On Tuesday, October 11, 2005, at 10:35 AM, Clive Taylor wrote: > Not here it doesn't, Curtis. I've set it to download 100 messages > and it's still infinitely quicker than TB!
That's still far less than thousands or hundreds. :) > If I chose the entire list, Mulberry would spend an >> eternity retrieving the entire message list. It takes LONGER than TB! >> to do the same. Ask Gary about it. :) > Again, not here. Serverside threading is transparent. This is the point. Mulberry takes advantage of server side threading. So it still doesn't have to retrieve as much data. It's very good at this. > It's Thunderbird that has a problem in this area for me. ... and guess why? ThunderBird needs to download all the folder message list data prior to your being able to browse; just as TB! does. This is why ThunderBird just doesn't factor in for me anymore. >> Mulberry's speed comes from efficiency. You do far more with much less >> transfer of data. TB! is doing too much in the background and requires >> too much data transfer to be productive > I'd buy that. It's the difference in philosophy between a POP and IMAP > developed client, I suppose. I guess. -- -= Curtis=- Using TB! v3.61.10 Echo (Beta) System Specs: http://specs.aimlink.name =-=-= ...Defeat isn't bitter if you don't swallow it.
pgpktXkGbBQFV.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.61.11 (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/
