Re: Poll: Is 154/49 an RC?
Hello Dwight, I don't think TB should be released with a faulty import tool. You may be right, but to me the import tool is just something a few people might use once, and even fewer might use regularly, while there You are right. And if these people that use TB! for the first time cannot import their mails properly they will be disappointed about TB! and may never try it again. Therefore I regard a simple-to-use and solid-rock import tool as a must have for every release of TB!. -- Regards, Daniel http://www.daniel-friedmann.de The Bat! 1.54 Beta/49, Windows 2000 Professional, Service Pack 2 -- _ Archives : http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wish List : https://bt.ritlabs.com/ BugTraq: https://bt.ritlabs.com/
Re[2]: Poll: Is 154/49 an RC?
Greetings Joseph, I normally stay pretty quiet on this list, but I thought I'd come out of LURK mode, and address your comments. I feel that 1.54 is the next obvious step. There are still quite a few 1.53 and prior release bugs floating around, some of which make regular contributors to this list practically foam at the mouth when each new beta or release comes out and they aren't fixed. In order for this to be a 2.0 release, IMHO the outstanding major and a vast majority of the minor bugs should be fixed. Having said that, and hoping to address the subject question, I think 1.49 should definitely be an RC. In my somewhat eclectic reading of the list, a lot of the problems recently discussed seem somewhat esoteric, and I think given the improvements in the RTV and a few other features, that now is the time to distribute the whole program in a installable executable. (Just my .02 everyone...) As to your complex point on where The Bat! is targeted, I think you are absolutely correct in your thought that it is really only in use (for the most part) by a dedicated and somewhat vocal group of people who not only enjoy its' vast capabilities and virtual immunity to the plague of MS engendered Macro viruses, but actually LIKE its' somewhat dated interface appearance, its' often confusing menu options, and its' immensely capable but often hard to use Filtering system. Having said all that, I THINK RITLabs target market are the huge number of OE users out there, and they not only want, but expect a handholding experience coupled with a swank and sexy interface. Unfortunately The Bat! has a slightly dated look. As well, the menu structure is often (as mentioned early) complex, and slightly counterintuitive. In order to go to 2.0, I think these will have to be addressed. Personally, I think it looks fine, I just wish (like many others) that the menus were rationalized and simplified, after all of these months of development and feature additions. Anyway, I've rambled enough...back to LURK mode for me... Regards, Scott... Forget Outlook Express, I use The Bat! 1.54 Beta/49 Supported by: An Abit KT7-RAID with a Thunderbird 900, and 512Megs of RAM. Burdened by: Windows ME (V 4.90.3000) -| The fact that there are some serious bugs remaining, e.g., HTML -| rendering and import operations, and the sense among some (not -| personally shared here btw) that the program needs a facelift, raise -| this in my mind: not whether B49 is a release candidate, but what -| type of release candidate is it? From 1.53 to 1.54 seems too small an -| increase, but it doesn't yet seem like a ver. 2.0. The reason I raise -| this at all, which is not a Beta testing issue but a corporate -| marketing issue, is that I think the new release of TB! should be well -| tailored to the role that RITlabs wants the program to play in the -| world. If it should continue to be a well designed program for -| general use by a small group, which is what it is now, then perhaps -| neither a face lift nor any particular numbering scheme matter. If, -| on the other hand, its release is going to be part of a major -| marketing push, then version numbers matter. Facelift, too, I guess, -| but I still don't see what's wrong with the current appearance; I'd -| say it's more important for widespread acceptance to have the menu -| redesigned than the graphics. All of which brings it full circle: -| perhaps it is now or soon will be ready to go as an officially -| released 1.6, with the hopes that RITlabls has an interlocked -| development and marketing plan for 2.0. -| JN -| Dierk Haasis wrote on Saturday, March 16, 2002: Hello Avi! On Saturday, March 16, 2002 at 2:33:02 PM you wrote: Since TB Beta 39, I have not been able to use the Import Messages tool to import messages from Outlook Express 6. No matter how many major problems get solved, I don't think TB should be released with a faulty import tool. I take this as the starting point of my poll. Maybe we can collect the persistent bugs that counter my idea of 154/49 being a release candidate. For me, I still do find some bugs not being fixed. Most of them are merely cosmetic, elusive or special (that is, found in circumstances usually only encountered by power users). Even my pet bugs from the CC fall in these categories. Avi's bug is definitely more serious as it would affect new users but not old timers like me. I know that Thomas F. once had a list of bugs found in the CC. Let's make something else here. --
Re: Poll: Is 154/49 an RC?
