINDOW My reasons, some of which was repeated in the "RMW in browser" discussion, is that the RMW is a useful feature of PowerMail and vital in daily message interaction, but that it does have some problems: 1. It's cumbersome or even impossible to affect exactly what ends up there as the settings are hardwired. The wishes of the user of what to put or not to put there may also be different from day to day. 2. Message listings are not retained between restarts.** 3. User must chose between, not removing messages, removing all read or removing all. 4. The Message listing is not scriptable. 5. __ **Back in 2003 Jérôme suggested that searching could replace the functionality of unretained messages between restarts. While this is true for simple setups, the search result for "date received" would also show all the messages that didn't end up in the RMW because the user set his filters to not include them, for whatever reason. I have several filters set that way because I only want the really important things in the RMW. It's not possible to repeat that effect with searches today. It's important to note that the RMW is different in concept and characteristics than the browser. · It's "virtual" in the sense that the messages are actually stored (from the user standpoint at least) in "concrete" folders, often in a well- known folder structure created by the user him/herself. · The recent mail window, to my knowledge, doesn't rely on Foxtrot(TM) technology, but filters affect what doesn't end up there. SEARCH RESULTS WINDOWS The Search Results Windows are also "virtual", but · they are based on Foxtrot(TM) technology and therefore... · rely on the search index. So results are typically somewhat different. The main problems of searches are: 1. They are limited on what is actually stored in the search index, i.e. "words" and not complete strings or parts of strings, sometimes making it hard to or even impossible to be sure you have found all the messages you want. Typically this means search results are broader than intended. This is not always a big problem, but it can be. 2. The Search dialog doesn't completely reflect the nature of the indexed searches, sometimes leading the user to expect results that are not possible to achieve. 3. The searches are not saveable, making it cumbersome to repeat a set of searches on a daily basis. 4. __ 2 MORE TECHNOLOGIES We also have 2 more technologies at our disposal: · The "view all", "view unread" or "view drafts" setting, which most often does exactly what is says. Sometime the current setting is not reflected so well in the interface. · The "Show only" filter in the browser, which work also on parts of a word or string, but only in the folder where the filtering string of characters was entered. As of today there are few bugs at play too, but that's beyond the scope here. MAIL FILTERS Filters are different because they typically at least · on concrete messages, ie on the messages themselves, rather than on a virtual representation (The exception being affecting what is not in the RMW) The main email filter problems are: 1. The list can over time become quite unwieldy to manage. 2. It's hard to always remember exactly what a filter does and why, 3, It's even more hard to know what to expect how it will work on actual messages (that may or may not contain what you expect). So setting up effective filters is not always a piece of cake. 4. You have to look at and analyze headers in order to get full effectiveness. Something not all know enough of to do easily. 5. ___ DOES SMART FOLDERS SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS? So, if the above mentioned problems are indeed problems to deal with, do 'smart' folders solve them? Well, if we're talking about 'virtual' smart folders that seek to fuse RMW with searches I think that 2 and 3 of Recent Mail Window problems may be fully solved. 1 and 4 could be solved, but needs more than just 'smart' folders. The Searches problems 2 and 3 may be fully solved, given the interface of setting up and saing searches is also improved to give realistic user expectatio
Re: Solving filter list management problem (was "RMW in browser")
I do the same thing -- 'dummy' filters that act as dividers. Folders would be preferable, of course, as they would, when collapsed, actually shorten the filter list considerably, whereas our current workaround lengthens it. From my own point of view, the filter organisation issue is a completely different discussion/wish to the smart folders thing (although I acknowledge that there is some tangential* overlap, as Marlyse pointed out). Rick *Tangential to me, possibly not to others. -- G5 2GHz x2 :: 2GB RAM :: 10.4.5 :: PM 5.2.3 :: 3 pane mode Shark Attack: A Design Studio -- Original message: Received from Mikael Byström on 22/3/06 at 14:16 >Currently as my solution to this problem I mark up the list with inactive >filters in a fashion to become headlines and organize the relevant >filters under these.
Re: "Find" & "Copy" broke when viewing HTML messages?
I have do some mods; but I don't have any haxies per se.. One of the machines tested, other than additional screensavers & fonts, is almost a default install. On Wednesday, March 22, 2006, at 08:46 AM, Mikael Byström wrote: > Justin Beek said: > >> PowerMail version: PowerMail version 5.2.3 build 4406 English >> Mac OS version: 10.2.8 >> >> I have re-downloaded and re-installed the app twice now. >> >> Justin >> > You have any haxies or other system modifications made? I've had > problems with these in the past. > > > PM 5.2.3 Swedish | OS X 10.3.9 | Powerbook G4/400Mhz | 1GB RAM | 30GB > HD > > > > >
Re: "Find" & "Copy" broke when viewing HTML messages?
Justin Beek said: >PowerMail version: PowerMail version 5.2.3 build 4406 English >Mac OS version: 10.2.8 > >I have re-downloaded and re-installed the app twice now. > >Justin > You have any haxies or other system modifications made? I've had problems with these in the past. PM 5.2.3 Swedish | OS X 10.3.9 | Powerbook G4/400Mhz | 1GB RAM | 30GB HD
