* Thomas Fernandez writes: > Carsten Th�nges wrote: >>> And anyway, independently of what you or I may wish, if Ritlabs is >>> smart enough and they want to keep in business, they should >>> include an HTML editor in a near future version.
> They _are_ smart. Wait and see... ;-) Oha! >> NACK. If Ritlabs is smart enough and they want to keep in business, >> they should provide full IMAP support for professional business >> users or should improve (=debug) the not-so-bad client/server mode. > I don't see a contradiction. Between a HTML editor and IMAP support? Where is the HTML editor? Where is IMAP? TB!'s fans have been waiting for V2.0 with all the promising features since I don't now when. And it definitely wasn't smart to announce a version 2. > And the mnemo is NAK. ;-) Both NACK and NAK is correct. And you know that. >> Which group is Ritlabs targeting? > I am not familiar with their marketing plan, but I believe they are > going for both the power-user who won't use HTML in emails (but would > need IMAP, better SSL/TLS implementation etc) as well as the sizeable > group that moves away from OL/OE but still wants to use HTML in > emails. The Personal costs about 40 EUR in Germany. This isn't what I would call cheap. I don't say that it's too expensive, but IMHO a little too much to get ahead of OE. Unfortunately TB! also isn't ideal for offices or small companies. a) no IMAP b) client/server mode is too buggy. And these are facts. > As long as the HTML-editor is optional, the additional "bloat" is > justifiable from a marketing point of view. The features I miss in TB! I found in another software. I am not alone. And no, it wasn't the missing HTML editor ;-) >> Yes, but competitors don't sleep ;-) > That's why. ;-) Why what? What has happened in the last months? Development wasn't very, ehm, rapid. Actually I like TB!... -- Best regards, Carsten ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
