EmailDiscussions.com

Go Back   EmailDiscussions.com > Email Service Provider-specific Forums > FastMail Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

FastMail Forum All posts relating to FastMail.FM should go here: suggestions, comments, requests for help, complaints, technical issues etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 7 May 2006, 07:55 AM   #46
rmns2bseen
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,418
It's probably just me, but I don't see paying any money for an email client when there are so many good free ones out there. I think the history of Mulberry shows I'm not alone, maybe But of course, we all have different wants and needs.
rmns2bseen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 08:04 AM   #47
Aimlink
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Here and Now...
Posts: 1,078
Quote:
Originally posted by rmns2bseen
It's probably just me, but I don't see paying any money for an email client when there are so many good free ones out there. I think the history of Mulberry shows I'm not alone, maybe But of course, we all have different wants and needs.
Indeed we have different wants and needs. That's what it's all about. I'm happy that you find all the features that you need in a an e-mail client through one of the free solutions out there.

Paid solutions often offer features that simply aren't present in the free offerings. Features many find useful and are willing to pay for.

It's the same for cheap vs expensive options of any kind. Some buy cheaply wondering what others want out of the more expensive options, thinking that the expensive options are for people who have nothing better to do with their money. It's a terribly myopic view to take.

I use a FastMail enhanced account since I want the features it offers. Which account type do you use?
Aimlink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 08:58 AM   #48
rmns2bseen
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally posted by curtis

I use a FastMail enhanced account since I want the features it offers. Which account type do you use?
FM Full account, because I've found only one free service that offers what it does...and I use both services
rmns2bseen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 09:03 AM   #49
Aimlink
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Here and Now...
Posts: 1,078
Quote:
Originally posted by rmns2bseen
FM Full account, because I've found only one free service that offers what it does...and I use both services
I guess there may be guest account holders wondering why you'd be paying for a full account when there are free accounts all over the place.
Aimlink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 09:14 AM   #50
rmns2bseen
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally posted by curtis
I guess there may be guest account holders wondering why you'd be paying for a full account when there are free accounts all over the place.
Well, for starters: about 590MB more storage (compared to the FM Guest account), fairly user-configurable spam protection (although the free account I mentioned offers even more customized anti-spam possibilities), more of a possibility for personal support, etc.

I'm not condemning those who pay for Eudora or The Bat! or whatever other commercial clients are out there. I just think that for the most part the commercial clients are just a tad too pricey for features offered, and having to pay for version upgrades would be a bear too. I'm talking here about using an email client for personal purposes.
rmns2bseen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 01:01 PM   #51
Aimlink
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Here and Now...
Posts: 1,078
Quote:
I'm not condemning those who pay for Eudora or The Bat! or whatever other commercial clients are out there. I just think that for the most part the commercial clients are just a tad too pricey for features offered, and having to pay for version upgrades would be a bear too. I'm talking here about using an email client for personal purposes. [/b]
The Bat! is a VERY powerful client. The only free clients that approach it in power are clients available for UNIX/Linux, and even then, there are many users of The Bat! asking that it be ported to UNIX and that they'd pay for it if that were to happen. These are users who use it for personal purposes.

Becky Internet Mail is another good one, though not as feature rich as The Bat!. Mulberry was the IMAP client against which all others were judged. In fact, it's last version still remains the benchmark in terms of IMAP functionality. Well worth the money if you desire the features.

I used to use The Bat! a lot, but am no longer using it as much since my e-mail traffic has been much less than it used to be. It was great for heavy traffic.
Aimlink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 01:17 PM   #52
rmns2bseen
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally posted by curtis
Mulberry was the IMAP client against which all others were judged. In fact, it's last version still remains the benchmark in terms of IMAP functionality.
I'll take your word for The Bat! and also Mulberry. A question I have though is, considering the glowing reviews that Mulberry received from users, why did it go belly-up? Or rather why did Cyrusoft go belly-up?
rmns2bseen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 01:28 PM   #53
ankupan
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 715
Hi,

May I know the web of Mulberry !

~ ankupan ~
ankupan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 01:40 PM   #54
rmns2bseen
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally posted by ankupan
Hi,

May I know the web of Mulberry !

~ ankupan ~
Mulberry is now defunct. (edit) re-reading that thread, there are some comments concerning the free/paid client model that I really agree with.

