Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
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
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
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
Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
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
Re: Importing from Entourage 2004?
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
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
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
Re: Review of Power Mail
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.
Re: Review of Power Mail
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
Re: Review of Power Mail
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? :-)
Re: Review of Power Mail
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
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
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
Re(2): Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
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
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
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
Re: Review of Power Mail
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 _
Re: Review of Power Mail
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
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
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
Re: Review of Power Mail
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.
Re: Review of Power Mail
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
Re: Review of Power Mail
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
powermail-discuss Digest #2839 - 06/12/08
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
Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine
Jeremy Hughes said: 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. I'm not sure that this is always so. I've been using QRecall http:// www.qrecall.com/ for some time now and haven't noticed this difficulty. -- Charles
What does it mean
Well the Claris Emailer Talk list is/was like that too! :-) What does that mean?! Dave N It also means that the last e-mail client used by many BEFORE PowerMail was Claris E-mailer. There are a lot of interface similarities and it was an easy transition. It also means there is fierce product loyalty. And as previously pointed out, it means no one product can be all things to all people. --Ira
Re: Review of Power Mail
On Thu, Jun 12, 200812:48 PM, the following words from Don Zahniser [EMAIL PROTECTED], emerged from a plethora of SPAM ... 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 I keep my Inbox empty with filters. The very last filter is: Condition- always Action- move message into folder Mail trash Because I assume that anything that wasn't caught by other filters is probably spam. There are some messages that end up in the trash that are legit. But it is such a low priority for me to read it that I don't assign a filter to put it elsewhere. If I put it in a folder, the folder would fill up very quickly. This way, if I don't have time or don't care to read the latest message from the unimportant source, it gets deleted when I delete the trash. Usually for people that don't seem to know how to communicate so all I get from them is forwarded jokes, virus warnings, scam alerts, etc. on a daily basis, sometimes several times a day. Also where messages from people on temporary watch go since they just recently got my email address and I consider all attachments suspect until I deem them safe enough to create a filter. I have dozens of folders, so there's really no need for flags and such. The folder name lets me know what the status is. You can do this by adding characters or words to the beginning or end of the folder's name. Simple words like IP for in progress. When the status changes, I move it to the same folder name without the IP. I know that different methods work well for some, not so well for others. This works for me. -- 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 *
Re: Review of Power Mail
I have dozens of folders, so there's really no need for flags and such. The folder name lets me know what the status is. You can do this by adding characters or words to the beginning or end of the folder's name. Simple words like IP for in progress. When the status changes, I move it to the same folder name without the IP. I know that different methods work well for some, not so well for others. This works for me. I guess the new up to date way is to archive all your old e-mail in one archive folder [empty in-box theory-- article in this months MacWorld]. I don't like it, I like the folder method such as you have. I'd like to have saved searches in Power Mail otherwise I'm happy with it. MacWorld doesn't like my other favorite programs either [Moneydance and Readerware, both Java and cross-platform]. I finally quite my MUG because they never liked my ideas of software. -- Barbara Needham
