Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS
Goncalo, I disagree with you on this. I was a Ak-mail user and never had problems with it. I just switch from it to TB! because development was kind of dead and the English version isn't updated anymore. People here using Mulberry seem to be very happy. You may get their testimonial here. I'm willing to give it a try. It's always good to have a backup client. Yes, I have it too. As I mentioned a couple of days ago, if you change the column headings in the message index, especially if you add some, Mulberry becomes nearly unusable. This is especially true with the IMAP inbox. This behavior does not appear on my laptop, however. Yes, I would agree that TB was released too early, so was Eudora, and Pocomail, and Mulberry, and Pegausus. Actually, I find Becky to be a better replacement for TB than Mulberry, and I think it is close to not being released too early. But it does not filter based on IMAP message bodies, and has limited support for personalities. It will not allow for sig attached to personality, or personality attached to server. In any case, it looks like most email client producers see their best strategy as getting as many features in as fast as possible, and when a client is good enough to convince a new user to pay for it after using it for a few weeks, get it out there and sell it. The truth is, I don't agree with that. I think there is a great big hole in what is available in the way of email clients for somebody who has done a good complete job to take over. Another thing I ponder is that most email clients have about a 10 year development history. Email clients must be devilishly hard to write well. So, all in all, considering what others have done, and how long it has taken them, and that early release is a strategy rather than an accident, I am inclined to not be too hard on RIT. -- Gleason UsingTheBat!v3.5.26onWindowsXP5.1Build2600 ServicePack2PrimarilyusingtheFastmail IMAPserverwhichusesCyrus. Current beta is 3.5.26 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS
Hello Gleason. --On 15 June 2005 12:46 -0700 you wrote about Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS: Mulberry becomes nearly unusable. This is especially true with the IMAP inbox. This behavior does not appear on my laptop, however. It doesn't happen here either, it's perhaps one of *the* most stable programs I have on here. -- Tony. M pgp3kyeApA2mK.pgp Description: PGP signature Current beta is 3.5.26 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS
Hi Goncalo, On 15/6/2005 7:50 PM +0100, you wrote: Well, putting out 3.5 surely didn't do any good to Ritlabs quality image. In fact, seeing people in this list using Mulberry email client isn't a good sign. I'm sure you'll agree on this. There are two reasons why one would not use TB! IMAP and move to using an alternative like Mulberry. - one is that it's buggy when being used. - the other is that its limited in features that would be very useful for the environment in which its being used. Currently, I don't have much problems with TB! IMAP's current capabilities working for me. I can run it without too much buggy behaviour to make the latter too much of a problem to not use it. However, the current features are rather limited and my using TB! now is based more on blind loyalty, rather than practical considerations. I can use it, but I prefer Mulberry. I'm pretty sure the features will improve and expand, hence my continued interest and input. I still contribute either from direct testing or from testimonials about how I do IMAP and how Mulberry helps me where TB! doesn't. Hopefully, this will assist with TB!'s IMAP development. What needs to improve as well, is reliability of the current functionality across different setups and servers. It would seem that there are quite a few who would be happy with TB!'s current IMAP implementation if it would just work reliably. -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it. Current beta is 3.5.26 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS
Hi Allie, -- 15.06.2005 15:02 -0500: What needs to improve as well, is reliability of the current functionality across different setups and servers. It would seem that there are quite a few who would be happy with TB!'s current IMAP implementation if it would just work reliably. Many would be very happy, you're right Allie! When everything is working reliable concerning IMAP, TB! would be on the step as Thunderbird and many other Clients are (concerning IMAP). The lack of feature (again: concerning IMAP) is widely spread, isn't it? I don't know any client that is nearly that good in IMAP as Mulberry. KMail, Evolution, Thunderbird, OE, oh... all, don't have these capabilities. So if TB! would just increase its reliability and get rid of the most ugly bugs in IMAP, RIT could be proud of its client, as it won't be beaten by the most other clients (once more: concerning IMAP). ;) Now that I've used Mulberry for a while, it's the lack of features, that doesn't get me back to TB! I really love Labels, moreover I love setting them at my server through sieve filtering. I like to subscribe to mailboxes without having to check them in x minutes. I like to set sent folders to each of my identities - that's a horror in TB! with outgoing filters. (Perhaps you, Allie, remember our private conversation where I complaint about this sent folder behavior in Mulberry - now I really like it. *g*) Just a few things - we're here at tbbeta. ;) -- Manuel, http://www.manuel-breitfeld.de Current beta is 3.5.26 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS
Hi Tony, -- 15.06.2005 20:55 +0100: Mulberry becomes nearly unusable. This is especially true with the IMAP inbox. This behavior does not appear on my laptop, however. It doesn't happen here either, it's perhaps one of *the* most stable programs I have on here. Have to confirm Tony's statement. No problems at all. :) -- Manuel, http://www.manuel-breitfeld.de Current beta is 3.5.26 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
Re: Re[7]: Distributed AS IS
Hi Manuel, On 15/6/2005 10:32 PM +0200, you wrote: Many would be very happy, you're right Allie! When everything is working reliable concerning IMAP, TB! would be on the step as Thunderbird and many other Clients are (concerning IMAP). You're right. TB! would be far better than Thunderbird, if its current features worked well. This is why I don't use ThunderBird at all anymore. It's not even installed. It's either TB! or Mulberry. The lack of feature (again: concerning IMAP) is widely spread, isn't it? I don't know any client that is nearly that good in IMAP as Mulberry. KMail, Evolution, Thunderbird, OE, oh... all, don't have these capabilities. I have to agree here. However, I couldn't comment on the Linux ones. So if TB! would just increase its reliability and get rid of the most ugly bugs in IMAP, RIT could be proud of its client, as it won't be beaten by the most other clients (once more: concerning IMAP). ;) Agreed. However, upon looking at TB! and what it represents, surely they couldn't be stopping at where the others have reached. :) I don't get that impression anyway. However, if they do stop at just getting the current functionality to work reliably, then I doubt I'll use TB! again with any frequency. Now that I've used Mulberry for a while, it's the lack of features, that doesn't get me back to TB! Indeed. I'm hoping that TB!'s capacity for excellence in whatever feature set it explores will find its way into IMAP and not simply do what the others do. The others don't do enough, pretty much like how other basic clients don't do enough for POP3. I really love Labels, moreover I love setting them at my server through sieve filtering. I like to subscribe to mailboxes without having to check them in x minutes. I like to set sent folders to each of my identities - that's a horror in TB! with outgoing filters. (Perhaps you, Allie, remember our private conversation where I complaint about this sent folder behavior in Mulberry - now I really like it. *g*) Just a few things - we're here at tbbeta. ;) My lure to Mulberry is its efficiency. It's so darned efficient with how it works with the server, which is what the spirit of IMAP represents. Everything is on the server. If you can minimise what is transmitted to work with what's on the server, then that's the way to go. The clients are generally far behind in their support of this. I recall a long time member of this list. He's Alexander Kiselev, I think. He was a Pegasus user for a long time before he finally switched to TB!. He was waiting for a few features to find their way in, and they did. :) I'm similarly sticking around to see how things go for TB! only the roles are reversed. I was a devote user of TB!. It's the only application that I've ever used for so long without having any desire or inclination to give its competitors even a fleeting consideration. This quickly changed with my way too late discovery of the joys of IMAP. :) -- Allie Martin System specs: http://www.ac-martin.com/sysspecs.htm -=-=- If you're not confused, you're not paying attention. Current beta is 3.5.26 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
