Pixie-
Friday, October 3, 2003, 8:26:47 AM, you wrote:
P> I can confirm, it is rather a pain. :-)
I've been advising my clients *not* to upgrade for that reason,
although I'm happily sending off my money to ritlabs for a v2
registration key, even though I won't be upgrading until they fix
things
Hello Mark,
Thursday, October 2, 2003, 12:50:49 PM, you wrote:
MW> Oh, all right... I also see that you've got a 2GHz Pentium 4 and
MW> I'm still sitting here with a 400MHz PII... wanna trade?
Uhm Lesse. Uhm. No!!!
MW> I've got TB running in server mode on my win2k server and
Leif-
Thursday, October 2, 2003, 7:40:55 AM, you wrote:
LG> messages) and deleted all of them (less than 5 seconds). I haven't
LG> read the Kerio List since their new pay version came out, so it was no
LG> big loss.
LG> Even deleting a single message, it was pretty much instantaneous.
Pretty
Hello Mark,
Tuesday, September 30, 2003, 8:39:13 PM, you wrote:
MW> V2 has proven to be *significantly* slower than previous versions,
MW> especially in dealing with network issues. It easily takes 15
MW> seconds to respond when I try to delete a message - meanwhile TB's
MW> CPU usage goes up to 3
Bats-
After spending a bit of time evaluating this I have now reverted to
v1.63.
V2 has proven to be *significantly* slower than previous versions,
especially in dealing with network issues. It easily takes 15 seconds
to respond when I try to delete a message - meanwhile TB's CPU usage
goes up to
Allie-
Monday, September 29, 2003, 6:44:14 PM, you wrote:
MW>> All v2 shows me is a bunch of messages, each named 1.MSG.
AM> They are numbered sequentially, yes.
No, they aren't. I find it more than somewhat annoying to find
multiple MIME parts in the left panel, all named 1.MSG. And even more
Roelof-
Well, I tried it again and it has suddenly started working.
The problem wasn't with not being able to view attachments, but that
v2 wasn't recognizing that I had the View option set to Message List.
Otherwise there's no way to distinguish one message from another.
I turned Message List m
Mark Wieder, [MW] wrote:
MW> In 1.6x I can double-click the contents in the preview pane on the
MW> left to view the subject and who wrote the messge, etc.
This is preserved in v2. Double click one of the messages and you open a
virtual folder with a list of all the attached messages that you can
Hallo Mark,
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 11:23:00 -0700GMT (29-9-03, 20:23 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
MW> I have to say that so far I'm not very impressed with v2.00.6. Mind
MW> you, this is after only about half an hour's look at it, but I don't
MW> at all like the way it handles MIME digests. In 1
Bats-
(sigh)
I have to say that so far I'm not very impressed with v2.00.6. Mind
you, this is after only about half an hour's look at it, but I don't
at all like the way it handles MIME digests. In 1.6x I can
double-click the contents in the preview pane on the left to view the
subject and who wr
Hello Thomas,
You wrote on 11/30/2000, 4:21 AM
MK>> 4) Sometimes, people send us messages in the UTF-8 encoding. Is it
MK>> planned to implemented UTF in The Bat! ? At the moment, I have to keep
MK>> those messages in Outlook Express...
TF> We were playing with UTF-7 and UTF-8 in one of the bet
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Ming-Li!
On Thursday, November 30, 2000 at 3:21:58 PM you wrote:
> I also came from OE (5.0), and I'm pretty sure TB is faster than
> OE5, in general or when handling large folders. I also have a few
> archive folder of that size or bigger. W
Hello Ming-Li,
(ML == "Ming-Li") [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
ML> As Jamie pointed out, 64 MB RAM is a little marginal for Win2k to
ML> work efficiently. I have a slightly slower CPU (200 MHz PPro, no
ML> MMX), but with 96 MB RAM, I believe my machine run smoother than
ML> yours, in general. At s
On Wednesday, November 29, 2000, 4:06:51 PM, Maksym wrote:
> 1) People usually say of The Bat! as being very fast. With our
> setup here (~80 folders with both corporate and my personal mail,
> some of them having 5000+ messages per folder), it is _slower_
> (?!!) than Outlook Express 5.5. It is
Hello Maksym Kozub,
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 02:06:51 +0200 GMT your local time,
which was Thursday, November 30, 2000, 00:06:51 (GMT+0100) (BST) my local time,
Maksym Kozub wrote:
MK> 2) It produces access violations quite often (several times a day), in
MK> various situations (but usually when worki
Hi Maksym,
and welcome to the list.
On Thu, 30 Nov 2000 02:06:51 +0200GMT (30/11/2000, 08:06 +0800GMT),
Maksym Kozub wrote:
MK> 4) Sometimes, people send us messages in the UTF-8 encoding. Is it
MK> planned to implemented UTF in The Bat! ? At the moment, I have to keep
MK> those messages in Out
MK> 3) When deleting a folder, the top folder in the folder tree becomes
MK> highlited. Wouldn't it be more logical for The Bat! to highlight the parent
MK> folder of the deleted one instead (that's what I liked in OE)? It's a
MK> bit borrowing when you delete a sub-folder of a folder at the very
Hello,
I've been using The Bat! (ver. 1.47) for 5 days by now, and here I'd
like to share some impressions, concerns, and wishes.
Before, I used earlier evaluation versions for a short time back in
1998, so I can see how it has developed. I like the program; however,
there are still lots of miss
18 matches
Mail list logo
