Hello John,
On Sunday, February 13, 2000 at 17:44:57 GMT +0900 (which was 12:44 AM where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] typed:
> Thank you for a calm and reasoned response.
No problem, I try to post close to the same caliber as most of the
people in this group. It is a high standard to match.
> The biggest problem with the status quo occurs every morning when I
> first get to my mail. There are typically more than a hundred
> messages waiting to be read, scattered among different folders. If I
> use the Mail Ticker, I find myself jumping back and forth among
> different discussions in different folders, because the Mail Ticker
> simply streams incoming messages in the order of their arrival.
Do you know that if you use the Mail Ticker to access the virtual
folder behind it, you can display the folder that the message is in?
For example, the Mail Ticker shows up,
1. you double click on it, and it brings up one of the messages.
2. Select View -> Message List
3. Select View -> Columns and add Folder.
4. Enjoy!
I haven't used the Mail Ticker much, but I'm starting to realize that
I've been missing out on a good thing.
> I would rather go through a folder at a time, reading the new
> messages in each mailing list, folder by folder.
That is why I set up folders. :)
> This can be done,
> but it either requires mousing, or using an odd combination of
> keystrokes: Tab to change to the folder tree, arrow keys to move to
> the next folder (all the while highlighting messages I don't want to
> see in each folder), then Tab to get back to the message list, and
> finally that oddball CTRL + ] to find the next unread message.
> Multiply that by each folder that has new articles.
True, but how could it be much less complicated and still do what you
want every time? (Ignoring the 'skip to next unread message in any
folder' option for the moment.)
> During the day as new messages come in, I use the Mail Ticker for
> most folders and leave the less important ones off it, so this is
> not as big a problem.
I personally don't mind using the mouse, now the only thing that TB
needs to implement is the customizable tool bars. That way I can use
either just the mouse, or just the keyboard to read mail. I don't
mind that option. But right now, you do need to use both to be at
maximal efficiency.
> Still, getting to the less important articles
> again takes all those weird keystrokes. Contrast this with Netscape
> Communicator, Datula, Becky, EdMax, and other clients which let you
> jump to an unread message in any folder from any location simply by
> pressing the space bar or N key or a user-defined key.
Admittedly this is a feature that TB needs to implement, but I
thought you were suggesting that TB is awkward to navigate between
folders. I know Netscape is not any better, are any of the others
any better if you want to go to a folder with *no* new messages, or
where you want to go to a read message?
> This is not just a matter of saving a couple of strokes, it saves
> hundreds of strokes each day.
Sure, but you have to balance saving strokes with becoming
incomprehensible. Just like when I write the year down. I could
write just 00 and I'm sure nobody would get confused about what year
I'm talking about, but it gets confusing to someone who is unfamiliar
with the quirks of my system. Not to mention the fact that I have a
tendency to forget things every now and then.
> -- all I'm asking is for that option, not a mandatory change.
Which is why we're here discussing it. :)
> **In fact, a keystroke that takes you to the next unread message
> across folders/accounts does not have to nullify the standard
> behavior of opening a folder at the last read article. Both can
> exist at the same time.**
Right. I alluded to this point in my message, although maybe you
missed it. A keystroke that takes you to the next unread message
across folders/accounts is a different debate than the one we're
having. With that option, TB does what you tell it to do. But if
you say that TB should open a folder at the next unread message, then
I disagree because you are not *explicitly* telling TB to do that.
All you are telling TB is to open the folder, beyond that it should
not make any assumptions. Therefore the logical action is to open
the message that was last open in that folder. Clear?
These are two separate issues, and don't think that since I oppose
one, that I oppose the other. :)
--
Thanks for writing
Januk
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Using The Bat! 1.39
under Windows 98 4.10 Build 2222 A
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
