Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM
cheshirekat ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 2008-6-19 5:09 PM said: Isn't your HTML showing as an attachment in PowerMail? Did you look at his screenshots? There was an attachment. That's his point. I'll repeat his words: PowerMail shows me a totally blank message with a html attachment, with no provision for viewing the message. It's just blank. Lame. There's no globe icon to 'view as html'. The email had _two italicised words_ and for that PowerMail needs to launch a 3rd Party application to show the message. Lame. This happens to me all the time too. Sean
Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail
MB ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 2008-6-20 6:54 PM said: Well, Apple currently provides developers with a .Mac SDK, so they may expand it to cover these new features. Or not. We'll see. And if CTM knows, they're under NDA. But 3rd Party developers will always be behind Apple in this regard, since of course teams within Apple get to use each other's code before any of us. And judging by the mediocre integration with Address Book (SDK introduced in 10.2), I'm pessimistic. :( I feel Apple is to blame here. What was the problem if the answer is to kill applications on the Mac platform? Well, I sorta agree. It's hard to compete with Apple since they make the OS too. But email is an essential feature and Mac OS should come with a mail client. But CTM is to blame too, they haven't been keeping PM up to date. It still doesn't even have sheets, a feature added in Mac OS X 10.0, 8 years ago. -- Every rule has an exception; especially this one.
Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM
Dave N wrote: Look at the difference between the 2 programs viewing the SAME EXACT EMAIL. PowerMail shows me a totally blank message with a html attachment, with no provision for viewing the message. It's just blank. Lame. AppleMail shows me the message so I can read it. Obviously this is possible. Yes, PowerMail has some limitations when displaying complex messages, which contain mixed HTML and plain text parts, or multiple HTML parts. These limitations are not easy to fix: this would require modifying how messages are saved in PowerMail's database, and combining multiple parts in a single HTML view can produce unexpected results, depending on how the HTML parts are designed. We chose to handle these messages as if the HTML parts were attachments, so you can display them individually in the web browser. Also, although these messages are valid regarding the MIME standard, it is normally the job of the sending email client to format complex messages in a unique HTML part, rather than the receiving email client to handle multiple HTML or HTML+text parts. Jérôme - CTM Engineering - FABULOUS PRODUCT ! Wonderful ! A real Spotlight Killer ! I'm now able to locate content in documents that I KNEW was there but Spotlight couldn't find. FoxTrot Personal Search is far more efficient and displays a preview of the file when you hiighlight it. Janie Angus, Nevada Download a demo version from www.foxtrot.ch -
Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail
Sean McBride wrote: Well, I sorta agree. It's hard to compete with Apple since they make the OS too. But email is an essential feature and Mac OS should come with a mail client. But CTM is to blame too, they haven't been keeping PM up to date. It still doesn't even have sheets, a feature added in Mac OS X 10.0, 8 years ago. Keeping an application up to date with Mac OS is not trivial, you know. PowerMail's foundation were built on the Mac OS 8 days, using PowerPlant which was the most used GUI framework at this time (also used by some Apple applications, like Finder and iTunes IIRC). Since then, Apple came with a new framework (carbon HIViews), that can't be fully adopted using PowerPlant. A new version of PowerPlant based on HIViews, PowerPlant X, was started by Metrowerks, but there was no easy migration path from PowerPlant to PowerPlant X; and PowerPlant X has never been finished and is now abandoned. Carbon HIViews itself is now being abandoned by Apple (it will never support 64 bits). During this period, we also had to change lots of things: transition to Carbon APIs, transition to the CFM binary format of Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X's MachO; transition to resource based application files to file packages; transition from the CodeWarrior compiler to Xcode; transition from PPC to intel; etc... Some technologies we have been using in PM 3 or 4 have been abandoned by Apple: HTML Rendering, AIAT (sherlock's indexing engine), OpenTransport... Concerning the Apple Address Book, it does not have the same feature set than PM's address book. Instead of dropping our address book and fully adopting Apple's one (which can be abandoned by Apple at any new major Mac OS X release...), we chose to implement a synchronization mechanism. So, yes, PM is not fully up to date with Mac OS. But doing so would require to spend 95% of our time rewriting things just to be up to date. We chose to be up to date for important things (Mac OS 9 - Mac OS X, PPC - intel...), but not for things that require a lot of work for a minor feature (supporting sheets would have require to adopt PowerPlant X), and not for things that Apple can abandon any time like the Address Book APIs. Jérôme - CTM Engineering - Powermail's search capabilities, already mind-boggling fast, seem to be even faster. You'll never say I think I have that in an email somewhere, ever again. Because, you'll know in a half second. PowerMail user comment on www.versiontracker.com Download a demo version from www.ctmdev.com -
Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM
Sean McBride sez: The email had _two italicised words_ and for that PowerMail needs to launch a 3rd Party application to show the message. Lame. This happens to me all the time too. Are we sure that the email in question followed the proper protocols for HTML mail? I bet it didn't if the HTML came out as an attachment. There should be a text portion that would show as text and the HTML portion that would show up if you have HTML turned on. If it is formatted properly, then the button should be there. Why is it PowerMail's fault if the sneding application can't format the mail properly? Just because other mail programs can catch a few errors and fix them on the fly, doesn't mean all of them can or should. I'd prefer that email programs didn't fix errors so that crappy email programs would finally die the deaths they deserve. -- Michael Lewis Off Balance Productions [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.offbalance.com
Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM
Hi Jérôme, Thanks for the explanation. It always helps to understand the problem. Whether we all like it or not, html mail is becoming more common, not less. So let's look forward to a solution. Would it be possible to let Webkit provide the services to view the html message within PowerMail? Could the complex message be assembled on the fly when there is a request to view a certain complex message? So maybe it would not be necessary to change the PM db structure, and still provide more robust viewing of html messages. This might also be helpful when the PowerMail user wants to reply to a blank message with html attachment, so the message text could be quoted (as plain text, or even, Gasp! in it's original format). That would be a labor-saving advancement. When I receive one of these html messages (as an attachment) I generally open the html attachment with Safari or FireFox, copy the text and run the script Replace Message Text with Clipboard to put this text into the received incoming message. Then I can delete the html attachment. If the incoming message displayed any text at all, then I add a step: after copying the text from the web browser, I paste it into TextWrangler, copy any text from the PM message, paste into Text Wrangler to assemble the entire desired message to save, then copy run that script to put this text into the incoming PM message. Kind of a lot of busy work that I don't always have time for. Here is the script for anyone that wants it. http://dave.sbamug.com/pmdisclist/scripts/Replace_with_clipboard.zip After Unzipping, drop this script into ~/Mail/PowerMail Files/Customs Scripts and restart PM. Perhaps this could be automated built into PowerMail? Or perhaps PowerMail can use Webkit to display the message on request? Or since AppleMail is scriptable and has a framework, (getting wild here) maybe PowerMail could send html messages to AppleMail for processing and return. Or even better, if PowerMail includes a a converter/html display engine so that PM will still work after Apple changes something again. None of us would want PM to break just because Apple changed something (again) in the OS or iApp. Somehow, there can be a solution. Best, Dave N in reply to ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), PowerMail Engineering's message of 5:12 AM, 6/20/08 Yes, PowerMail has some limitations when displaying complex messages, which contain mixed HTML and plain text parts, or multiple HTML parts. These limitations are not easy to fix: this would require modifying how messages are saved in PowerMail's database, and combining multiple parts in a single HTML view can produce unexpected results, depending on how the HTML parts are designed. We chose to handle these messages as if the HTML parts were attachments, so you can display them individually in the web browser. Also, although these messages are valid regarding the MIME standard, it is normally the job of the sending email client to format complex messages in a unique HTML part, rather than the receiving email client to handle multiple HTML or HTML+text parts. Jérôme - CTM Engineering
powermail-discuss Digest #2846 - 06/20/08
powermail-discuss Digest #2846 - Friday, June 20, 2008 HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by Dave N [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail by MB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail by MB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Review of Power Mail by MB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by cheshirekat [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Review of Power Mail by Paul Schatzkin [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: Review of Power Mail by Richard Hart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re(2): Review of Power Mail by Peter Lovell [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by Dave N [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by Sean McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail by Sean McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by PowerMail Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail by PowerMail Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by Michael Lewis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM by Dave N [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Subject: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM From: Dave N [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:22:40 -0700 Ok, this html mail thing is getting more annoying all the time. Even if I want to push the globe button in PowerMail, it is not always there because PowerMail does not always notice the message is in HTML format. Look at the difference between the 2 programs viewing the SAME EXACT EMAIL. PowerMail shows me a totally blank message with a html attachment, with no provision for viewing the message. It's just blank. Lame. AppleMail shows me the message so I can read it. Obviously this is possible. I'm starting to see more of this kind of problem, and CTM really needs to do something about it. Or else PM will be an impediment to communication. Here are the screen photos. See the difference? http://dave.sbamug.com/pmdisclist/AppleMail_msg.png http://dave.sbamug.com/pmdisclist/PowerMail_msg.png I still prefer sending plain text emails. But I've gotten used to having a powerful email client (PM of course) that does things right. However, it seems the world is still advancing, and now PM needs to catch up. Like any tough love, I wouldn't spend the time to bring this up if I didn't care. Here's hope for the future, and hope that the future includes an updated, more powerful version of PowerMail. Best, Dave N -- Subject: Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail From: MB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 14:49:49 +0200 Steve Tarpin said: I've avoided Apple's Mail application, having been an avid PowerMail user for 10-years now (since May of 1999) That's 9-years though. The Cloud are awfully tempting. The Cloud is the direction of the future (GoogleApps, MobileMe etc), and eventually I will give in and make the move, unless... What are the tempting features for you? Mikael Technoids: PM 5.6.3 build 4504 sv / SpamSieve 2.6.6 sv | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 | 1GB / 80GB -- Subject: Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail From: MB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 00:54:53 +0200 Sean McBride said: Well, Apple currently provides developers with a .Mac SDK, so they may expand it to cover these new features. Or not. We'll see. And if CTM knows, they're under NDA. But 3rd Party developers will always be behind Apple in this regard, since of course teams within Apple get to use each other's code before any of us. And judging by the mediocre integration with Address Book (SDK introduced in 10.2), I'm pessimistic. :( I feel Apple is to blame here. What was the problem if the answer is to kill applications on the Mac platform? Mikael Technoids: PM 5.6.3 build 4504 sv / SpamSieve 2.6.6 sv | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 | 1GB / 80GB -- Subject: Re: Review of Power Mail From: MB [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 01:55:51 +0200 A-NO-NE Music said: I think OM uses aliases, so I wouldn't think the name throws it off unless the alias in question is broken. Not too sure about this, because sometimes it opens correct attachment after reboot, but not after restarting PM. It seems as if PM caches with wrong pointer. it may be some kind of bug, but I don't think I have experienced it. Though I may not have been verifying a majority of posted attachments. Mikael Technoids: PM 5.6.3 build 4504 sv / SpamSieve 2.6.6 sv | OS X 10.4.8 | Powerbook G4/400 | 1GB / 80GB -- Subject: Re: HTML mail comparison PM vs AM From: cheshirekat [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 15:09:46 -0600 Isn't your HTML
Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail
I've avoided Apple's Mail application, having been an avid PowerMail user for 10-years now (since May of 1999) That's 9-years though. Picky-Pickerton, so I'm not big on detail, don't let that distract you from the point. The Cloud are awfully tempting. The Cloud is the direction of the future (GoogleApps, MobileMe etc), and eventually I will give in and make the move, unless... What are the tempting features for you? I thought I was pretty clear with that initially, but here goes... the features of MobileMe and the mail-push, server-side constant updating of multiple computers from The Cloud are awfully tempting. Shall I repeat that? the features of MobileMe and the mail-push, server-side constant updating of multiple computers from The Cloud are awfully tempting. Hope that helps... -- If you lend someone $20 and never see that person again, it was probably worth it.
Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail
So, yes, PM is not fully up to date with Mac OS. But doing so would require to spend 95% of our time rewriting things just to be up to date. We chose to be up to date for important things (Mac OS 9 - Mac OS X, PPC - intel...), but not for things that require a lot of work for a minor feature (supporting sheets would have require to adopt PowerPlant X), and not for things that Apple can abandon any time like the Address Book APIs. So Jerome, regarding the initial question, if it were my decision to eventually move from PM to Mail because the push services were not to be offered at all then I should probably do it ASAP to account for the small degree of arc in my learning curve. Do you foresee the possibility of PM going in that direction, or should I go ahead and start dumbing- down. I'll miss everything I have come to appreciate and enjoy about PM; the staff's attention to users concerns, the community that has contributed, and mostly the interface that has been my email experience for so long. But considering the changes that have occurred over the years of using PM and the changes that are to come in the near future, having email (at least) files updated on ALL computers at ALL times (I use a laptop, desktop and iPhone) is too compelling to avoid. If you feel you can't comment publicly Jerome because you might advocate a switch, feel free to write me directly. I know this thread moved away slightly from my initial inquiry, but I'm really curious about the future of push services and what your (and other's) take might be. Regards... Steve -- Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes. That way, when you criticize them, you're a mile away and you have their shoes.
Re: MobileMe and Push-eMail
Steve Tarpin wrote at 6:04 PM (-0400) on 6/20/08: I'm really curious about the future of push services and what your (and other's) take might be. Pardon me if I'm coming late to the party here, but from what I've gathered, push in this context simply means IMAP; is that correct? And the salient point is that PM has crappy IMAP support? Or are there further issues also? (I use both PM and Apple Mail: of course I've used PM for years with POP3 for all my personal and business stuff. But at the day job I started a few months ago I'm using an IMAP box, which is simply infeasible with PM but at which Apple Mail excels.) -b -- Ben Kennedy (chief magician) zygoat creative technical services http://www.zygoat.ca