Hello Joseph! On Saturday, March 16, 2002 at 5:54:29 PM you wrote: The fact that there are some serious bugs remaining, e.g., HTML rendering and import operations, and the sense among some (not personally shared here btw) that the program needs a facelift, Import issues I see the same as you. Only, I haven't ever used it, so didn't actually know of it. Facelift is definitely needed, but not a serious issue. Serious and Grave for me means making the programme unusable - at least for newbies - in its core capability as an MUA. HTML rendering lacks a bit, but I don't count that as an issue for two reasons: 1. Some of the bugs are only missing features - and those I can gladly live without (GET images). It's more a design decision based upon ones philosophy. 2. If I have a badly rendered HTML message - regardless whose fault it is - I just open the HTML attachment in my browser. raise this in my mind: not whether B49 is a release candidate, but what type of release candidate is it? From 1.53 to 1.54 seems too small an increase, but it doesn't yet seem like a ver. 2.0. Correct. I don't think 154/49 should be published as the pimpernelian v2. due to the many new features and some major overhaul of source code it would deserve a 1.7 or even 1.9 - closing up upon Agent. Although I more than once in the past openly voiced my negative opinion upon us discussing marketing issues, I think it is high time to do that. The reasons are simple, this list was the reason 1.54 wasn't released before Christmas. And the points you raise in your message are valid but need some customers input. From all those negative reviews lately having been around, which all state no development for a lot of time, I think a small boost for RITLabs would be in order. And isn't it us knowing what is needed? As long as we don't lose ourselves in details that may be unimportant for the big picture. -- Dierk Haasis http://www.Write4U.de http://Interest.Write4U.de/pongo PGP keys available: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=SendMyPGPkeys The Bat 1.54 Beta/49 on Windows 95 4.0 1212 C Arbeit um der Arbeit willen ist gegen die Natur. (John Locke) -- _ Archives : http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wish List : https://bt.ritlabs.com/ BugTraq: https://bt.ritlabs.com/
Re: Poll: Is 154/49 an RC?
Hello Dierk, Saturday, March 16, 2002, 5:55:40 PM, you wrote: DH I take this as the starting point of my poll. Maybe we can collect the DH persistent bugs that counter my idea of 154/49 being a release DH candidate. The overlapping of text when using RTV!!! Pick a long message and read it using space to scroll it. With PTV the last line of text in view will be the first line in view when you hit space. But RTV is trying to do something different. After hitting space you don't get the last line being the first, no. You get the *next* line. OK, sort of, if you trust the programme doesn't skip any lines. I don't, so I'd really like to see the PTV behaviour in RTV too. But the worst thing is that on a lengthy message you're bound to bump in a situation where you see only the upper half of a line on the bottom of the window and when you hit the space you see the lower half of that same line on the top of the window! Arrgghhh!! -- Best regards, Pete The Bat! 1.54 Beta/49, Win98SE, 300 MHz/32 Mb -- _ Archives : http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wish List : https://bt.ritlabs.com/ BugTraq: https://bt.ritlabs.com/
Re: Poll: Is 154/49 an RC?
