Hello John Thomas, On Monday, 03 Oktober 2005 at 02:45, you wrote:
> I would like to go on record as saying that IMAP is much better with > your settings, but still needs work. Yes, and that's indeed a curious situation. One really can't count how often this process of getting IMAP work better was described. As Curtis wrote, TB! is a really good IMAP mailer, but needs special settings. You did wonder why options like full-sync are offered. Why did you, as a Mulberry user, want to use this "feature"? Mulberry doesn't offer it and works great. So why just tune TB! in a similar way?! > For example, I am having a > terrible time trying to copy a folder with 7000 messages to a local > folder. Now I know 7000 is a bundle of messages, but shouldn't it > just work. Yes, that did annoy me too. Curtis gave a workaround. This needs work. > There are other issues too. ...like everywhere. ;-) > The only way I think TB is going to get good IMAP is if all of the > developers are forced to work 100% on IMAP. I would be curious to > know how many are now. Your sentence is that right and I would agree with you. But Ritlabs unfortunately has a list with hundreds of other things beside IMAP. At this point I want to agree with Clive. Ritlabs promissed to focus on IMAP and now TB! has funky tabs. Nice... But this way of developing will never end - at Ritlabs, at least. -- Manuel, http://www.manuel-breitfeld.de ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.61.09 (Echo) | '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/
