Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

MB (15/6/08, 12:07) 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. > >Qrecall only backup the parts of the file that are different. This doesn't look like it cou

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

Jeremy Hughes wrote: >incremental backups (Retrospect, Time Machine, whatever) >have to back up the entire database each time it changes. I'm sure you did not mean to include the word "whatever". The word "whatever" implies that ALL backup programs suffer this defficiency. Richard Hart

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

Jeremy Hughes said: >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 datab

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 for some time now and haven't noticed

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 12/6/0

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

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 integ

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: 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 schedu

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 databas

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

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 imp

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

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, thei

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

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

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

: - >> >>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

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

> >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 lop

Re: Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

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 former message(s) quotes: - >

Review of Power Mail in new MacWorld magazine

Review of PowerMail in new July 2008 MacWorld magazine And PowerMail didn't do well. It got only 2.5 Mice out of 5, to earn last place after Apple Mail, Entourage ThunderBird GMail GyazMail Yahoo Mail Outspring Mail PowerMail Full Reviews: