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
Stay in touch wirelessly

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 16 Apr 2008, 06:15 AM   #61
jchevali
Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: London UK
Posts: 47
Perhaps. Who is behind MailPicker.com? There's nothing, not a word, in the website, about the company, or if it's a software project, or what. Surely, if I'm going to give someone access to my mail (other than my own mail host), I should know something about them?
jchevali is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 Apr 2008, 06:28 AM   #62
dantheman
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hot Springs, AR
Posts: 857
Quote:
Originally Posted by mister_twister View Post
I use mailpicker.com. It works with IMAP fine.

Looks like a pretty new service.
Haven't heard of it but it was easy to register.
100mb of storage isn't much room to retrieve messages.
It doesn't tell you if they remove or leave messages on server either.
No support for Hotmail (of course!).

BTW, welcome to EMD forums!

dantheman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 Apr 2008, 03:44 AM   #63
mister_twister
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by jchevali View Post
Perhaps. Who is behind MailPicker.com? There's nothing, not a word, in the website, about the company, or if it's a software project, or what. Surely, if I'm going to give someone access to my mail (other than my own mail host), I should know something about them?
I don't know who's behind it too but I had no problems with it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantheman View Post
Looks like a pretty new service.
Haven't heard of it but it was easy to register.
100mb of storage isn't much room to retrieve messages.
It doesn't tell you if they remove or leave messages on server either.
No support for Hotmail (of course!).

BTW, welcome to EMD forums!

Yeap, it's nice and easy to use service. I was looking for something like that for a long time. I have access to my mail from anywhere anytime.
There is mail box settings where you can set up removing messages from server.
P.S. they just changed max account size to 500Mb!

Last edited by mister_twister : 17 Apr 2008 at 03:54 AM.
mister_twister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 May 2008, 07:44 AM   #64
marcus0263
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjk View Post
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.
Mulberry is open source and still is simply the best IMAP client there is. It does take a little bit to get used too but you can't beat it for speed and functionality.

Mulberry Mail
marcus0263 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 May 2008, 12:11 PM   #65
Aimlink
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Here and Now...
Posts: 1,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
Mulberry is open source and still is simply the best IMAP client there is. It does take a little bit to get used too but you can't beat it for speed and functionality.

Mulberry Mail
This is a tiresome claim and one wonders why it's so good and struggles to have a decent userbase. I do agree about its speed and functionality:

However, I was just using it the last couple days:

- it's not stable in current OS X versions. I'm using a fully updated Leopard on an iMac. It's this instability that made me decide to forget it for good.

- poor HTML rendering for really old reasons.

- it has one of the most sadly awkward user interfaces I've EVER encountered. Once you figure the app out, it has unmatched functionality in some ways, but the interface?! Some of it is really unnecessary and gets more in the way than anything else. It makes very poor use of screen real estate.... I tried many options including non-MDI mode.

- it's modal in behaviour. Once it's busy with a server there's no getting user input. You're in trouble if it's having trouble with a connection.

From my POV, its short comings outweigh its benefits when compared to other options out there. There is a lot of attention paid to features that will interest a few and very little attention paid to making core functionality that all users would use, easily accessible, and the user interface less awkward and more intuitive.

I can see why particular users would love it, but users that are willing to desensitize themselves to Mulberry's issues in order to use its special features, are a minority, and hence, Mulberry will likely remain a solution for such a minority. It may be the best for you, but it ain't the best .... period. That's a misleading claim to make. A heavy feature-set doesn't necessarily make it better than a very well put together client with a less esoteric feature set at a user's disposal.
Aimlink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 May 2008, 12:50 PM   #66
marcus0263
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
This is a tiresome claim and one wonders why it's so good and struggles to have a decent userbase. I do agree about its speed and functionality:
That's why it's simply the best, extremely powerful. I currently us it with 6 separate accounts, (two very large) all with a fair amount of different buckets in each account.

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
However, I was just using it the last couple days:

- it's not stable in current OS X versions. I'm using a fully updated Leopard on an iMac. It's this instability that made me decide to forget it for good.
It hasn't been open sourced that long, the code base is still back when it was commercial. Supports Windows, Linux, Solaris and Mac OS <= 9 very well. So lend a hand in getting ported to OS X

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
- poor HTML rendering for really old reasons.
And that's a bad thing? It renders limited HTML, there's been some talk about more HTML. But it's not really a priority due to the current user base either could care less or flat out doesn't want it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
- it has one of the most sadly awkward user interfaces I've EVER encountered. Once you figure the app out, it has unmatched functionality in some ways, but the interface?! Some of it is really unnecessary and gets more in the way than anything else. It makes very poor use of screen real estate.... I tried many options including non-MDI mode.
Yep, it defiantly takes some getting used to, but once you know where it's at it's actually very logical and well laid out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
- it's modal in behaviour. Once it's busy with a server there's no getting user input. You're in trouble if it's having trouble with a connection.
Being module isn't the problem, that's one of it's many strengths. It's only single threaded and defiantly needs to be multi threaded, which is being worked on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
From my POV, its short comings outweigh its benefits when compared to other options out there. There is a lot of attention paid to features that will interest a few and very little attention paid to making core functionality that all users would use, easily accessible, and the user interface less awkward and more intuitive.
The functionality with it's huge amount of features is one of the reasons the UI takes getting used to. But day to day email after it's set up and configured it's very simple. You know getting behind the wheel of a Ferrari takes a lot more than a Yugo

Quote:
Originally Posted by curtis View Post
I can see why particular users would love it, but users that are willing to desensitize themselves to Mulberry's issues in order to use its special features, are a minority, and hence, Mulberry will likely remain a solution for such a minority. It may be the best for you, but it ain't the best .... period. That's a misleading claim to make. A heavy feature-set doesn't necessarily make it better than a very well put together client with a less esoteric feature set at a user's disposal.
If you use IMAP and need/want speed, power, multiple accounts, multiple identities, multiple cert's, SIEVE, LDAP, WebDAV, CalDAV, etc. etc. Mulberry's the one.

When Cyrus went out of business I went back to a number of other clients. Kontact, Slypheed, Evolution, Claws, etc. etc. etc. Oh and of course Thunderbird, but I missed the speed and power I had with Mulberry. So when it went Open Source, oh yeah!!!!!! I currently use it on Window's, Linux and Solaris, works like a champ.

As to "misleading claim", well that's your opinion
marcus0263 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 May 2008, 01:11 PM   #67
Aimlink
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Here and Now...
Posts: 1,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
It hasn't been open sourced that long, the code base is still back when it was commercial. Supports Windows, Linux, Solaris and Mac OS <= 9 very well. So lend a hand in getting ported to OS X
Can't code. Never did and likely, never will.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
And that's a bad thing? It renders limited HTML, there's been some talk about more HTML. But it's not really a priority due to the current user base either could care less or flat out doesn't want it.
Yes, this is a bad thing. Seemed OK back then, but it's ... getting old. It takes a special user to use Mulberry today. No wonder the current userbase doesn't think it bad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
Yep, it defiantly takes some getting used to, but once you know where it's at it's actually very logical and well laid out.
We have great ability to get accustomed to bad user interfaces and systems. Developers accustomed to complexity make for terrible interface designers. They are unable to see why what they think is simple is not for an average customer. A seasoned Mulberry user suffers from a similar blindness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
Being module isn't the problem, that's one of it's many strengths. It's only single threaded and defiantly needs to be multi threaded, which is being worked on.
I mentioned this YEARS ago in my early days of using Mulberry. This weakness is particularly evident on slow connections.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
The functionality with it's huge amount of features is one of the reasons the UI takes getting used to. But day to day email after it's set up and configured it's very simple. You know getting behind the wheel of a Ferrari takes a lot more than a Yugo
Right. I wish it were like that. However, Ferrari's don't annoy or mystify when you first drive them. It's quite the opposite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
If you use IMAP and need/want speed, power, multiple accounts, multiple identities, multiple cert's, SIEVE, LDAP, WebDAV, CalDAV, etc. etc. Mulberry's the one.
ThunderBird with FastMail covers a lot of that. It does have a lot.. no doubt. However, there are not many that will put up with the problems in exchange for the extra offered, since not many are in need of that extra. There's a place for Mulberry as with all the clients.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
As to "misleading claim", well that's your opinion
... as was yours. Just making sure that it's seen as such.
Aimlink is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 May 2008, 02:08 PM   #68
marcus0263
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 594
It fills a niche and does it very well

As to coding, I know enough about coding to know to run away screaming

Cheers
marcus0263 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 Jun 2008, 01:29 AM   #69
Mysteron
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2
Best Email Client for Fastmail

I use Fastmail, brilliant, and tried most of the Email Clients out there with varying degrees of satisfaction.

Thunderbird, or the latest version of Eudora, I find work best. The other plus is that they are both FREE!

Thunderbird is OK but, you have to keep going back to the Inbox to go to the next mail, unless it is a new one.

The latest version of Eudora allows you to go up or down to mail, whether new or not, without going back to the Inbox.

Only thing is, Thunderbird includes a Calendar whereas Eudora doesn't, yet!

If you prefer Eudora, like me, then download Mozilla Sunbird as a Calendar.

Ron
Mysteron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 Jun 2008, 01:39 AM   #70
Mysteron
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2
Best Email Client for Fastmail

Chad,

The best Email Client for Fastmail/Imap is Thunderbird, or the latest version of Eudora. Both have their advantages.

Thunderbird has a Calendar, Eudora does not, yet! But there is always Mozilla Sunbird!. Have a look at http://www.eudora.com

I know that your original post was some time ago but, please accept this in the spirit it was intended. ie Help

Ron
Mysteron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 Jul 2008, 05:00 PM   #71
marcus0263
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 594
Well I got bored and started messing around again with Claws Mail. I did run it about two or so years ago back when it was "Slypheed Claws". All I can say is "Wow!", they've really come a LONG way. It's fast and to be honest I've not run any tests but it feels faster than my beloved Mulberry.

The interface is nice, clean with a LOT of features under the hood. I'm running 6 different IMAP accounts on it and it is very "snappy". So far it's been very stable and a very nice/functional interface. Not trying to speak too soon but I'm going to run it for a couple more weeks and it just may replace Mulberry as my primary email client.

Anyway it's worth taking a look at Claws Mail, you can get the source and there are a number binary downloads also.
marcus0263 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11 Jul 2008, 05:18 PM   #72
David
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
I am using Alpine these last few weeks - it's pretty powerful imo
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jul 2008, 07:32 AM   #73
UrbaneTiger
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 22
have a look at Windows Live Mail Client

OK I know we are all supposed to hate microsoft; and sometimes I do too. But ask yourself this -- would we be having this discussion if MS did not exist; my answer is -- maybe not. No other company has done as much to put a computer on every desk and in every home than MS - except maybe IBM when they released an open hardware platform in the early '80's - without that there'd be no MS either.

contrary to popular opinion the LiveMail Client (LMC) is NOT a clone of OE, indeed user interface wise Thunderbird is much closer to OE than is LMC.

contrary to popular opinion LMC does not inherit the internals of OE, especially the .dbs mail store. Mail and news messages are stored as discrete .eml and .nws files respectively - the index (database if you must) can be reconstructed from the messages.

Whilst I have not personally used it for IMAP, those that do say it works fine, many folks use it to access gmail IMAP accounts.

it's NNTP features aren't too shabby either, better than many others for text groups at least, haven't used with binary groups.

I am not saying that LMC is the best, because that introduces attributes such as beauty and charm which, unless your a physicist, are subjective qualities. But it is a worthy candidate.

BTW I am thinking of changing back to Thunderbird, why you may well ask, given the accolades you just gave to LMC - see Thunder Browse!
UrbaneTiger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jul 2008, 08:04 AM   #74
marcus0263
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Seattle
Posts: 594
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbaneTiger View Post
OK I know we are all supposed to hate microsoft; and sometimes I do too. But ask yourself this -- would we be having this discussion if MS did not exist; my answer is -- maybe not. No other company has done as much to put a computer on every desk and in every home than MS - except maybe IBM when they released an open hardware platform in the early '80's - without that there'd be no MS either.
You do know Apple created the first PC don't you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbaneTiger View Post
contrary to popular opinion the LiveMail Client (LMC) is NOT a clone of OE, indeed user interface wise Thunderbird is much closer to OE than is LMC.

contrary to popular opinion LMC does not inherit the internals of OE, especially the .dbs mail store. Mail and news messages are stored as discrete .eml and .nws files respectively - the index (database if you must) can be reconstructed from the messages.
And has MS's flaws and vulnerabilities, enjoy being a member of a botnet

Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbaneTiger View Post
Whilst I have not personally used it for IMAP, those that do say it works fine, many folks use it to access gmail IMAP accounts.

it's NNTP features aren't too shabby either, better than many others for text groups at least, haven't used with binary groups.

I am not saying that LMC is the best, because that introduces attributes such as beauty and charm which, unless your a physicist, are subjective qualities. But it is a worthy candidate.

BTW I am thinking of changing back to Thunderbird, why you may well ask, given the accolades you just gave to LMC - see Thunder Browse!
Yeah T-Bird's not bad, but I must say I'm really enjoying Claws Mail
marcus0263 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14 Jul 2008, 10:46 AM   #75
UrbaneTiger
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus0263 View Post
You do know Apple created the first PC don't you?
what I said was "...except maybe IBM when they released an open hardware platform", open is not in the Jobs vocab - anyway altair was before apple.

IBM sold more XT's in the nine months after its release than apple sold in the preceding 5 years, its not first that counts, its most that counts.

It's also worth remembering that the success of the Apple II was in part because of its inclusion of Basic as a programmers language, I wont remind you of where that came from.

And don't say but apple invented the gui/wimp interface - they didn't - they stole from xerox (the courts said so), MS licensed it from xerox - that's why that silly xerox dir is installed with Windows - it serves as a copyright notice.

I installed Thunderbird and hooked up to a fastmail guest account, the Thunderbrowse extension is pretty cool - which is the thing that triggered me being here.
UrbaneTiger 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 05:31 PM.

 

Copyright EmailDiscussions.com 1998-2022. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy