From: peter (Peter da Silva) Date: 20:58 on 02 Feb 2004 Subject: Mail.app 1. When I right-click or control-click to bring up a context menu in the message list, what say you WAIT UNTIL I SELECT AN ACTION before spending a quarter of a minute hauling its virus-infected corpse from the server and rendering the worthless rich text spam on my screen. I might be about to delete it, for all you know. 2. When I *do* want to see a message, I want to see it now, not after you have elegantly animated the old message fading away, so how about giving me an option to turn that off? 3. Who designed your icons? Hey look, there's a picture of a mailbox with mail in! I'll bet that gets me new mail... no, it slides out a tray with a list of mail folders in it. Now how do I get mail? Oh, it's that fan of envelopes that look like a hand of playing cards. That's obvious. It's mostly a pretty decent mail program, just... needs a bit of polishing. I wouldn't complain, except that I'm afraid Apple's working on new timewasting animations instead of actual useful UI enhancements (at least if their new Finder is anything to go by they are).
From: Matt McLeod Date: 01:40 on 03 Feb 2004 Subject: Re: Mail.app Peter da Silva wrote: > It's mostly a pretty decent mail program, just... needs a bit of polishing. > I wouldn't complain, except that I'm afraid Apple's working on new timewasting > animations instead of actual useful UI enhancements (at least if their new > Finder is anything to go by they are). Given that they *still* haven't provided a way to get to the next message when you're viewing a message in its own window, I don't think we're going to be seeing any new "non-sexy" features in Mail.app. ISTR that some people were writing a clone with things like these fixed. Not sure what state it's in, as I haven't looked at it in about eighteen months. Should be easy enough to track down, though.
From: Nicholas Clark
Date: 16:45 on 29 Jul 2005
Subject: Mail.app
So, I get forwarded an HTML e-mail message. (Hateful in itself)
And I want to print it.
Can I?
Can I fuck.
Mail.app consistently decides that it will print "1" page of it, basically
a screenshot of the first part of the message. In the end I scroll down a
bit to the section that I want, do a screen grab, and print that.
However, now I have found out how to print the message, I only hate it more.
What you do is
1: Save the raw message to an mbox file
2: Use a REAL MAILER (eg mutt) to save out the messages/rfc-822 attachment out
as another mbox file.
3: Go to "file" on Mail.app.
Oh fuck. There isn't "Open". Does the style guide allow this?
Oh. It's Apple. They don't care anyway. "Do as I say, not as I do"
3a: Go to import.
Discover that you have to import a whole goddam folder of mboxen.
Bastards
Make a new temporary directory. Put the 1 mbox file in there.
3b: Go back to import
4: Import that folder
5: Print the bloody message. In its entirety. As $deity intended it to look.
format fucked?
text/html?
Once upon a time e-mail just worked. What was wrong with working?
Nicholas Clark
From: Nicholas Clark Date: 17:05 on 29 Jul 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 04:45:55PM +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote: > 1: Save the raw message to an mbox file > 2: Use a REAL MAILER (eg mutt) to save out the messages/rfc-822 attachment out > as another mbox file. blech wondered if I could save the attachment direct. No. Aarrgh. Hateful waste of disk won't even let me do that. Fucking useless. See. Look how much disk it wastes: http://www.ccl4.org/~nick/Hateful%20waste%20of%20disk.png Nicholas Clark
From: Luke Kanies Date: 18:01 on 29 Jul 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Nicholas Clark wrote: > blech wondered if I could save the attachment direct. > > No. Aarrgh. > Hateful waste of disk won't even let me do that. Fucking useless. > See. Look how much disk it wastes: > > http://www.ccl4.org/~nick/Hateful%20waste%20of%20disk.png I don't know, man; I'm not sure anyone with emacs installed gets to complain about applications wasting a lot of space... 140MB for an editor?
From: Aaron Crane Date: 19:48 on 29 Jul 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app Luke Kanies writes: > I don't know, man; I'm not sure anyone with emacs installed gets to > complain about applications wasting a lot of space... 140MB for an > editor? Not really -- 140MB for a package containing an editor with most of its source code, plus a large number of add-on packages, some of which are large anyway, and all of which also include source. (Or at least, the Emacs I've got on my own Mac looks like that.) So, yes, it's hateful that installing Emacs needs 140MB, but it's the packager's fault, not the application's. For comparison, the minimal Emacs 21 packages on Debian Sarge for i386 have a combined installed-size of 6242KB, which does sound much more reasonable. BTW, on my Sarge laptop, when I compare Vim 6.3 and GNU Emacs 21.4.1, I find the following: Command VSZ RSS Estimated time to start gvim -i NONE -u NONE -U NONE 20000 11156 1500ms emacs21 -q --no-site-file 13040 8080 800ms The VSZ and RSS are according to 'ps u', and the estimated time to start is the gap between hitting Enter on the command line, and having a window ready to type at, as estimated subjectively by me. Of course, this is somewhat off-topic, as I can't currently muster up much hate at all for either editor. Doubtless that will change soon enough...
