[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 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 - Update!

Update!

Discussion not related specifically to one of the topics below

Moderators: Eric, Tomas, robin

Postby chrisretusn » Tue Sep 09, 2008 2:41 pm

I too am worried a little about new ownership; however, I am keeping a optimistic outlook that this will bring us a better product.

One thing about PocoMail (and Barca too) is there is no other comparable e-mail client (IMHO). Especially the way it handles multiple e-mail accounts and it's scripting language. PocoMail is the best e-mail client for my needs. I am looking forward to the new release.
Chris

PocoMail 4.8.0.4400 running in Slackware64 w/Wine
chrisretusn
Poco Enthusiast
 
Posts: 284
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 12:09 am
Location: Philippines

Postby ianw » Tue Sep 09, 2008 7:56 pm

Me too, I'm concerned about new ownership, if it is Yahoo, then rtemember MSoft are trying to buy them out and you know what that will mean.

I'm satisfied with Pocomail as it is, however, new improvements may very well suit me.

Whatever happens I'll always stay with Poco.

I have just had a thought, a new owner may want Poco to use the activation caper, that is, so many installs and thats it.
If that does come about I will not take V5, I am sick, sore and tired of re-activating, sometimes I think I'm the criminal by re-installing the programs, it is a real hassle.
ianw
 

Postby Slaven » Sat Sep 13, 2008 6:00 am

skerns: nothing to worry about re ownership change, it's not Yahoo and it was done in part to secure PocoMail future going forward, as you're used to it.

I am of course disappointed too that we didn't deliver what we wanted in 5.0 (which was going to include a new HTML engine, 4.8 unfortunately won't). You do have to understand that Poco Systems is a small outfit, we do what we can with the resources available. Some people's needs will change and PocoMail/Barca won't be able to meet them any more, I understand that. I also hear from a lot of people how they desperately need exactly what PocoMail and Barca is right now, concerned that we're no longer around, so our priority is to make sure we stick around and provide support for the product, and grow the product as we can.

There is a reason why many of our competitors faded away over the past few years - this is a tough market to be in but we think it still needs options like PocoMail.

On the positive side: we have some really exciting stuff planned for 5.0, can't wait to get going on it!
Slaven Radic
Poco Systems Inc
Slaven
Poco Systems Inc
 
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:37 pm

Postby Andreas » Sat Sep 13, 2008 6:53 am

Slaven wrote:Some people's needs will change and PocoMail/Barca won't be able to meet them any more, I understand that.

Slaven, what does this sentence mean? Does it mean that v5.0 still won't have the new HTML engine?
Andreas
Poco Enthusiast
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 5:30 pm
Location: Germany

Postby Slaven » Sat Sep 13, 2008 10:28 am

Andreas wrote:
Slaven wrote:Some people's needs will change and PocoMail/Barca won't be able to meet them any more, I understand that.

Slaven, what does this sentence mean? Does it mean that v5.0 still won't have the new HTML engine?


I was just talking in general, I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

The new HTML engine is still in plans, but we have to get through 4.8 first. :)
Slaven Radic
Poco Systems Inc
Slaven
Poco Systems Inc
 
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:37 pm

Postby Andreas » Sat Sep 13, 2008 5:20 pm

Thanks for the clarification, Slaven.

Good to hear that the new HTML engine is in plans.

When I saw that there will be a v4.8, it was quite clear to me that it won't contain a new HTML engine. But a v5.0 without a new HTML engine would have been really disappointing. Now I'm a bit relieved. :)
Andreas
Poco Enthusiast
 
Posts: 380
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 5:30 pm
Location: Germany

Postby robin » Sat Sep 13, 2008 7:02 pm

Slaven wrote:...I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

I seem to recall that the specification for the Exchange protocol has been published, but also that it was hundreds of pages long so it would take any organisation a while to decode that: it's no surprise that most or even all non-MS e-mail clients won't support it - in this respect Barca is no different to many others.

This is supposed to be, however, a positive comment not a "knock" against Poco.
robin
 

Postby Flashfox » Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:45 am

robin wrote:
Slaven wrote:...I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

I seem to recall that the specification for the Exchange protocol has been published, but also that it was hundreds of pages long so it would take any organisation a while to decode that: it's no surprise that most or even all non-MS e-mail clients won't support it - in this respect Barca is no different to many others.

This is supposed to be, however, a positive comment not a "knock" against Poco.


Granted... However, when you associate Micorsoft's dominant position (like it or not), the proliferation of Windows Mobile based smart phones and what ActiveSync and Sync Center (in Vista) expect, then Barca2 will continue to be excluded from all serious business applications which require mail & calendar synchronization with Exchange servers.

Like Slaven stated, if the application doesn't suit the need, then we need to move elsewhere... which is what we did (Outlook 200x). This being said, I keep Barca2 on my main home computer and on my netbook (Acer Aspire ONE). This is because Barca2 suits me just fine. It's too bad that I can't easily sync contacts and calendars, but hey, it's what it is.

PSI made a business decision tied to resources and priorities. If Slaven has identified a niche market that Barca and PM can fill, then this is where they need to focus on.

Forward looking, I am now curious to see what will be offered in version 4.8 :D
Flashfox
 

Thanks for the reassurance...

Postby skerns » Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:57 am

Slaven wrote:skerns: nothing to worry about re ownership change, it's not Yahoo and it was done in part to secure PocoMail future going forward, as you're used to it.


Slaven, thanks for the info, I was pretty certain that was (not?) the case, but it's good to know for sure.
Meet me at Stonehenge at midnight, I'll bring the goat!
skerns
Poco Tourist
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:42 pm
Location: Wichita, Kansas

Re: Thanks for the reassurance...

Postby Slaven » Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:01 am

skerns wrote:
Slaven wrote:skerns: nothing to worry about re ownership change, it's not Yahoo and it was done in part to secure PocoMail future going forward, as you're used to it.


Slaven, thanks for the info, I was pretty certain that was (not?) the case, but it's good to know for sure.


We actually already had our annoying run-in with Yahoo a few years ago, maybe it makes it into my memoirs... :)
Slaven Radic
Poco Systems Inc
Slaven
Poco Systems Inc
 
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:37 pm

Postby Slaven » Sun Sep 14, 2008 6:05 am

robin wrote:
Slaven wrote:...I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

I seem to recall that the specification for the Exchange protocol has been published, but also that it was hundreds of pages long so it would take any organisation a while to decode that: it's no surprise that most or even all non-MS e-mail clients won't support it - in this respect Barca is no different to many others.

This is supposed to be, however, a positive comment not a "knock" against Poco.


I completely agree with you, it may be unfortunate but it's just a physical constraints of the development process. As Flashfox puts it

PSI made a business decision tied to resources and priorities. If Slaven has identified a niche market that Barca and PM can fill, then this is where they need to focus on.
Slaven Radic
Poco Systems Inc
Slaven
Poco Systems Inc
 
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:37 pm

Re: Thanks for the reassurance...

Postby skerns » Sun Sep 14, 2008 1:56 pm

Slaven, thanks for the info, I was pretty certain that was (not?) the case, but it's good to know for sure.


We actually already had our annoying run-in with Yahoo a few years ago, maybe it makes it into my memoirs... :)


Really? Oh, do tell, pleease? I take it that you didn't enjoy the experience very much...
Meet me at Stonehenge at midnight, I'll bring the goat!
skerns
Poco Tourist
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Jul 27, 2004 5:42 pm
Location: Wichita, Kansas

Re: Thanks for the reassurance...

Postby Slaven » Sun Sep 14, 2008 4:27 pm

skerns wrote:
Slaven, thanks for the info, I was pretty certain that was (not?) the case, but it's good to know for sure.


We actually already had our annoying run-in with Yahoo a few years ago, maybe it makes it into my memoirs... :)


Really? Oh, do tell, pleease? I take it that you didn't enjoy the experience very much...


Oh I'm sure I'd be sued if I shared anything :)
And no, I did not enjoy the encounter - though in Yahoo's defence they were just looking out for their best interest so I don't begrudge them.
Slaven Radic
Poco Systems Inc
Slaven
Poco Systems Inc
 
Posts: 1644
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:37 pm

Yayyyy!

Postby ShyWriter » Tue Sep 16, 2008 7:10 am

Looking forward to the public release of 4.8 beta Slaven. Been missing you guys. Maybe it will be ready for RTM by December17th.. (my 65th birthday - in lieu of flowers, send wenches, ale, goats and gold coin to address on file ;)

Shy
Feel free to add 781 posts to the number of posts shown by my avatar.. ;)
ShyWriter
Poco Tourist
 
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 2:33 pm

Postby Gleason Pace » Fri Sep 26, 2008 5:27 am

Hi Slaven,

Slaven wrote:around, so our priority is to make sure we stick around and provide support for the product, and grow the product as we can.

There is a reason why many of our competitors faded away over the past few years - this is a tough market to be in but we think it still needs options like PocoMail.


Yes there is a reason and the list is growing

Eudora became Penelope (Mozilla) and has seen very little development since. Which is understandable since they have TBird.

Courier is about to be rebranded. There is speculation in its discussion group too about who the new parent will be. In
Courier's case the old Calypso codebase is to be abandoned and the Courier name to be pasted onto a, it is hoped, more serviceable one.

Mulberry went bankrupt and has resurfaced as open source. Traffic in the Mulberry programmer's discussion group has just about trickled away. There was hope there that some requester of new features would be willing to pay a programmer's wage for them. Oh, Dear.

There are a number of lesser players that can remain on the scene because few resources were committed in the first place.

I agree with some others here that improved message editing and Imap durabilty are key to Poco's economic viability under any name.

I really think, Slaven, that the old model of selling incremental small improvements to a loyal user base is no longer viable. You really need a fairly complete, well working product to continue in this market.
Gleason Pace
Frequent Visitor
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Aug 13, 2004 6:41 pm
Location: Oregon

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron