Re: Thinking about v3
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 ***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Thu, 10 Mar 2005, @ @ at 16:39:21 -0800, when Melissa Reese wrote: over that past few years, I've implemented more complicated/convoluted filter rules than I can count or even remember. All I know is that they're working! :-) That's pretty same situation with me too. I had made them, and I forgot how, for many of them. But they are working. I had to dig into my filters and make some adjustments when I moved from v1 to v2, and I'm wondering if I'll have to do the same if I now move on to v3? You will have to. (-: At *least* for just few of them, or in general depending on how much you made them complicated/convoluted, along the way. I was told that the old filters will automatically adjust/transfer to the new filtering system (NFS), I followed, very carefully, instructions, and lost two harvests of about 60-70 messages, in about two hours. They were *all* deleted from server, totally regardless my (old) filtering rules. (-: Happily, no one of them had any very important message, so I could read few of them (the LOG recorded them all well, thanks at least to that fact) at lists' web interfaces. I didn't try third time. The 3rd time consisted of kicking the v3 out. (-: So far, v2.12.00 has worked brilliantly for me, and I'm just a bit wary of moving on to the next major version just because it's there. I agree completely with you; just because it's there is not enough reason, especially if it could make some harm. Being wary is wise. I will at least try to learn more about the new filtering system before I make up my mind. That's the only part I see as most vital one. On the other hand, I still didn't notice anything enough new, or simply useful for me, personally, which would justify this new pace to v3. Except this on the fly encryption, though. But it depends on the new filtering system, again. (-; There *was* actually just one tiny detail, when I had no this encryption in mind yet, namely a new feature of filtering by file attached, but I solved it on another level, using old (Selective Download) filtering system, accompanied with few new features of my *personal* routines (the first line of defense, as you would name it). It works charmingly and I receive 0, zero, nada of SPAM. Being a bit more conservative these days about using bleeding edge software, and since TB! development seems to move at a pretty fast pace in certain areas, I guess I'll continue to monitor v3.x from a distance to see if anyone encounters any real show stopper problems, or can demonstrate any real advantages that I just couldn't live without. It's pretty good maneuver. Okay then, you monitor them and I'll monitor you (-: since I think you are much better chess player than I am. (I was monitoring them, but didn't notice any food, yet. (: So, be friend and drop a note if you find some fatty morsel, and of what are your experiences with v3, since you will *certainly* pick it up sooner than I. I feel somehow...) I'm all for supporting TB! development by upgrading, and I'm sure that someday I will again upgrade, but I'm just so happy with how my 2.x version is working for me now that I'm a little reluctant to mess with it. :-) If you would need my opinion then it would be this: I'd like to see you happy more than any new v3 making your days, in a bad way. (-: Just you be conservative and enjoy. It's anyway just one part of the pair conservative-progressive, which makes the whole thread, and when the wave is up, it will surely slide down, and vice versa. The conservative one tides timely and that's it. My mother is still using v1.62r, and when v2 was released (and also v3), I told her about it, but she's even more afraid than I am to try something new and improved; especially while she's still coming to grips with v1! (which, if you know how my mother gets along with computers in general, is pretty impressive already!). :-) It *is* impressive, indeed! I can understand pretty well the fear of computers too, but what would you do with mother whose byword is any change is good, even if it's to the worse? (-: The last time she uttered that a serials of various civil wars started nearby, and now you sit and think, are you happy or not, with yours. g Oh you are, definitely, as I am with mine, as much as it is possible, but mine couldn't learn more than driving in Need for Speed, and still has forgotten it, so she's driving mainly banging at roadsides with 100 mph (she uses only the first gear). Actually, digressive as I am sometimes, I wanted to say that I myself would stick with v1, just if they would have few tinier features I *really* need, and all of them *can* fit a v1 size. TB develops in a way which produces lots of unfinished things, and if you need just one (I needed just a LOG feature which would record data about mail deleted from server, when I last time upgraded a v2) you