From: Luke Kanies Date: 22:39 on 29 Jul 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Aaron Crane wrote: > Not really -- 140MB for a package containing an editor with most of its > source code, plus a large number of add-on packages, some of which are > large anyway, and all of which also include source. (Or at least, the > Emacs I've got on my own Mac looks like that.) So, yes, it's hateful > that installing Emacs needs 140MB, but it's the packager's fault, not > the application's. For comparison, the minimal Emacs 21 packages on > Debian Sarge for i386 have a combined installed-size of 6242KB, which > does sound much more reasonable. I just thought it was funny that he was complaining about something so far down the list of sizes. And I guess I just can't help but take jabs at emacs. > BTW, on my Sarge laptop, when I compare Vim 6.3 and GNU Emacs 21.4.1, I > find the following: > > Command VSZ RSS Estimated time to start > gvim -i NONE -u NONE -U NONE 20000 11156 1500ms > emacs21 -q --no-site-file 13040 8080 800ms Heh, of course the gnome-settings-applet is 16m resident... I only use vim, not gvim, but they're the same binary so I expect they take the same amount of memory or something like. I'm sure if you combine rxvt + vim, it's the same amount of memory. I'm no (g)vi(m) defender; I'm just more of an emacs pointer-and-laugher. > Of course, this is somewhat off-topic, as I can't currently muster up > much hate at all for either editor. Doubtless that will change soon > enough... Whereas my "I love to hate Emacs" post was entirely on-topic. :)
From: Michael G Schwern Date: 00:14 on 30 Jul 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:01:59PM -0500, Luke Kanies wrote: > I don't know, man; I'm not sure anyone with emacs installed gets to > complain about applications wasting a lot of space... 140MB for an > editor? $ du -sk /Applications/NeoOfficeJ.app/ 344864 /Applications/NeoOfficeJ.app $ du -sk /sw/lib/xemacs* /sw/bin/xemacs* 114400 /sw/lib/xemacs 22532 /sw/lib/xemacs-21.4.15 6840 /sw/bin/xemacs-21.4.15 $ du -sk /Applications/Mail.app/ 24604 /Applications/Mail.app $ du -sk /Applications/thunderbird.app/ 32556 /Applications/thunderbird.app $ du -sk /Applications/Firefox.app/ 25928 /Applications/Firefox.app Open Office is the reigning champ. Thunderbird weighs in more than Mail.app and, I'm surprised to see, Firefox. XEmacs is still up there, but that's XEmacs-sumo which has every extension known to man plus the elisp source code. If you strip out the elisp its down to 74375K. Just xemacs, no source, no sumo, is 31620K. But its the most bang for the bits as you get an editor, a graphical web browser, several mail clients AND you can play tetris and psychoanalyze-zippy!
From: Robert Spier
Date: 23:52 on 12 Oct 2005
Subject: Mail.app
Dear Apple,
You have a very nice operating system.
That Mail.app tool is quite nifty. It syncs mail fast and
accurately, it's got decent filtering. But you seem to have
forgotten two very important things.
First -
There is no (obvious???) way to tell you not to sync certain
folders. I have several things in my IMAP directory that are
not Mail folders (like my procmail and fetchmail logs) as well
as folders that I really don't care to have synced to the
laptop. (There's one that gets at least 100 spam messages a
day -- I'd be happy to send it to you if you want. There's
another that is a superset of all the other folders.)
Second -
There is no decent keyboard navigation for common operations
like 'Go to next unread message'. I understand that if there
was a menu item, this is something I could fix myself. I know
that all Mac users are mouse-happy, but for things like email,
I *need* a keyboard. And I need it to be able to do most
operations. So much for Mail.app.
While I'm ragging on you, isn't this pretty?
$ defaults write com.apple.Terminal NSUserKeyEquivalents '{"Quit Terminal" = "@$Q";}'
That's what I ran to tell Terminal.app not to bind Apple-Q to
"Quit". It's now Shift-Apple-Q. Why do I need this? Well,
Meta-Q (or Option or Alt) is too close, and I kept killing my
terminals. (Which is _not_ fun.) User Interface standards are
quite nice, but I want an easy way to change them when they get in
my way.
Anyway, I'll go back to staring at the beautiful OpenGL
accelerated graphics now.
