Hi Gleason,
>> If I am hearing right, a reliable, correct IMAP support with the >> filtering, etc. of The Bat! would be a big hit. Why? Nu such thing >> exists yet. GP> Right, it does not exist. One reason is that it is devilishly hard to GP> do. If that was true, Thunderbird wouldn't have been able to offer basic, yet reliable IMAP support from the start. In a development time of less then a year a system has been established that outperforms the decades-old TheBat hands down. Where Thunderbird lacks is the user interface, not the behind-the-scenes engine. If you combined Thunderbird's IMAP engine and TheBat's user interface, you would be good to go. So difficulty can't be a factor. If IMAP were prohibitivly difficult, Thunderbird wouldn't have been able to make that glorious a debut. If user interface was a problem, TheBat wouldn't already have it. There are no outside factors preventing RIT from fixing TheBat's IMAP. It is pure choice on their side. The fact that they have chosen to ignore IMAP users can only be a signal that they're not (or no longer) targeting corporate users. No excuses can be made up, it's just that. GP> But I maintain that The Bat Imap is much much better than it was GP> just a few years ago. For one, it could hardly get worse. For second, today other things are failing than a few years ago: Where with earlier versions e.g. the "maintenance center", a seldom used niche function, wasn't working for IMAP, today TheBat stops checking IMAP accounts for new email half way during the day without telling the user so. Written emails are not going out. Mails that are being sent still linger in the outbox afterwards. The new "IMAP threads" freeze the program each time they're executing, so you have to pause in reading (=scrolling) or writing mails. I wouldn't sign your statement. GP> Actually, the new thing on the email horizon is Webmail, I fear. GP> Young people seem to universally prefer it. Nothing to learn, GP> nothing to fix. It just works, and when it doesn't, somebody else GP> must fix it. Yes, I agree with you there. Most users with an "IMAP-demand-profile" are already accustomed to using server-side filtering (no need for TheBat's filtering), being reminded about appointments by the server (no need for TheBat's scheduler), not to have any backup strategy (no need for TheBat's backup mechanism), and to use folders on the server (no need for TheBat's "virtual folders" and stuff.) TheBat is a dinosaur from the POP3 world which lives its last years as a scrapout for private, non mission-critical use. That's why emphasis is being placed on gimcrack like "delayed message sending" these days. There's an additional catch: Private users don't pay for an email program. They either "aquire" it for free, or, if they are unable to, they use the webmail interface that is free. Hence RIT can integrate anti-scanning-engines in TheBat all they like, but they won't make a single additional buck either way. Corporate (or serious private) users are the ones actually paying for programs they use. But in return they demand a reliable product. With TheBat, they're not getting one. RIT's mistake is (or even "has been", who knows how far on that trail they've already gone) to target the wrong customer segment. I wouldn't buy any RIT stock, because it is bound to take a dive in the next few years. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Alto Speckhardt mailto:[email protected] TheBat v4.1.11
pgpsaHX8g2m1L.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________________ Current beta is 4.1.14.2 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
