1/30/2004, 9:43 PM: Peter said in "PC Mag Review Of "The Bat!""
JM>> Did anyone see the PC Mag review of "The Bat" yet? JM>> They gave "The Bat!" 2 marks out of a possible 5 JM>> Outlook 2003 received 5 marks. I'd probably give it the same review if I fired it up for a period of five minutes to write a review. PO> I had my doubts about PCmag for some time, but now I don't trust PCmag PO> anymore... I remember the days when expert computer users wrote for computer magazines. Now it's apparently sports writers who can't find an openning in their preferred genre. Or perhaps Luddites. One thing that really caught me off guard was: "Overly cute and at times confusing," It seems to me that the typical argument is that TB is aesthetically lacking, not overly cute. What copy of TB are they using? They seemed to consider the mail ticker a bug rather than a feature. Furthermore, rather than recognizing the value in having a choice of SPAM filtering method (I'd rather be able to chose among plug-ins than be forced a proprietary mechanism) they dismiss it as an acknowledgement that TB! cannot stand on its own two feet in the e-mail market. Most troubling, is: How can you write a review about TB without mentioning its filtering system, TBUDL and, most importantly, its template/macro system?! The Bat! "doesn't take flight", Eudora is "customizable" and Outlook is "the king of e-mail clients". Right. <sigh> -- Peace, be well J Allen R Day http://protempore.org The most wasted of all days is one without laughter. -e e cummings The Bat! 2.03.47, | Windows XP Service Pack 1 build 2600 ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.02.3 CE | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