Hello Dierk Haasis, On Saturday, March 16 2002 at 09:40 AM PDT, you wrote: Facelift is definitely needed, but not a serious issue. Serious and Grave for me means making the programme unusable - at least for newbies - in its core capability as an MUA. That is the 'very' reason to push for a much needed facelift... together with customisable Toolbars. When a 'Newbie' arrives on the scene you can be reasonably sure that their frustration level will rise in direct proportion to TB's learning curve. TB's 'core capability' is beginning to become hidden amongst it's many esoteric features, as Scott has already alluded to. It is then that we need to keep their attention directed at TB by presenting a sharp looking interface with the ability to customise the Toolbar to their particular needs so that the New User has immediate access to this 'core usability' you refer to, but on their terms. Long time power Users have to be careful not to be too dismissive about 'eye candy'. In my view, a crisp looking interface with customisation to take advantage of TB's already overwhelming feature list will equate to more sales. -- Nick Andriash Courtenay, B.C. Canada -- _ Archives : http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wish List : https://bt.ritlabs.com/ BugTraq: https://bt.ritlabs.com/
Re: Poll: Is 154/49 an RC?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 16 Mar 2002 20:04:32 +0200, Pete [P] wrote these comments: ... P Pick a long message and read it using space to scroll it. P With PTV the last line of text in view will be the first line in view P when you hit space. I know exactly what you're talking about here. With the plain text viewer, reading with the scrollbar is something one can easily become accustomed to and quite adept at since it does the same thing *everytime* you hit the space bar. You expect everytime for you to be scrolled so that the last line at the bottom of the previous page becomes the first line of the next. Your eyes therefore dart to the top of the screen to continue reading the next page. You know exactly where to continue reading. However, some people get irrationally rabid when scrolling is allowed to occur beyond the end of the message. Users as these managed to convince the MicroPlanet Gravity developers to block scrolling beyond the end of a message. What this created was a serious problem. You never really knew for sure where the next spacebar scroll would take you. If the next page consisted of only three lines of text, the space bar would only scroll you three lines down. If there are only ten lines left, you are scrolled ten lines downwards. You therefore have to just look for where to continue reading each time you hit the scroll-bar. You cannot develop a learned behaviour of quickly moving your eyes to the top of the screen each time you hit the scroll-bar. The Gravity developers said they understood what I was saying and agreed but they made the change because of user demand and were reluctant to change it back. That was that I have since used Agent instead, which space bar scrolls the correct way. P But RTV is trying to do something different. Indeed it does. This is why I've abandoned space bar scrolling when using the RTV. I just scroll. P After hitting space you don't get the last line being the first, P no. You get the *next* line. You actually get exactly one page. If only the top half of a line of text is visible at the bottom of the page, it's the lower of the same line of text that is at the top of the next page. P OK, sort of, if you trust the programme doesn't skip any lines. I P don't, so I'd really like to see the PTV behaviour in RTV too. It's uneasy not being able to read the last line of the last page. Even the last 2 lines, but some of the last page should be displayed and in a predictable fashion. However, I can sympathise to some extent since it's a RTV which means that it can display text with different font sizes and types. It's therefore very difficult if not impossible to make the scroll-bar scrolling as exact as it is with the fixed width viewer that is designed to use only one font type at a time. My heart is with the fixed width viewer for this reason. It's definitely a give and take thing. P But the worst thing is that on a lengthy message you're bound to bump P in a situation where you see only the upper half of a line on the P bottom of the window and when you hit the space you see the lower P half of that same line on the top of the window! Arrgghhh!! I feel your pain. I think you have to stick with the plain text viewer if you can't give up using the scroll-bar for reading. - -- | Allie Martin - Moderator ox|--- | TB! v1.54 Beta/49 Windows XP 5.1.2600 PGPKey - mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ¯¯ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAjyTkYQACgkQV8nrYCsHF+JCaQCbBJCGpBtoMA/VrlYS+3tDsNGf QYYAoMtUOs2OaPyQ1OJBzNDvJh+y4bAl =8l+2 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- _ Archives : http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Wish List : https://bt.ritlabs.com/ BugTraq: https://bt.ritlabs.com/