Last edited by rmns2bseen : 7 May 2006 at 02:05 PM.
rmns2bseen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 02:11 PM   #55
Aimlink
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Here and Now...
Posts: 1,078
Quote:
Originally posted by rmns2bseen
I'll take your word for The Bat! and also Mulberry. A question I have though is, considering the glowing reviews that Mulberry received from users, why did it go belly-up? Or rather why did Cyrusoft go belly-up?
I can only offer my own theory on this. Clearly it wasn't doing well in the form of registrations.

I feel that this was mainly because of its interface. It took me 3 attempts to get past the hurdle of the user interface and the interface has always been a sore point for MANY users. I persevered on my third try only because I had nowhere else to go. Only after persevering and getting past that initial difficulty, did I start discovering its greater features.

I think the client failed badly in what I feel is very important in interface design. Always make the basic operations intuitive, well supported and accessible. Be VERY careful complicating the interface to make it more powerful. They often entirely changed the approach to doing some things in the interest of making it more robust. However, many users, including myself would try an intuitive approach or look for the expected behaviour, only to not find it and then have to learn the new approach which is often tedious. Quite often you'd have to learn this new complicated approach and yet, not wish to use the power that the redesign was intended to make available to the user.

So, the client had a small, though significant contingent of die hards who would evangelise and defend the clients design etc. I think the developer/s may have listened too much to them and to themselves as well.

ThunderBird, OTOH, is the opposite to me. It has a very pleasant and easy to use interface. A nice layout and solid support for all the very basic features. It then offers more advanced features via extensions. As a result, building a solid base of basic to intermediate users is possible.

I doubt that Mulberry would have done well if it were like ThunderBird in power. Why would anyone pay for it when there's ThunderBird. However, I've always felt that they could have offered similar IMAP power via a more friendly and pleasant interface. I think this was grossly under-estimated and not addressed by Cyrusoft.
Aimlink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 May 2006, 02:16 PM   #56
rmns2bseen
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 1,418
In all honesty, before Cyrusoft went under, I was considering trying out Mulberry and would've been open to purchasing a license.
rmns2bseen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8 May 2006, 09:22 AM   #57
sjk
Master of the @
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Eugene
Posts: 1,975
Quote:
Originally posted by rmns2bseen
A question I have though is, considering the glowing reviews that Mulberry received from users, why did it go belly-up? Or rather why did Cyrusoft go belly-up?
See Matt Wall's Thanks and some inside dope from an inside dope Slashdot post.

Apparently Apple hired Cyrus Daboo.
sjk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8 May 2006, 10:22 PM   #58
dantheman
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 846
Quote:
Originally posted by sjk
See Matt Wall's Thanks and some inside dope from an inside dope Slashdot post.

Apparently Apple hired Cyrus Daboo.
Thank you SJK for the insight into a company i always thought had some kind of future ahead of it.

In the computer world things change so fast and it's really quite surprising to see how this company managed to survive for so long!
dantheman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10 May 2006, 06:38 AM   #59
sjk
Master of the @
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Eugene
Posts: 1,975
Quote:
Originally posted by dantheman
Thank you SJK for the insight into a company i always thought had some kind of future ahead of it.
Let's thank Matt, not me.

One thing I've wondered is whether Apple's switch to Intel processors contributed to Mulberry's demise. The OS X code base was still being compiled with CodeWarrior and it would have taken a significant effort converting to Xcode. I don't know the per-OS breakdown of Mulberry customers but there seemed to be close to as many OS X as Windows users actively participating on the mulberry-discuss mailing list (one of my all-time favorites; a sad loss). And Mulberry was originally developed on Mac OS (pre-X), adding to my unconfirmed impression that Mac customers would always remain important to Cyrusoft. The two-way loyalty street, as Matt mentioned.

I hope Cyrus positively influences mail product development at Apple although it may be in everyone's better interest to leave the UI work for someone else. My speculation says he'd be more involved with server projects but the Apple Mail client could benefit from some of Mulberry's uniquely powerful features being integrated. Multi-platform support was crippling Mulberry development on OS X, which isn't an issue with Mail. Heck, I'd even pay for an Apple Mail "Pro" version that came close to the Mail/Mulberry mutant I can imagine.
sjk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 Apr 2008, 06:01 AM   #60
mister_twister
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2
Re: Best Email Client for IMAP

I use mailpicker.com. It works with IMAP fine.
mister_twister is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +9. The time now is 08:19 AM.

 

Copyright EmailDiscussions.com 1998-2013. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy