or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Road Mac OS X Leopard: Mail 3.0
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Road Mac OS X Leopard: Mail 3.0 - Page 3

post #81 of 108
So for those of us working in organizations that use microsoft exchange for a mailserver: does anyone know if Leopards mail is any better at connecting to an exchange server than tigers mail?
post #82 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTel View Post

I'm sure then they were UNIX networks at Universities, mid to large corporations, and government agencies. All with dumb terminals until the early to mid 1980s where the PC replaced the dumb terminal.

Didn't you mean to say "where the dumb PC [read MS DOS compatible] replaced the dumb terminal" ? Sorry, couldn't resist
post #83 of 108
[QUOTE=rahlgren;1157776]I don't understand why when I get an email with pictures in it, I also have to tell the program to save the pictures. Didn't it already download them anyway? Just go ahead and put them in the folder I've chosen for downloads./QUOTE]

Try and take a look in Mail Preferences -> General -> Downloads Folder

Quote:
Originally Posted by rahlgren View Post

I'd like to permanently set Mail as my default mail program instead of having Mail arbitrarily reset it to Eudora. I can't delete Eudora as I don't trust that everything got transferred to Mail.

And you're sure that it isn't Eudora changing the default app?
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #84 of 108
what about smilies ? when you type ";" and ")" in thunderbird (even in full text mode), you get a nice but in Mail 2.0 (Tiger), when someone writes you a , you only get a ";" and ")" !
Does Mail 3.0 display now smilies ?
post #85 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

This report goes to great lengths to follow the origins, history, and maturity of the Apple's Mail client. For those readers with limited time or who are only interested in what's due in Leopard, you can skip to page 3 of this report.



The link to page 3 does not actually work (don't worry, i did read the entire article).
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx
Reply
Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. Groucho Marx
Reply
post #86 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philotech View Post

I could return your latter argument: Smart Folders require mails to be filtered to fall into special rules. Unfortunately, real life doesn't always follow rules. Imagine I've got two groups of friends who exchange lots of e-mails so I want one folder for one group and another for the second group so I can see discussions of either group all in one place without being disturbed by any other e-mail in between. Easy you say, just set the Smart Folder to filter with regard to sender/recipient? Unfortunately, some people belong to both groups, and not every time mails are being sent to the group but to one person only (in particular me, otherwise I wouldn't receive it obviously). I can't see any rule to cover that, but it's easy with 'hard' folders and simple filtering that covers 90% of all cases and me manually moving the remaining 10%.
I got lots of similar cases with my e-mail, so I can't imagine there wouldn't be a use for hard folders for other people.
Thing is, I can arbitrarily move any e-mails to any hard folder which I can't with Smart Folders. Life IS arbitrary oftentimes.

It's not so arbitrary that you can't create a Smart Folder that filters through some sender/recipients and adds a second condition that excludes e-mails from certain sender/recipients. I bet I could set you up with a Smart Folder that does this and has 99% accuracy...which would then be a guaranteed 100% if you keep your e-mail messages grouped as threads.

I know some people give up early on Smart Folders because they can't be bothered figuring out the exact query that will fit their specific situation.
post #87 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by rajulkabir View Post

It's very, very handy, I do it with a script from the command line at the moment.

Imagine you have a message from two months ago with the subject "Re: Fw: Your mail" which is about some very crucial matter. Nice to be able to change it to "Brain transplant schedule for November" or whatever, so that you can quickly see it while scanning your "important" folder.

Imagine if you could *edit* the content of the e-mail too? Tampering with e-mail subject lines or content for that matter is not something Apple will ever allow. I can see how it could be useful for sorting purposes but it's mostly irrelevant considering it's a chore to sift through e-mail by just looking at the subject line in most cases.

In general, nobody remembers the subject line of the e-mail but they remember the general idea of the e-mail. A simple search for "brain transplant" or "Dr. Frankenstein" would have found that e-mail instantly.
post #88 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by kim kap sol View Post

I know some people give up early on Smart Folders because they can't be bothered figuring out the exact query that will fit their specific situation.

This is an understandable sentiment but I think you're approaching the situation rather dogmatically. Smart folders are useful, but so are normal folders.

I've been writing database front ends for two decades now. Despite this, I still don't want to treat my mail as a single database table accessed solely by stored queries. There is utility in manually managing storage that will never be done away with, no matter how "smart" our folders get. Each method is optimal for some daily tasks.

Thankfully we don't have to exclusively use one or the other.
post #89 of 108
Will we finally get the ability to request a Return Receipt in Mail.app?

If not, business users will likely continue to use Thunderbird or Entourage etc, which makes it all the more bizarre if Apple has left out this simple and oft-requested feature!

Any users of the development release able to advise one way or the other?
post #90 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by rahlgren View Post

Here's one very basic necessary feature I'd like to see in Mail someday if not sooner:

I'd like to be able to edit the subject line to my own liking. To not be able to do this is just bizarre. Forwarding is not the answer.


One work-around is to move the message to the Drafts folder, edit the subject line, and then move it back to the inbox.
post #91 of 108
It would be so great - SO GREAT - if writers stuck to the truth and cited references relating historic fact. As things stand this article is not swaying enough from the truth to incur wrath but just enough from it to be really and truly annoying.
post #92 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunkDifferent.com View Post

Steve is a true visionary never satisfied with e status quo.

So you give NO credit to the hundreds of engineers at NeXT? Do you really think Steve understands MACH? Or what SOS Interface was all about? Or had the competence to put together the class system of NeXTSTEP? What you refuse to see is although NeXTSTEP is close to OS X and vice versa that it's taken nearly ten years for Apple to get where NeXTSTEP was ten years ago. Put that in your Kool-Aid jar and drink it.
post #93 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by mixed9 View Post

Will we finally get the ability to request a Return Receipt in Mail.app?

Yes. That's ticket #3001 for Apple Mail. Unfortunately the other three thousand which mostly are bugs will have to be taken care of first.
post #94 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fairly View Post

It would be so great - SO GREAT - if writers stuck to the truth and cited references relating historic fact. As things stand this article is not swaying enough from the truth to incur wrath but just enough from it to be really and truly annoying.

Would you care to point them out?
post #95 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianus View Post

I do it every day. The "+" button in Mail 2.0's lower-left corner by default creates a regular, rather than Smart, mailbox at the top level (they're positioned in the very bottom of the sidebar), stored locally. Email-filtering rules can deliver from any inbox to any of these folders. I have one that pulls certain automated notices out of my work POP inbox into a folder, and another that filters mailing list postings out of an imap account. If you don't mind that the folders are top-level, try it!

I use Mail at home and Thunderbird at work, in both cases with two POP and two IMAP accounts, and though the visual metaphor is different in their respective sidebars, I really can't see any functional difference. There's little that I can do in one that I can't in the other, with respect to folder management.


The only problem then is, that under a sub-folder you can't create another sub-folder.
Like Family with under that relatives.
Or Forums and under that the names of the various forums.
post #96 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I don't know about the posters original motivation for his request but there are good reasons to want this sort of arrangement. First; if we acknowledge that Apple storage of E-Mails as individual files is a good thing we then realize they are simple file system objects. This means that writing scripts to work against specific types of E-Mails is very easy.

Lets say for Example that you can get Mail to sort out all E-Mails of advertisements from a specific vendor for you. If these end up in a specific directory you can then write simple scripts to purge these ads every 45 days for example. Other important E-Mails can be backed up to secondary storage automatically. The idea here is to populate your USB dongle with only the stuff from correspondents that you find important automatically.

Things like searching for specific files with Finder would be easier too.

In the end I would want what the original poster is looking for myself. The usability enhancements that Apple is making with OS/X have me looking seriously at it for use on a laptop. This from a Linux user. The thing is they need to move forward as far as removing artificial restrictions with respect to power users.

Dave

Exactly, most Apple applications are too limited.
Same with current iCal. You can have done To Do's deleted after a certain amount of time, or not at all.
There is no option to mark them flagged "done" and have them visually removed and to be popped up by clicking a button or so.
Then there is iTunes. Don't even get me started on that POS crapware.

All Apple software is just not done. It all misses small things to make them perfect for me, meaning I have to resort to 3rd party software.

I'd love to go to Apple because I do like Mac OS X a lot, and it's a nice change from Microsoft, but even in Windows and it's default Outlook Express and Windows Media Player (which I both don't use btw) I can do the things I miss in Apple's default software :-(
post #97 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prism View Post

The only problem then is, that under a sub-folder you can't create another sub-folder.
Like Family with under that relatives.
Or Forums and under that the names of the various forums.

Huh? You certainly can have sub folders.
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
JLL

95% percent of the boat is owned by Microsoft, but the 5% Apple controls happens to be the rudder!
Reply
post #98 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLL View Post

Huh? You certainly can have sub folders.

But also sub-folders under sub-folders?
post #99 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prism View Post

But also sub-folders under sub-folders?

Yes. I just tried it (on 2.0), actually with a subfolder of a subfolder of a subfolder of a folder. I'm not sure there is any limit to how deep you can nest folders.

Here's one nested thrice:
post #100 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianus View Post

Yes. I just tried it (on 2.0), actually with a subfolder of a subfolder of a subfolder of a folder. I'm not sure there is any limit to how deep you can nest folders.

Here's one nested thrice:

Hmm, need to retest it myself again then. Must have done something silly last time...
post #101 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by suhail View Post

NeXT had email back in 1988? How? There was no real internet in 1988! I was running an Amiga and a C128 back then and was considered a NERD, I do not remember email, I do remember local-networking chat-rooms using modems but not emails?

Weird

E-mail between computers existed through much of the 1970s, over non-standard networks. ARPANET had an early version, before becoming "the Internet". UNIX in the late 1970s supported e-mail to users of remote machines (if you knew a "path" from your machine to the remote machine). Mail to "fred@remotemachine" was addressed as:
To: nearbymachine!furthermachine!remotemachine!fred

The implementation depended on machine-to-machine file copy and machine names that were unique to neighboring machines. Each hop removed the left-most machine name from the "bang" list. See: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UUCP>

"Internet-style" e-mail names became common in 1982-83 as RFC 822 was adopted as an e-mail standard for the Internet, and a standard for mixing the 2 e-mail addressing systems was defined. My Amiga 1000 back in 1986 was often dialing up UNIX machines in order to read/send e-mail to both types of addresses. And to read news-groups (USENET) and download new freeware.
A mini
Reply
A mini
Reply
post #102 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prism View Post

Hmm, need to retest it myself again then. Must have done something silly last time...

Maybe you should retest all of the other programs as well. I thought everyone knew this.
post #103 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.mini View Post

E-mail between computers existed through much of the 1970s, over non-standard networks. ARPANET had an early version, before becoming "the Internet".

There was also BITNET throughout the 1980s, operating more or less in parallel to the internet (less flexible though, which is probably why it eventually died out).
post #104 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Maybe you should retest all of the other programs as well. I thought everyone knew this.

Nah, I know for sure I don't need to retest iTunes because I know it can't do what I want.
But that's too far off-topic now.
post #105 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by casino View Post

According to Apple, Leopard contains over 300 changes and enhancements,[3] covering core operating system components as well as included applications and developer tools. Leopard introduces a significantly revised desktop, with a redesigned Dock, Stacks, a emitransparent menu bar, and an updated Finder that incorporates the Cover Flow visual navigation interface first seen in iTunes. Other notable features include support for writing 64-bit graphical user interface applications, an automated backup utility called Time Machine, support for Spotlight searches across multiple machines, and the inclusion of Front Row and Photo Booth, which were previously only included with some Mac models.Apple missed Mac OS X v10.5s release time frame as originally announced by Apples CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June 2005, Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007

And your point of posting this info and forum trolling up a very old topic, is?
post #106 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by prism View Post

and your point of posting this info and forum trolling up a very old topic, is?

Quote:


12345
post #107 of 108
Do'h! Was still early at 11:57am.......
post #108 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunkDifferent.com View Post

Thanks for the Leopard update agian, rockin' iAm amazed at how close the NeXT STEP OS was related to the current OS X, even looking at the old Apple OS seems Soooo antiquated, Steve is a true visionary never satisfied with e status quo.

Imagine how far Nextstep would have gone if Steve didn't have to stay away from the market Apple Computers targeted. Steve did the same thing with NeXT that was done with Apple, and that is supply a computer system (hardware and software). It is possible Apple might not be around and Microsoft would be as big as it is today.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › Road Mac OS X Leopard: Mail 3.0