Hello Stuart,
Friday, December 9, 2005, 11:18:18 PM, you wrote:
I wonder if it has something to do with setting messages to a color
group on arrival.
I've no idea, I'm afraid. I did a little unscientific experiment a
few weeks ago, opening the same IMAP mailbases using TB!, Mulberry and
Hello Clive,
Saturday, December 10, 2005, 4:39:47 AM, you wrote:
I wonder if it has something to do with setting messages to a color
group on arrival.
CT I've no idea, I'm afraid. I did a little unscientific experiment a
CT few weeks ago, opening the same IMAP mailbases using TB!, Mulberry
Hello Stuart,
Friday, December 2, 2005, 7:27:27 AM, you wrote:
SC I have a free fastmail account that I use for testing and about the
SC only thing I use it for is testing TB! with IMAP. I'm not sure which
SC version I was using at the time, either 3.63.05 or .06, but I
SC received
On Friday, December 9, 2005, 8:27:25 AM, Stuart Cuddy wrote:
Further to this I received the following from Fastmail.
---
Re: FastMail.FM account '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
You have now used over 75% of your monthly bandwidth
A quick check shows that I have used 96% of my 40 MB
bandwidth for this month and it is not half over yet. This was not a
problem before.
That's odd. I use my FastMail account for my domain traffic as well as
my list subs and I've only used around 15Mb BW for December so far.
--
Hello Dwight,
Friday, December 9, 2005, 9:09:07 AM, you wrote:
DAC I just checked and have used 16.5 mb of my fastmail bandwith for
DAC December. That is for all my mail, including having fastmail collect
DAC all 4 of my pop accounts, some of which get tons of spam due to their
DAC long lifespan.
Hello Clive,
Friday, December 9, 2005, 9:14:57 AM, you wrote:
CT That's odd. I use my FastMail account for my domain traffic as well as
CT my list subs and I've only used around 15Mb BW for December so far.
That's 2 in a row with reasonable bandwidth usage. I wonder if it has
something to do
Hello tbbeta,
I have a free fastmail account that I use for testing and about the
only thing I use it for is testing TB! with IMAP. I'm not sure which
version I was using at the time, either 3.63.05 or .06, but I
received the following from Fastmail.
Stuart Cuddy [EMAIL PROTECTED] rašė:
Email address/account: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
User Bandwidth: 10003053 bytes in one hour
The only thing in this account is tbbeta and tbudl. There was about
2000 messages in it at the time and I was not sending anything that
would account for this
Hello Vilius,
Friday, December 2, 2005, 8:13:16 AM, you wrote:
VS I've reported this a while ago (see
VS http://www.mail-archive.com/tbbeta@thebat.dutaint.com/msg74834.html),
VS but nobody seem to be interested in it. As I'm using my own IMAP server
VS I forgot about it. But now, as I'm not alone
Stuart,
On 02-12-2005 15:27, you [SC] wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
VS I've reported this a while ago (see
VS http://www.mail-archive.com/tbbeta@thebat.dutaint.com/msg74834.html),
VS but nobody seem to be interested in it.
I don't have that problem.
Also, Curtis gave you a reason for your
Hello Peter,
SC I can not find the archived message, but I hope you are right about
SC it being looked into.
Remove the trailing ) - a TB! problem.
No, it is not a TB problem. It is a user laziness problem... Put a
space after the link, and it would work. There must be rules... Next
time
Vili,
On 02-12-2005 16:40, you [V] wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
V No, it is not a TB problem. It is a user laziness problem...
Can you give me a valid URL that ends with a )?
--
greeting Best regards /greeting
author Peter Fjelsten /author
thebat version 3.62.12 Pro /thebat
12/2/2005 10:57 AM
Hi Vili,
On 12/2/2005 Vili wrote:
V Hello Peter,
SC I can not find the archived message, but I hope you are right about
SC it being looked into.
Remove the trailing ) - a TB! problem.
V No, it is not a TB problem. It is a user laziness problem... Put a
V space after
Stuart Cuddy wrote:
Maybe if it can be tracked down this can help explain why there are
so many IMAP problems.
Any one else encounter anything like this?
I use FastMail with an enhanced account as my main IMAP provider. All my
domain and list traffic goes through it and I can't say I've
Hello Peter,
On 02-12-2005 16:40, you [V] wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
V No, it is not a TB problem. It is a user laziness problem...
Can you give me a valid URL that ends with a )?
You just have to ask for it:
http://www.thebat.hu/forpeter.html)
(the bracket at the end IS a part of
Hello Peter,
V No, it is not a TB problem. It is a user laziness problem...
Can you give me a valid URL that ends with a )?
I forgot:
You just have to ask for it:
http://www.thebat.hu/forpeter.html)
(the bracket at the end IS a part of the link!!!)
You have to scroll down on that page, I
Stuart,
On 02-12-2005 15:27, you [SC] wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
VS I've reported this a while ago (see
VS http://www.mail-archive.com/tbbeta@thebat.dutaint.com/msg74834.html),
VS but nobody seem to be interested in it.
I don't have that problem.