-R
From: Nicholas Clark Date: 00:04 on 13 Oct 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 03:52:23PM -0700, Robert Spier wrote: > That Mail.app tool is quite nifty. It syncs mail fast and > accurately, it's got decent filtering. But you seem to have fast only if given a low latency link. The authors of this and much other hateful software should be locked up on a cruise ship with a satellite link and no parole until they fix the hate. Nicholas Clark
From: Steven Smolinski Date: 03:13 on 13 Oct 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app On 12-Oct-05, at 6:52 PM, Robert Spier wrote: > That Mail.app tool is quite nifty. It syncs mail fast and > accurately Umm, not quite. If you use IMAP, Mail seems to think it is the only MUA that ever talks to your IMAP folders. If you delete messages out of (the middle of) an IMAP mailbox with some other MUA, sometimes Mail.app will decide to keep it's cached copy of the headers, including the deleted ones. If you click on one of the deleted ones, it brings up the mail that's in that INDEX in the IMAP mailbox, even though it doesn't match the cached headers in Mail. And re-syncing doesn't make it realize it has the wrong headers! And deleting the already-deleted entry in Mail deletes whatever proper email was in that INDEX in the IMAP mailbox. Stupid, hateful software. Steve
From: Peter da Silva
Date: 05:58 on 13 Oct 2005
Subject: Re: Mail.app
> There is no decent keyboard navigation for common operations
> like 'Go to next unread message'. I understand that if there
> was a menu item, this is something I could fix myself. I know
> that all Mac users are mouse-happy, but for things like email,
> I *need* a keyboard. And I need it to be able to do most
> operations. So much for Mail.app.
Save this as a compiled .scpt file called ... (wait for it)
"~/Library/Stripts/Mail Scripts/NextUnreadMessage___ctl-n.scpt"
try
tell application "Mail"
activate
tell the front message viewer
set unreadMessages to (the messages whose read status is false) as
list
if (count of unreadMessages) is not 0 then
set selected messages to {the first item of unreadMessages}
else
beep
end if
end tell
end tell
on error error_message
beep
display dialog "Next unread message: " & return & error_message
buttons {"OK"} default button 1
end try
Doesn't that syntax make you think "what if Grace Hopper had been a
contemporary of Steve Jobs"? I know it fills me with hate...
From: A. Pagaltzis Date: 07:51 on 13 Oct 2005 Subject: Re: Mail.app * Peter da Silva <peter@xxxxxxx.xxx> [2005-10-13 07:00]: > Doesn't that syntax make you think "what if Grace Hopper had > been a contemporary of Steve Jobs"? I know it fills me with > hate... http://daringfireball.net/2005/09/englishlikeness_monster Regards,
From: Peter da Silva Date: 21:31 on 26 Aug 2007 Subject: Mail.app When it says "The message from Peter da Silva <peter@xxxxxxx.xxx> concerning 'Re: error in funnel web' has not been downloaded from the server. You need to take this account online in order to download it." WHAT DO YOU FUCKING HAVE TO DO TO GET IT TO FOLLOW THROUGH? The account is online, the message is in the folder on the server, I have taken the account offline and online multiple times, it's STILL saying this. This pretty much makes Spotlight support in Mail.app useless to me. I should expect it. This kind of hateful shit happens in ALL goddamn GUI applications, they are all full of layers of crap libraries that take a simple operation, make it complicated, then try and make it look simple after all.
From: Darrell Fuhriman Date: 21:51 on 26 Aug 2007 Subject: Re: Mail.app > HAVE TO DO TO GET IT TO FOLLOW THROUGH? The account is online, the > message > is in the folder on the server, I have taken the account offline > and online > multiple times, it's STILL saying this. > When this happens I usually select "Rebuild Mailbox" and that seems to take care of it. Not that that makes it any less hateful. d.
From: David King Date: 07:09 on 27 Aug 2007 Subject: Re: Mail.app > When it says "The message from Peter da Silva <peter@xxxxxxx.xxx> > concerning > 'Re: error in funnel web' has not been downloaded from the server. You > need to take this account online in order to download it." WHAT DO > YOU FUCKING > HAVE TO DO TO GET IT TO FOLLOW THROUGH? This happens to me for all emails with an empty body, which I frequently get from spammers (probably whose spamming software is hateful) and from myself as reminders (echo|mail -s "pick up dry cleaning" `whoami`). Sadly, this also happens at random, and it can be difficult to tell the difference. > The account is online, the message > is in the folder on the server, I have taken the account offline > and online > multiple times, it's STILL saying this. > > This pretty much makes Spotlight support in Mail.app useless to me. > > I should expect it. This kind of hateful shit happens in ALL > goddamn GUI > applications, they are all full of layers of crap libraries that > take a simple > operation, make it complicated, then try and make it look simple > after all. >
From: Peter da Silva Date: 12:19 on 27 Aug 2007 Subject: Re: Mail.app On Aug 27, 2007, at 1:09, David King wrote: > This happens to me for all emails with an empty body, which I > frequently get from spammers (probably whose spamming software is > hateful) and from myself as reminders (echo|mail -s "pick up dry > cleaning" `whoami`). Sadly, this also happens at random, and it can be > difficult to tell the difference. No, this happens for ALL old messages in ANY folder, including messages that Spotlight has pulled up as a result of a search. THe spotlight database appears to have the entire body, but Mail.app has deleted it.
Generated at 10:27 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi