Re: Toolbar [request?]
>... but have noticed that the lack of a manual is a frequent >source of comments. ... Oh, there are other topics too... you just have to ask about them in the right way! :D Chris --
Re: Bug in "View Only..."! Need quick fix
Received from Max Gossell on 23/5/03 at 1:06 pm >A search/filtering tool you can't trust is a tool you can't use at all. >And you are back to your own memory or manual looking through zillions of >mails. I agree entirely. The main search function of PM is a very good case in point. I almost never use it any more because the results returned are so often inaccurate. People on this list, myself included, have been complaining quite legitimately about the search functions of PM for years now, and it's still no better. If I was somebody who needed to regularly search my database for long-lost emails (as opposed to having to do so only infrequently, as I do) then I think that I'd have ditched PM long ago, in spite of the fact that in almost every other respect I find it a joy to use. CTM often explain that because PM uses the Sherlock search engine, any inaccuracies are down to that, not PM itself. Well, then, don't use the Sherlock engine. It seems obvious to me that accurate searches are possible on a body of email, because almost every other email client manages to perform them. PM always returns too many false positives and false negatives -- a fact that isn't always obvious unless one performs a test search where the correct results are known beforehand. I think I've been using PM for 3 years now, since v.3.1 or something like that; isn't it time this problem was fixed? I mean, 3 YEARS of regular complaints about a problem and it's still with us? What's THAT all about? Rick --- G4/500 MHz (DP) :: OS 10.2.4 :: PM 4.1.2 :: 3 pane mode :: 768 MB RAM
Bug in "View Only..."! Need quick fix
If I go to Menu->View->View Only... (or click the small "eye" icon in the middle of the Mail Browser window) I get the smal tool for filtering out text in the 'from', 'to' or 'subject' fields. In my PowerMail Discuss Folder there are 15 incoming mails addressed to me personally. When checking each mail individually with the alternative "Show Simple Header", all 15 show [Max Gossell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] in the 'to' field. The reason, I guess, is I exist in my own address book. Because if turn on "Show Full Header" 10 of them have been addressed to [Max Gossell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] and the other 5 have been addressed to [<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]. Now, 1) If I choose the option 'to' in the View Only tool and write "max" in the text field I get 15 hits = correct. 2) If I write "gossell" in the text field I get 10 hits = understandable, but not optimal. should be 15 as well. 3) If I write "progettoavanti.com" or "prog" or any other shortening of the domain name in the text field I get 5 hits = BLOODY HORRIBLE. Opposite: 4) If I choose the option 'from' in the View Only tool and write "max" or "gossell" in the text field I get 92 hits = correct. 5) If I write "progettoavanti.com" or "prog" or any other shortening of the domain name in the text field I get 0 hits = now understandable, but EQUALLY BLOODY HORRIBLE. A search/filtering tool you can't trust is a tool you can't use at all. And you are back to your own memory or manual looking through zillions of mails. This seems to me as it should be a pretty easy fix. At least having the filter check everything in the "real" 'to' and 'from' fields. Can we have it. Soon? Max G
Re: moving file to trash -- glitch?
Received from Wayne Brissette on 22/5/03 at 8:10 pm >There continue to be some issues in Mac OS X when it comes to updating >the current view of things. This could very well be one of them. If you >select the trash icon in the doc, I'm going to bet it gets updated and >looks "full" at this point. Actually, it doesn't. When I realised that PM had put things in the trash but the icon still showed empty, I too expected that selecting the trash in the Finder would force the icon to update. But it didn't. Selecting it, opening the Trash, closing it again, none of these updated the icon. Since this is apparently an Apple issue it's now rather off topic for this list, but I offer this info for reference -- and to close the thread. Rick --- G4/500 MHz (DP) :: OS 10.2.4 :: PM 4.1.2 :: 3 pane mode :: 768 MB RAM
Re: Longshot (?) request (default sender)
Received from Max Gossell on 23/5/03 at 9:37 am >I guess this is just a dream, but wouldn't it be very nice to be able to >assign a 'from' address to a specific 'to' address? > >One's emailing would be so much smoother without i.e. those list bounces >because you get because you forgot to change your from address before >hitting the send button. Just one more reason to introduce a feature I've been asking for for years now: Filters that work on outgoing mail BEFORE it is sent, not afterward. With that featrure I could change a message's specified account automatically based on its destination, in case I forgot -- no more business emails going out through my personal account. And many more possibilities. Rick --- G4/500 MHz (DP) :: OS 10.2.4 :: PM 4.1.2 :: 3 pane mode :: 768 MB RAM
Longshot (?) request (default sender)
I guess this is just a dream, but wouldn't it be very nice to be able to assign a 'from' address to a specific 'to' address? One's emailing would be so much smoother without i.e. those list bounces because you get because you forgot to change your from address before hitting the send button. Max G
Re: Wrong SMTP server for second account problem
Go to 'Setup' and 'Mail Schedulings and Locations' and select the 'Locations' tab. If you have a default account or default SMTP server selected that may cause this problem. James On Tue, 20 May 2003 14:25:25 +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: >Ok, so what is this: > >I activate a second account, I open a new message, set to the new account >(NewAccount), click send and the PowerMail attempts to send from my first >account (FirstAccount) and that doesn't work as it does SMTP Auth and the >email address is of course the wrong one. > >I have both accounts activated under "connect", also tried "NewAccount" >only. Didn't help. > >So what's going on? As I can give separate SMTP servers for each account, >then it is to be expected that each account try and send from the server >given there, isn't it? > > > >
Re: Partial retrievement
On Tue, 20 May 2003 22:57:25 +0200, Mikael Byström wrote: >How can I partially retrieve messages that are above a certain size? Is >this an option in 4.x at least? > > > > Go to the 'Setup' menu then select 'Mail accounts'. Select the account which you want to apply a partial retrieve filter to. Click on the 'Receiving' tab and look towards the middle of the pane - you should see 'Advanced' which you can expand. You'll find a radio button there with the option to partially retrieve mails over x kilobytes.
Re: Partial retrievement
And you can do that individually for each account as well, in the advanced settings of the receiving-tab. Locations is probably a better place to deal with it, though! Mirko -- Mirko Kranenburg e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 20 May 2003 22:57:25 +0200 Mikael Byström wrote: >How can I partially retrieve messages that are above a certain size? Is >this an option in 4.x at least? > > > >
Re: Partial retrievement
Go to Setup > Mail schedulings and locations > Options tab At least in v 4.1.2, which I am using. Mirko -- Mirko Kranenburg e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 20 May 2003 22:57:25 +0200 Mikael Byström wrote: >How can I partially retrieve messages that are above a certain size? Is >this an option in 4.x at least? > > > >
Re: Toolbar [request?]
Hi All, I'm fairly new to the mailing list but have noticed that the lack of a manual is a frequent source of comments. I would agree that an up-to-date manual is a glaring omission from a commercial application however I can see how it would happen. Many have commented that a manual would be useful for retaining new users and how this would have a positive impact on the long term program development. So, between us I'm sure that we can collaborate on a simple manual that tells people where things are and how to get up and running. Let CTM distribute this as a PDF with the application. Alternatively, adopt something like FAQ-o-Matic and let people contribute the answers there. Any takers, any interest? James On Thu, 22 May 2003 08:25:44 -0700, Barbara Needham wrote: >C. A. Niemiec on 5/22/03 said > >>You learn something new every day. Where would we be if we had a manual? ;) > >We wouldn't have all these nice surprises! >Just kidding. >But, I have tried to write a manual just for a simple church directory >"program" I made out of Approach. I finally gave up and just put >directions on the screen. Writing a manual isn't easy. Not that a program >shouldn't have one... > > >-- >Barbara Needham > > > >
Re: Toolbar [request?]
On Thu, May 22, 2003, C. A. Niemiec [EMAIL PROTECTED], invoked powers within the internet realm, to proclaim ... >>>I would welcome a vertical toolbar option, whether or not it's connected. >> >>Try the Menu: Window -> Rotate Toolbar > >I swear I've been looking right at that ... DUH! > >You learn something new every day. Where would we be if we had a manual? ;) Well, the menus aren't totally intuitive. Some things don't seem consistently implemented to me. I would think "Move To Mail Trash" would be in the "Mail" menu where other actions on messages are located. With my small hands, command+delete involves too much hand energy, even on the small-sized PowerBook keyboard, so I had to search the menus frequently when I first started using PowerMail and the Delete key (or command+d) alone didn't work. (I guess I got too used to these keyboard commands with Emailer.) Fortunately, with QuicKeys, I re-mapped most of the keyboard commands for the left side of the keyboard. It's inconvenient being without the control and option keys on the right side. Sometimes, even the stuff you see with wide eyes doesn't sink in at first. I've recently discovered how much easier it is to use the "View Unread" and "View Only..." options for following threads. Now I always have the "View Only..." palette open and used QuicKeys to map a keyboard shortcut to the "View Unread" menu item because I use it so frequently. cheshirekat
Re: Spam
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* On Thu, May 22, 2003, Dan Webb said: >Andy Fragen, 8:57 PM, 5/22/03: >> >>On Thu, May 22, 2003, Dan Webb said: >> >>>A useful trick I've learned to protect the email lists I subscribe to: >>>Create a filter that checks for your email list addresses, and schedule >>>it to run before the SpamSieve filter. Be sure the "Stop applying >>>filters to this message" checkbox is enabled. >> >>SpamSieve will use your system address book as a "white list". > >True, and that's a great feature. But I don't have all of my email list >addresses in my address book. Some are just for receiving announcements, >so I've never needed to add them. But maybe I should; then I could >reduce the size of my filters. Dan, If you teach SpamSieve your email lists as "Good" then you shouldn't really have that problem either. Of course, you may have to teach it with several different copies of the list. -- Andy Fragen
Re: Spam
Original message Andy Fragen, 8:57 PM, 5/22/03: >*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* >On Thu, May 22, 2003, Dan Webb said: > >>A useful trick I've learned to protect the email lists I subscribe to: >>Create a filter that checks for your email list addresses, and schedule >>it to run before the SpamSieve filter. Be sure the "Stop applying >>filters to this message" checkbox is enabled. > >SpamSieve will use your system address book as a "white list". True, and that's a great feature. But I don't have all of my email list addresses in my address book. Some are just for receiving announcements, so I've never needed to add them. But maybe I should; then I could reduce the size of my filters. -- Dan Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The state is the great fictitious entity by which everybody seeks to live at the expense of everybody else." - Frederic Bastiat
Re: Spam
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* On Thu, May 22, 2003, Dan Webb said: >A useful trick I've learned to protect the email lists I subscribe to: >Create a filter that checks for your email list addresses, and schedule >it to run before the SpamSieve filter. Be sure the "Stop applying >filters to this message" checkbox is enabled. SpamSieve will use your system address book as a "white list". -- Andy Fragen
Re: Spam
A useful trick I've learned to protect the email lists I subscribe to: Create a filter that checks for your email list addresses, and schedule it to run before the SpamSieve filter. Be sure the "Stop applying filters to this message" checkbox is enabled. Dan Original message [EMAIL PROTECTED], 3:30 PM, 5/22/03: >Are there any good tricks to teach SpamSieve or will it really learn on >it's own? > >Fred -- Dan Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] "To be controlled in our economic pursuits means to be ... controlled in everything." -- F.A. Hayek
Re: HTML Mail/Spam Relationship
*This message was transferred with a trial version of CommuniGate(tm) Pro* On Wed, May 21, 2003, Michael Tsai said: >In PowerMail you might be able to filter based on the content-type >containing "html". As for SpamSieve, I'm looking at providing some >special options for HTML messages. What exactly do you mean by "proven >innocent"? Do you mean that there should be a different cutoff for HTML >messages so that the slightest bit of spamminess can tip the scale? Michael, Lately what I've noticed that SpamSieve doesn't catch is the message that doesn't appear to have any body content but has an HTML message attached. What I see in PM is a messages with rather innocuous headers and no visible body, but an HTML attachment. The messages are usually very small and I think the HTML is a redirect or Meta-Refresh or something. I can send some to you if you haven't been seeing them. Unfortunately one of the easiest ways to troubleshoot this is not available in PM. I want to be able to open the source of a message. Why can't I? -- anyone? BTW, my SpamSieve reads 99.2% accurate with 9 false positive and 64 false neg. 8667 good messages and 202 spam. So I think it works great. -- Andy Fragen TiBook 400/384 RAM - OS X 10.2.6 - PowerMail v4.1.2 PowerMail AppleScript Archives: http://homepage.mac.com/wayneb/powermail.html
Re: powermail-discuss Digest #1501 - 05/21/03
I never have this happening as I first check mail and then manually trigger email to be send. Never run into problems like you have described, maybe a way for you to go too. Not saying it should work like you would like it to, just right now it doesn't and so this would be possibly a working solution. This usually also prevents the 'oops forgot to attach my vacation pict to the email to aunt julie' sort of frantic aborting of messages :) ---marlyse >THe problem, I think, is that it is attempting to send email while it is >receiving it and it ends up in the same sort of confused state...
Re: Spam
[EMAIL PROTECTED] on 5/22/03 said >Well I had downloaded SpamSieve last week but didn't set it up since I >wasn't having any problem with spam. Today I started getting spam from >the same sender to both my .mac account and my business domain account. >Both were addressed correctly (since the business email has a catch-all >that sometimes gets a few sales type emails) and I find it strange that >both emails got the same spam. > >Anyway, I just set up SpamSieve and it seems to be working (at least with >those emails). I'll have to add a few "good" emails so that it will >learn which emails are good and which are not. > >Are there any good tricks to teach SpamSieve or will it really learn on >it's own? It is important to feed it about equal amounts of good and spam; or if you want more good to go to your spam folder, train with more spam; or more spam to go your good, use more good mail. I find it very helpful to filter out all my mailing list mail first, and also mail from my friends and family. -- Barbara Needham
Spam
Well I had downloaded SpamSieve last week but didn't set it up since I wasn't having any problem with spam. Today I started getting spam from the same sender to both my .mac account and my business domain account. Both were addressed correctly (since the business email has a catch-all that sometimes gets a few sales type emails) and I find it strange that both emails got the same spam. Anyway, I just set up SpamSieve and it seems to be working (at least with those emails). I'll have to add a few "good" emails so that it will learn which emails are good and which are not. Are there any good tricks to teach SpamSieve or will it really learn on it's own? Fred
Contacting CTM
Does anybody have a phone number that reaches CTM sales? I've been trying to email for several days, and keep getting bounced back "because the connection was dropped by the remote server." Thanks, z
Sharing Address Books
Greets - What's the most efficient way to share address books with co-workers? I have four standard folders and a couple of groups I'd like to distribute whenever there are changes to any of them. Thanks, z
Re: Toolbar [request?]
C. A. Niemiec on 5/22/03 said >You learn something new every day. Where would we be if we had a manual? ;) We wouldn't have all these nice surprises! Just kidding. But, I have tried to write a manual just for a simple church directory "program" I made out of Approach. I finally gave up and just put directions on the screen. Writing a manual isn't easy. Not that a program shouldn't have one... -- Barbara Needham
Re: Missing HotKey !? (Was: Toolbar [request?])
On Wed, May 21, 2003, Max Gossell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Could we have that? Soon? Like a small patch made in the very next coffe >break? There are HotKeys for all other buttons in the Toolbar, and this >is a bit inconsistent. It also kind of take the "HotKey Alternative" away >from you... :-( Hi Max, I know this isn't the hotkey solution you were looking for, but do you not have the little attachment button with the paper clip icon in the lower left corner of your new message window? Thanks, Zach -- Zach Selland Taylor Design Group Portland, OR [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.taylordesigngroup.com
Partial retrievement
How can I partially retrieve messages that are above a certain size? Is this an option in 4.x at least?
Wrong SMTP server for second account problem (Resend)
Ok, so what is this: I activate a second account, I open a new message, set to the new account (NewAccount), click send and the PowerMail attempts to send from my first account (FirstAccount) and that doesn't work as it does SMTP Auth and the email address is of course the wrong one. I have both accounts activated under "connect", also tried "NewAccount" only. Didn't help. So what's going on? As I can give separate SMTP servers for each account, then it is to be expected that each account try and send from the server given there, isn't it?
Wrong SMTP server for second account problem
Ok, so what is this: I activate a second account, I open a new message, set to the new account (NewAccount), click send and the PowerMail attempts to send from my first account (FirstAccount) and that doesn't work as it does SMTP Auth and the email address is of course the wrong one. I have both accounts activated under "connect", also tried "NewAccount" only. Didn't help. So what's going on? As I can give separate SMTP servers for each account, then it is to be expected that each account try and send from the server given there, isn't it?
Char problem on Import of Mail from OE, Emailer and Entourage
Why can't Powermail get the extended ASCII chars right every time when importing messages? I tried with Entourage 2001 mailboxes that had been collected over the net and the chars looked right and import was swift and easy. But when I try and import directly from Emailer or trough OE 4.5 first, the chars all look wrong again. So I tried and moved the OE 4.5 messages to OE 5.02 (where they looke dright again, h) and then to Entourage 2001 (I couldn't see any direct ways to read Emailer even though the online help stated it should be possible). The chars look right all the way until I put them on the desktop by exporting from Entourage. Why would one set of chars look right in several MS email apps beside OE 4.5 and then on export they will look bad again. I assume the data is the same internally and the apps themselves decide what to display according to a standard? So isn't everyone adher to the same standard or at least CTM acknowledge the standard the imported mail have and change the data or the display accordingly so that we can enjoy trouble free importing and not feel we are wasting our very lifes when we try and switch email application? Is it really that hard?
