[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Notice: in file [ROOT]/includes/session.php on line 2208: Array to string conversion
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4688: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3823)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4690: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3823)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4691: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3823)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4692: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3823)
Poco Forums • View topic - Poco 4 screenshot ?

Poco 4 screenshot ?

Discussion not related specifically to one of the topics below

Moderators: Eric, Tomas, robin

Poco 4 screenshot ?

Postby sabreman » Thu Sep 15, 2005 7:38 pm

Some of us are waiting to see some Pocomail 4 beta screenshots as we aren't "beta choosen ones" or simply curious about new Poco version.

In my case, I'm a doubtful Eudora (since 2000) and (until now) Foxmail user tired of lack of upgrading software and searching for a better app.

I tried the Poco3 trial for a week and think it seems a good e-mail client, but before buying anything I'm trying another e-mail clients just to see what's the application that feed my needs.

Sorry, but can the mortals see only a screenshot of the new version ?

Thanks in advance.


Sabreman
^..^
sabreman
New Arrival
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:19 am

Postby Eric » Thu Sep 15, 2005 8:12 pm

Hi Sabreman & welcome to Poco Forums, :D
sabreman wrote:Some of us are waiting to see some Pocomail 4 beta screenshots as we aren't "beta choosen ones" or simply curious about new Poco version.
Unless PSI approves, no screenshot can be posted of the new beta.
It's a beta, so that information must stay within the beta section.
Beta testers may tell about the improvements, like posted in this topic, but not about the details (specifics). = NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement)
I tried the Poco3 trial for a week and think it seems a good e-mail client, but after buying anything I'm trying another e-mail clients just to see what's the application that feed my needs.
Being a 'forced' Eudora user myself, I think you will like the new version a lot when released. 8)
Sorry, but can the mortals see only a screenshot of the new version ?
In short NO. :?

Sorry. :wink:
Eric
 

Postby Slaven » Fri Sep 16, 2005 6:23 am

We are getting close though, so hopefully the wait won't be too long. And honestly, the screenshot may not tell the whole story as we tried to unclutter the interface so PocoMail 4 may look simpler than PocoMail 3. :)
Slaven Radic
Poco Systems Inc
Slaven
Poco Systems Inc
 
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:37 pm

Postby sabreman » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:51 am

Thanks for your answers and sorry for my poor english (i'm from spain and english isn't my native language).

I'm not looking for something new and revolutionary, I'm only looking for something usable, stable, simply and customizable at the same time, with powerful scripting, improved IMAP and a good contacts part. I'm tired in my search of the "ultimate e-mail client" as I'm now telling this question.

My long search through "ultimate e-mail client" begins on my first connection to the web, using:
- Eudora (same at work). It was useful and complex for me at the same time couse I usually work with webmail. After a couple of years with it began to loose the race just for not updatings and some other qestions. Last version 6 is just same as I used before, no face change, not improvements, just same app with different name version so I don't want to be forced to use it again.

- Then went to Foxmail since now. Foxmail was a refresh for me just because it is free and a very stable application. The big trouble with this nice app arrives when mail database begins to grow, so program wents slower ang buggy. Although it's a chinese software so don't ask at the forum, and time passes from version to version on about 2 years or more withoout notice from creators.

So on the last two or three months I was testing a lot of e-mail clients, but no one convinces me to buy or use it. This is the "alternative testing" list.

The Bat! : it looks like a nice app but yet everyday a new version appears on their site. It's like a beta-forever-app that makes this soft unstable, buggy and annoying. Lacks of a good html render engine and don't open images (no option for the user, no is no)., so, discarded.

Becky! : really a good e-mail client only for advanced and safe-paranoid users, with ugly interface. An older version from 2002 only improved one time every couple of months. Definitively not for me.

Dreammail : Just looks like a new version of Foxmail, chinese too, but a little unstable, long-last beta and with some problems with language, unicode, translation to english and more. No answer to my questions at their site just I'm not chinese ?

GcMail : a recent discovered. Early version with a lot of work to do on it but good enphasis on their work. Ugly interface and a strange user-account system that annoys me.

iScribe : good not professional and simply email client but only one person working on it so very expensive and not sure continuity over the future.

Thunderbird : I never likes Netscape client and this seems more of the same with decent gui and some extensions. No imap improved but a good news system. After testing I found it slowly and heavy.

Opera : although I'm a registered user of Opra since version 3, I never liked their M2 mail client. It's the only thing that I don't like from this browser, let me say, the fastest and the best browser over the world.

YAMC, Sylpheed-Claws, yMail, Mulberry, VanMail, Express, Phoenix, Datula and some more aren't good applications in my honest opinion. Some are ugly, buggy, slow, lack of features, and so on.

At least, POCOMAIL.
At first, let me say I tested the Pocomail v.2 in my translation from Eudora to Foxmail. I found it's interface slow and poor designed, not IMAP so I discard it.
Now i've tested the Pocomail 3 and found it much more powerful and faster than v.2 but again lack of imap also it's the best of all the mail clients i've tested over these months.
So if version 4 is as featured as beta-testers are saying, and faster and simply interfaced, I have no doubt I will buy it as soon as I can test it. I'm sure it will be a good application but I think I won't buy a v.3 version just for upgrade (at no cost, I know) it the next month. I preffer to begin a clean installation.

Well, sorry for this long post and thank you again for your answers.

Please, have a nice day,

Sabreman
^..^
sabreman
New Arrival
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 9:19 am

Postby TimothyS » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:20 pm

Sabreman,

I only post here a response because you are obviously not knowing what you are talking about and your comment is totally unqualified.

1. TheBat can open any graphic you want to see if you have defined the setup correctly and the HTML parser does an excellent job.

2. Your comment about Becky! is the actual reason for this posting:
You write: ...safety-paranoid users
What a joke. Becky! uses the Internet Explorer engine for HTML mail and this is an open invitation for anything and everything that comes with HTML formatted mail like: scripts, phishing, etc. etc.

Please do some research before you make statements that can be costly for others.

3. Thunderbird
If there is one e-mail client that was the first one to deal with IMAP in an acceptable way, this was Thunderbird.

I do not want to give a wrong impression: Is it possible that you have some configuration issues with various mail clients because English is not your native language?

Tim
TimothyS
Poco Tourist
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 12:05 am

Postby ferent » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:30 pm

Nobody has tested Microsoft Outlook?
Alfredo Fernandez
ferent
Resident Poster
 
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 7:29 am
Location: Spain

Postby geekboy2000 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:36 pm

sabreman wrote:Thanks for your answers and sorry for my poor english (i'm from spain and english isn't my native language).


Actually your English is quite good. I can assure you that with English being *my* native language, it's much better than my Spanish. :)

sabreman wrote:I'm not looking for something new and revolutionary, I'm only looking for something usable, stable, simply and customizable at the same time, with powerful scripting, improved IMAP and a good contacts part. I'm tired in my search of the "ultimate e-mail client" as I'm now telling this question.


I also spend endless hours, grabbing every available e-mail client, their corresponding updates, and in general, driving myself crazy. It doesn't seem like it should be such an elusive thing, but it certainly is. I think a few of the factors that make it so, are:

1) I prefer to check my e-mail accounts at varying intervals per account.
2) I have quite a number of accounts, most POP3, and some IMAP.
3) I correspond regularly with someone who uses AOL's client exclusively (nicely quoting messages sent from the AOL client has proven to be a challenge for virtually every mail client I've tried).
4) I prefer to see images inline in my incoming messages, but almost exclusively compose and reply in plain text.
5) I want the app to be portable. If I need to move it to a new machine, I don't want to have to deal with complex profiles, and a plethora of registry entries.
6) I use Spamihilator as my anti-spam app. Like many it's a proxy type app, so I need to specify separate incoming and outgoing username/server formats, and I'd like that process to be easy.


sabreman wrote:My long search through "ultimate e-mail client" begins on my first connection to the web, using:
- Eudora (same at work). It was useful and complex for me at the same time couse I usually work with webmail. After a couple of years with it began to loose the race just for not updatings and some other qestions. Last version 6 is just same as I used before, no face change, not improvements, just same app with different name version so I don't want to be forced to use it again.


While I credit Eudora with having an excellent editor, and with being very stable, that's about all I can say for it. Through all these versions, to still *not* have per account mail checking intervals is, IMO, just ridiculous. If I need to specify different ports or usernames for incoming/outgoing mail on a per account basis, it requires editing the ini file, or otherwise bending over backwards to accomplish it. It *could* be excellent, but as you indicated, after all this time, I think it's mediocre overall, at best.

sabreman wrote:- Then went to Foxmail since now. Foxmail was a refresh for me just because it is free and a very stable application. The big trouble with this nice app arrives when mail database begins to grow, so program wents slower ang buggy. Although it's a chinese software so don't ask at the forum, and time passes from version to version on about 2 years or more withoout notice from creators.


Again, yes, lots of potential, great price (free), but no IMAP, slow to no active development, and worse yet, developers who put what *they* want, and only what they want into the app. It's free, so certainly that's their right, but at the same time, I need an app written by someone who's actually writing it for the users, not for him/herself.

sabreman wrote:The Bat! : it looks like a nice app but yet everyday a new version appears on their site. It's like a beta-forever-app that makes this soft unstable, buggy and annoying. Lacks of a good html render engine and don't open images (no option for the user, no is no)., so, discarded.


The Bat! authors seem to have turned their attention to bumping up versions more for the revenue it will generate, than for the purpose of fixing bugs and adding much needed functionality (IMO) that works. It had been one of my favorite apps, up through version 2.x, but then things took a turn, and all I have come to expect from them now is a new version number with a new price tag.

sabreman wrote:Becky! : really a good e-mail client only for advanced and safe-paranoid users, with ugly interface. An older version from 2002 only improved one time every couple of months. Definitively not for me.


Becky! has always been the e-mail app I fall back on when issues come up with whatever else I'm trying at the time. There's not much *not* to like about it IMO, but the IMAP implementation still isn't without bugs, and as you said, the interface needs a facelift desperately. Functionally though, it covers things very well, and allows for a lot of flexibility.

sabreman wrote:Dreammail : Just looks like a new version of Foxmail, chinese too, but a little unstable, long-last beta and with some problems with language, unicode, translation to english and more. No answer to my questions at their site just I'm not chinese ?


I haven't given that a look yet, but I believe it is in fact the "new Foxmail".

sabreman wrote:iScribe : good not professional and simply email client but only one person working on it so very expensive and not sure continuity over the future.


Very lean and mean to be sure, but based on what I see in the free version of iScribe, I'm not prepared to invest in the commercial version. IMAP doesn't work properly for me, and I'm far from thrilled with the look of the app.

sabreman wrote:Thunderbird : I never likes Netscape client and this seems more of the same with decent gui and some extensions. No imap improved but a good news system. After testing I found it slowly and heavy.


The new nightlies are, as I understand it, based on a new memory usage model. Rather than releasing memory when minimized, it no longer does that. For me, that's a good thing, as I always found Thunderbird slow to respond when restoring it from the taskbar. On the other hand, the new builds have broken WYSIWYG quoting with plain text messages, and as yet, they haven't addressed what I consider to be a very critical issue. If they fix that, there's little else I don't like about Thunderbird, except for it's "portability". Yes, there is a "portable" build out there, but IMO, it's still not as easy to manage as say PocoMail.

sabreman wrote:Opera : although I'm a registered user of Opra since version 3, I never liked their M2 mail client. It's the only thing that I don't like from this browser, let me say, the fastest and the best browser over the world.


I have never been able to get used to their M2 mail component. While I like Gmail's interface and approach to mail threading/labeling, Opera just misses the target for me. And, the overall look of the messages, and quoting is terrible.

sabreman wrote:YAMC, Sylpheed-Claws, yMail, Mulberry, VanMail, Express, Phoenix, Datula and some more aren't good applications in my honest opinion. Some are ugly, buggy, slow, lack of features, and so on.


Agreed, and I'd include Pegasus in that group as well. Functionally, it probably does a lot, but the functionality is buried deep in a terrible interface that's anything but intuitive. Perhaps that's why the author has (at least last I checked) sold the manual and not the app.

sabreman wrote:At least, POCOMAIL.
At first, let me say I tested the Pocomail v.2 in my translation from Eudora to Foxmail. I found it's interface slow and poor designed, not IMAP so I discard it.
Now i've tested the Pocomail 3 and found it much more powerful and faster than v.2 but again lack of imap also it's the best of all the mail clients i've tested over these months.
So if version 4 is as featured as beta-testers are saying, and faster and simply interfaced, I have no doubt I will buy it as soon as I can test it. I'm sure it will be a good application but I think I won't buy a v.3 version just for upgrade (at no cost, I know) it the next month. I preffer to begin a clean installation.

Well, sorry for this long post and thank you again for your answers.


I've been a registered user of PocoMail for quite a long time, and fully expect to register the new version as well. It, IMO, has always had the most potential, and covers all of the bases for me. There have been issues with some of the functionality that seems well on it's way to being resolved in version 4. And truly, nobody is more responsive than Slaven and staff, to the concerns of the users. Yes, version 4 could very well be everything we're looking for! :)

Mark
geekboy2000
Resident Poster
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:43 pm

Postby geekboy2000 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:39 pm

ferent wrote:Nobody has tested Microsoft Outlook?


Very nice, very powerful, and okay if you want to top post your replies. If not, Quote-Fix is an essential add-on. Far from portable though, and the fact that it "forgets" saved passwords on certain server connectivity errors drives me insane. Every mail server's going to experience problems at one time or another, and some more frequently than others. To return to my PC to find a password/login dialog displayed every time that happens is infuriating.
geekboy2000
Resident Poster
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:43 pm

Postby geekboy2000 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:46 pm

TimothyS wrote:Sabreman,

1. TheBat can open any graphic you want to see if you have defined the setup correctly and the HTML parser does an excellent job.


Tim, please correct me if I too have missed something with The Bat!, but:

Can The Bat! display inline/remote HTML images *within* the application/message itself? I thought for sure seeing inline images via remote servers required launching the message in IE.

Mark
geekboy2000
Resident Poster
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:43 pm

Postby Eric » Fri Sep 16, 2005 12:59 pm

geekboy2000 wrote:Can The Bat! display inline/remote HTML images *within* the application/message itself? I thought for sure seeing inline images via remote servers required launching the message in IE.
Haven't tested the new version yet, but AFAIK it can't, because it has to launch IE. :?
Maybe Tim can enlighten us. :)
Eric
 

Postby TimothyS » Fri Sep 16, 2005 2:06 pm

Geekboy;

I read my message again before responding because your answer confused me and I thought I made a stupid statement. Where and when did I talk about inline/ remote images??? Remote images are for sure the most dangerous thing that can be sent via HTML mail and it offers all possibilities a "phisher" can dream about.

There are two things I really look for in e-mail clients:
1. No remote images or remote components are retrieved.
2. No script execution of any kind.

Anything that usesd IE as HTML component (like Becky!) would never live in my or in any of my employee's computer that are installed in-house. Their private machines are their own problem.

Eric and Geekboy:

Is it possible that you confuse the meaning of the word: Parse?
Just a short hint: You cannot parse an image but you can parse text.

Tim
TimothyS
Poco Tourist
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 12:05 am

Postby geekboy2000 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:27 pm

I understand Tim, and I can see why you were confused. There was no original mention of inline/remote image rendering. Certainly, as you say, The Bat! can handle/open any image, and that is what you addressed. Sorry for muddying the waters.

I respect your opinion, and everything you mention regarding IE's rendering engine, Becky's use of it, etc, is quite true. I guess the web "bugs"/tracking associated with the inline images is worthy of concern. In fact, who knows, maybe half of my SPAM or more, is as a result of that. Otherwise though, I've never encountered anything that's caused me any grief. I'm behind a router, run a software firewall, A/V, and a few anti-spyware apps.

I think we're on the same page though, because after all, we are here, and are PocoMail users - for good reasons. :)

Mark
geekboy2000
Resident Poster
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:43 pm

Postby TimothyS » Fri Sep 16, 2005 3:57 pm

Geekboy,

I appreciate and thank you for your fair and professional reponse. Unfortunately, your statement saying: "I think we're on the same page though, because after all, we are here, and are PocoMail users - for good reasons." is not entirely correct. I stop by once-in-a-while because I was a PM user and might becoming one again depending on the features added and modified in PM V4. PM V3 cannot be used as a result of certain actions it performs when receiving mail having an HTMl/Text part. No need to explain it since you most likely know about it. We'll see what V4 has to offer.

Tim

P.S.: Is your real name Mark?
TimothyS
Poco Tourist
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 12:05 am

Postby geekboy2000 » Fri Sep 16, 2005 4:47 pm

TimothyS wrote:P.S.: Is your real name Mark?


Yes it is.

Have we crossed paths elsewhere online or in real life?

Mark
geekboy2000
Resident Poster
 
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 12:43 pm

Postby Eric » Fri Sep 16, 2005 11:59 pm

TimothyS wrote:Eric and Geekboy:
Is it possible that you confuse the meaning of the word: Parse?
Just a short hint: You cannot parse an image but you can parse text.
From what I've experienced with TB 2.12 it simply can''t display images inside HTML.
You always have to open IE in order to see it. :?
I know you can only parse text.

I also trialed, bought many email clients before I stumbled on Poco.
A refreshing find at that time after having trialed so many. :P
Eric
 

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: antameexek, preeheple and 2 guests

cron