Also, Curtis gave you a reason for your
On Friday, December 2, 2005, 11:42:20 AM, Vilius Sumskas wrote:
Also, Curtis gave you a reason for your high bandwidth usage in
http://www.mail-archive.com/tbbeta@thebat.dutaint.com/msg74852.html
No. It's not the reason. When using Outlook or Mullbery with the same IMAP
account I hardly use
When using Outlook or Mullbery with the same
IMAP account I hardly use 5mb in 8 hours.
I've just done a quick, unscientific test opening the same IMAP account
in TB! and Mulberry, both with about the same number of unread messages
and reading the port upload and download toals with Port
Also, Curtis gave you a reason for your high bandwidth usage in
http://www.mail-archive.com/tbbeta@thebat.dutaint.com/msg74852.html
No. It's not the reason. When using Outlook or Mullbery with the same
IMAP
account I hardly use 5mb in 8 hours.
I have 40 folders in my IMAP account, check
Hi Vilius,
You wrote:
No. It's not the reason. When using Outlook or Mullbery with the same
IMAP account I hardly use 5mb in 8 hours.
Do you have TB! to do full synchronization's with the server? If so,
then those other clients are incapable of doing such a thing. Mulberry
interacts
On Friday, December 2, 2005, 12:17:03 PM, Vilius Šumskas wrote:
I have 40 folders in my IMAP account, check regularly 4 POP
accounts, and do all my business with TB! which is open pretty much
all the time. For the month of November, I used a total of 21.9M of
bandwidth.
Do you use SSL ?
I
Hi Clive,
You wrote:
It looks as though TB's bandwidth usage is around 3-4 times that of
Mulberry. Make of that what you will.
I'm not surprised. TB!'s approach is different.
When was the last time you had used TB!?
When TB! loads, it updates the message index file for all
Hi Curtis,
You wrote:
Mulberry interacts with the server in a way that is highly
inefficient and in a way that Outlook is incapable of as well.
Please replace 'inefficient' with 'efficient'! Thanks. ;)
--
-= Curtis =-
PGPKey: http://rsakey.aimlink.name
-=-=-
(A)bort, (R)etry,
I have 40 folders in my IMAP account, check regularly 4 POP
accounts, and do all my business with TB! which is open pretty much
all the time. For the month of November, I used a total of 21.9M of
bandwidth.
Do you use SSL ?
I am using regular authentication (not sure what SSL is but if it
Do you have TB! to do full synchronization's with the server? If so,
then those other clients are incapable of doing such a thing. Mulberry
interacts with the server in a way that is highly inefficient and in a
way that Outlook is incapable of as well.
Yes, I have synchronization every 1
Hi Vilius,
You wrote:
Yes, I have synchronization every 1 minute. BTW, I have Outlook
configured exactly the same way. Syncronize all folder and all
messages every 1 minute.
The options look the same, but they work differently.
If you right click each of TB!'s folders you'll see
If you right click each of TB!'s folders you'll see that you can vary
how you synchronize. Which of those do you use? Does Outlook give you
those options?
I use Full Syncronization in TB! and Syncronize All Messages in Outlook on
every folder.
--
Pagarbiai,
Vilius Sumskas
LNK TV sistemu
Hi Vilius,
You wrote:
I use Full Syncronization in TB! and Syncronize All Messages in
Outlook on every folder.
So when you do this with Outlook, can you disconnect from the server at
any point and browse all messages in all folders?
--
-= Curtis =-
PGPKey:
--On 2/12/2005 14:17 -0500 Curtis wrote:
When was the last time you had used TB!?
I've been using TB and Mulberry together, really - only because I'm too
idle to synchronise my address books! So, the answer to your question is
that both progs probably have similar cached message information.
So when you do this with Outlook, can you disconnect from the server at
any point and browse all messages in all folders?
Of source. I use it like this for 3 years now.
--
Pagarbiai,
Vilius Sumskas
LNK TV sistemu administratorius
tel.: +370 614 75713
www.lnk.lt
Vili,
On 02-12-2005 18:20, you [V] wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
V You just have to ask for it:
V http://www.thebat.hu/forpeter.html)
Yes but a browser might not interpret .html) as html - unless you make a
MIME type - and why would you.
V (the bracket at the end IS a part of the link!!!)
Hi Clive,
You wrote:
I've been using TB and Mulberry together, really - only because I'm
too idle to synchronise my address books! So, the answer to your
question is that both progs probably have similar cached message
information.
Even then I'd be cautious comparing the two. They
Hi Vilius,
You wrote:
Of source. I use it like this for 3 years now.
Then there's something pretty inefficient about TB!'s approach to
maintaining a full synch status.
--
-= Curtis =-
PGPKey: http://rsakey.aimlink.name
-=-=-
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural
Hello Peter,
V You just have to ask for it:
V http://www.thebat.hu/forpeter.html)
Yes but a browser might not interpret .html) as html - unless you make a
MIME type - and why would you.
...
V (the bracket at the end IS a part of the link!!!)
Yes, but since there was no comma after the
Hello Clive,
Friday, December 2, 2005, 11:07:55 AM, you wrote:
CT I use FastMail with an enhanced account as my main IMAP provider. All my
CT domain and list traffic goes through it and I can't say I've ever
CT experienced any bandwidth spikes - but there again I don't use TB!
CT overmuch these
37 matches
Mail list logo