Re: Thinking about v3
Hi Mica, On Monday, March 07, 2005, at 10:09:46 AM PST, you wrote: That's my contribution: if you use some more complicated or unusual filtering rules -- be careful. This is something that concerns me, as over that past few years, I've implemented more complicated/convoluted filter rules than I can count or even remember. All I know is that they're working! :-) I had to dig into my filters and make some adjustments when I moved from v1 to v2, and I'm wondering if I'll have to do the same if I now move on to v3? I myself am waiting to see what will happen before I decide to buy a copy of a v3 using *my* name. The main reason of mine was encryption on the fly, and I was already prepared to buy a Secure Bat but they entombed this form of the popular mammal, just in the moment when I pulled my wallet. Pity, since I do not need any additional features, as hardware tokens etcetera. Just a possibility to keep my mail in an encrypted form, while still using all the resources of a standard TB. I share some of the same concerns here as well. I also don't use IMAP, the HTML editor, Rich Text Viewer, or smileys, so I'm mainly concerned with keeping my email management as stable and trouble free as possible. So far, v2.12.00 has worked brilliantly for me, and I'm just a bit wary of moving on to the next major version just because it's there. I will at least try to learn more about the new filtering system before I make up my mind. Being a bit more conservative these days about using bleeding edge software, and since TB! development seems to move at a pretty fast pace in certain areas, I guess I'll continue to monitor v3.x from a distance to see if anyone encounters any real show stopper problems, or can demonstrate any real advantages that I just couldn't live without. I'm all for supporting TB! development by upgrading, and I'm sure that someday I will again upgrade, but I'm just so happy with how my 2.x version is working for me now that I'm a little reluctant to mess with it. :-) My mother is still using v1.62r, and when v2 was released (and also v3), I told her about it, but she's even more afraid than I am to try something new and improved; especially while she's still coming to grips with v1! (which, if you know how my mother gets along with computers in general, is pretty impressive already!). :-) -- Melissa PGP public keys: http://www.kuviahunnihautik.tk/ TB! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 pgpeq7PW7AGO6.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:35:44 -0800, Melissa Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is the current release version (non-beta) stable and fully functional? Stable as software can be - nothing guaranteed. I have to restart every once in a while for the message list pane gets corrupted - unsure if this is a DLL conflict or TB!, although I expect the latter (index grid out of range is usually the first error, it gets worse after that). In my case (using v2.12.00 for daily office tasks), several bugs or incomplete and even lacking functionality is still not fixed, corrected or added although reported by many of us for a long time. This includes basic things like the doubtful HTML editor and IMAP support - to name just one thing, in a reply all formatting in the %QUOTES is still lost (I'm currently testing v3.01.33). Moving to v3 depends on your requirements, I'd say. For professional use I see no gain in smiley and rogue support, and a fancy inteface where large, shaded buttons take up more precious space... :-\ -- Happy flappin'! Corne' (aka Cory, The Batdmin) Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
Hello Cory! On Wednesday, March 09, 2005, 4:05 AM, you wrote: Moving to v3 depends on your requirements, I'd say. For professional use I see no gain in smiley and rogue support, and a fancy inteface where large, shaded buttons take up more precious space... :-\ I think the New Filter System's added clarity and simplicity might be worth the move. Anyone considering this move should perhaps search the archives in regard to conserving filters from the Old Filter System. And there were some NFS and other bugs fixed between 3.0 and 3.0.1.33. Even more improvements between 3.0.1.33 and beta 3.0.2.8. Between 3.0.1.33 and beta 3.0.2.8 or beta 3.0.2.10 (the Pro version that include On-the-Fly-Encryption capability) I myself greatly prefer the beta version. -- Best regards, Mary The Bat! 3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 2600 Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
Hello Melissa, On Sun, 6 Mar 2005 23:35:44 -0800 GMT (07/03/2005, 14:35 +0700 GMT), Melissa Reese wrote: MR Is the current release version (non-beta) stable and fully functional? Yes. I am using it in the office without any problems. MR Are there any known issues that I should be aware of? I am using v3.0.2.10 at home because of some minor fix I cannot even remember. -- Cheers, Thomas. Things You Would Never Know Without the Movies: It is always possible to park directly outside any building you are visiting. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.0.2.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600Service Pack 2 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
Melissa Reese said the following on 03/07/2005 01:35: Is the current release version (non-beta) stable and fully functional? Are there any known issues that I should be aware of? As long as you don't need IMAP, you'll probably be OK. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Sun, 6 Mar 2005, @ @ at 23:35:44 -0800, when Melissa Reese wrote: In the past, I was always eager to jump to the latest versions of software as soon as they were released. Lately, I've become a bit more conservative; especially when a version I'm currently using is stable and working well for me. Now, finally, I'm thinking about TB! v3. Is the current release version (non-beta) stable and fully functional? Are there any known issues that I should be aware of? It depends on your needs, and/or of how much of TB you explore, I would dare to say, since there are some who are explicitly very pleased with v3, but there are other ones who rather would love to wait a bit, or a bit more, until situation is more clear. For myself, which means that the World (and perhaps wider) is not obliged to abide to this, it will be when I remove the word unleashing from my signature. (-; Yet, the number 3.0.1.33 somehow tells me that much of water and lava will have to stream away until it gets to some 3.1.00, or so. 187 days is about 6 months, and I recon I'd wait patiently yet those 3 ones, for not to push the Nature too much, or I could get something I wouldn't want to. I am not sure that anyone could generalize and deliver a full list of known issues, but I suppose that individual reports could help, in a measure, and you already got few of them. That's my contribution: if you use some more complicated or unusual filtering rules -- be careful. I myself am waiting to see what will happen before I decide to buy a copy of a v3 using *my* name. The main reason of mine was encryption on the fly, and I was already prepared to buy a Secure Bat but they entombed this form of the popular mammal, just in the moment when I pulled my wallet. Pity, since I do not need any additional features, as hardware tokens etcetera. Just a possibility to keep my mail in an encrypted form, while still using all the resources of a standard TB. Those were my experiences many weeks, and moons, ago, and I admit that I lost my patience after trying several first copies of v3. Those days I again had in mind to try a newer one...but it seems that my patience is not enough chubby yet. I hope that this thread you spun now will get more constructive answers, so that I myself could tap some benefits of them too. So far, no news with I am quite pleased with, It works smoothly and similar. (: Such ones were present even 6 months ago. (Will be that downloading a new copy and playing with it, *safely*, like in save hex (:, is a most appropriate way to get the precise answers.) Take care and wear a smile, because it's more beautiful, and possibly less painful, this way. (: -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ :eyes: [Earth LOG: 187 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... pgpmXZzEOBS3B.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
***^\ ._)~~ ~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 7 Mar 2005, @ @ at 19:09:46 +0100, when Mica Mijatovic wrote: The main reason of mine was encryption on the fly, and I was already prepared to buy a Secure Bat Mica's celebrating typo festival these days: should stand Secure Bat Lite instead. (Will be that downloading a new copy and playing with it, *safely*, like in save hex (:, is a most appropriate way to get the precise answers.) And instead save should stand safe, obviously. Although the both are appropriate I would say. (-: -- Mica PGP keys nestled at: http://bardo.port5.com/pgpkeys/ [Earth LOG: 187 day(s) since v3.0 unleashing] OS: Windows 98 SE Micro Lite Professional IVa Enterprise Millennium with nestled ZipSlack(tm) 9.1 UMSDOS Linux, and with Bochs 2.1.1 with a small DLX Linux; and, for TB sometimes, Gentoo and Vector via Wine... pgpps6bxgVBpB.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Thinking about v3
Hi, In the past, I was always eager to jump to the latest versions of software as soon as they were released. Lately, I've become a bit more conservative; especially when a version I'm currently using is stable and working well for me. Now, finally, I'm thinking about TB! v3. Is the current release version (non-beta) stable and fully functional? Are there any known issues that I should be aware of? Thanks! -- Melissa PGP public keys: http://www.kuviahunnihautik.tk/ TB! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 2 pgp5O89rO0LTT.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
