Comments on: Eudora Cocoa http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/ Wed, 20 Aug 2008 23:08:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Michael http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8162 Michael Tue, 24 May 2005 13:45:26 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8162 Fetch 5 is now out and, although it looks like there's some Cocoa in it, it seems to be primarily a nib-based Carbon application. Fetch 5 is now out and, although it looks like there's some Cocoa in it, it seems to be primarily a nib-based Carbon application.

]]> By: Tim http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8138 Tim Wed, 04 May 2005 15:18:12 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8138 Ok, so Eudora isn't really sold on a subscription model. I just remember around the 10.0-10.1 days Eudora was really quick to get on OS X (minus SSL support, which was available in 9). I bought a year's worth of support and got 1 piddly update. About 2 months after my year ran out, Qualcomm added SSL back to Eudora and had the balls to want to charge me for it. That's close enough to a subscription model for me not to like it. To their credit, after I complained to them, they did extend my license for a couple of months so the update including SSL was free for me. As far as interface and speed, I always liked it. I'm not a big fan of the 3 pane or even 2 pane + mailbox list interface. Give me a bunch of individual windows with Eudora's navigation any day. I think my perfect email client would be if Mailsmith were a bit more Eudora-like. Yummy. Ok, so Eudora isn't really sold on a subscription model. I just remember around the 10.0-10.1 days Eudora was really quick to get on OS X (minus SSL support, which was available in 9). I bought a year's worth of support and got 1 piddly update. About 2 months after my year ran out, Qualcomm added SSL back to Eudora and had the balls to want to charge me for it. That's close enough to a subscription model for me not to like it.

To their credit, after I complained to them, they did extend my license for a couple of months so the update including SSL was free for me.

As far as interface and speed, I always liked it. I'm not a big fan of the 3 pane or even 2 pane + mailbox list interface. Give me a bunch of individual windows with Eudora's navigation any day.

I think my perfect email client would be if Mailsmith were a bit more Eudora-like. Yummy.

]]> By: Charles http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8128 Charles Tue, 03 May 2005 14:02:25 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8128 ..ok, to add to the comment above: Mail's now running (had to recreate entire Gmail account..). Top says: Eudora (with 12 windows open): 0%. Mail (1 window open): 5.1%, not checking mail. And Qualcomm want to rewrite Eudora in Cocoa why, exactly? ..ok, to add to the comment above: Mail's now running (had to recreate entire Gmail account..).

Top says: Eudora (with 12 windows open): 0%. Mail (1 window open): 5.1%, not checking mail.

And Qualcomm want to rewrite Eudora in Cocoa why, exactly?

]]> By: Charles http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8127 Charles Tue, 03 May 2005 13:47:13 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8127 Eudora doesn't, doesn't, DOESN'T have a subscription model. I've been using Eudora 5.2 paid-for for years, and it's never asked me for more money. What is the case is that certain of the point upgrades aren't free. Going from 5.x to 6.x costs money, which pertains for pretty much everyone from a certain fruit-named computer company on down. I haven't upgraded to 6.x because none of the features has been compelling. To be honest, I'm not sure what shifting to Cocoa would add to the game. Faster? Eudora's already damn fast. My only quibble with 5.x is that I can't connect to Gmail through it, no matter how many SSL settings and x-eudora-settings I tweak. So I use Mail 2.0 for that. Comparative CPU use: Eudora 0.0%; Mail - don't know, it's got into a habit of crashing on open. Grr. Eudora doesn't, doesn't, DOESN'T have a subscription model. I've been using Eudora 5.2 paid-for for years, and it's never asked me for more money.

What is the case is that certain of the point upgrades aren't free. Going from 5.x to 6.x costs money, which pertains for pretty much everyone from a certain fruit-named computer company on down.

I haven't upgraded to 6.x because none of the features has been compelling. To be honest, I'm not sure what shifting to Cocoa would add to the game. Faster? Eudora's already damn fast.

My only quibble with 5.x is that I can't connect to Gmail through it, no matter how many SSL settings and x-eudora-settings I tweak. So I use Mail 2.0 for that. Comparative CPU use: Eudora 0.0%; Mail - don't know, it's got into a habit of crashing on open. Grr.

]]> By: Michael http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8126 Michael Tue, 03 May 2005 13:16:35 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8126 Alderete: Please feel free to post links. I disabled trackbacks because I got more spam ones than real ones. I'm a few versions behind on WordPress. Alderete: Please feel free to post links. I disabled trackbacks because I got more spam ones than real ones. I'm a few versions behind on WordPress.

]]> By: Alderete http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8121 Alderete Tue, 03 May 2005 07:12:28 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8121 While it's exciting to hear that there is further investment in Eudora for Mac OS X, I hope QUALCOMM is appropriately cautious about changing the user interface too dramatically. Cleaning up the UI elements to use the Cocoa look-and-feel is one thing, but making changes to look like all the other email clients would be a mistake, IMHO. <a href="http://aldoblog.com/blog/470">More details in a post on my own weblog</a> (Michael, have you considered enabling Trackbacks? Or did the WordPress 1.5 Trackback bug not ping this post?) While it's exciting to hear that there is further investment in Eudora for Mac OS X, I hope QUALCOMM is appropriately cautious about changing the user interface too dramatically. Cleaning up the UI elements to use the Cocoa look-and-feel is one thing, but making changes to look like all the other email clients would be a mistake, IMHO.

More details in a post on my own weblog (Michael, have you considered enabling Trackbacks? Or did the WordPress 1.5 Trackback bug not ping this post?)

]]> By: Michael http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8119 Michael Mon, 02 May 2005 23:59:02 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8119 Matt: As I see it, Nisus used Composer as a foundation. They added some of their old code (perhaps Power Find) and added lots of new code to make it more like Nisus Writer. It matters little to me whether the foundation was written by Charles before or after he was hired by Nisus; had they hired him first, the code would have ended up much the same. It's similar to how Netscape was rewritten. They kept some pieces of code, but used a whole new architecture. By "rewrite," I mean writing a new set of code to implement similar behavior, as seen by the user. It's "rewriting Program A" because the end result is something that works like A, but is different under the hood. (Merely adding code to A wouldn't constitute a rewrite.) To me, renaming would be if they bought B, and called it A, but it didn't end up resembling the old A. So, which is OS X? :-) Matt: As I see it, Nisus used Composer as a foundation. They added some of their old code (perhaps Power Find) and added lots of new code to make it more like Nisus Writer. It matters little to me whether the foundation was written by Charles before or after he was hired by Nisus; had they hired him first, the code would have ended up much the same.

It's similar to how Netscape was rewritten. They kept some pieces of code, but used a whole new architecture.

By "rewrite," I mean writing a new set of code to implement similar behavior, as seen by the user. It's "rewriting Program A" because the end result is something that works like A, but is different under the hood. (Merely adding code to A wouldn't constitute a rewrite.) To me, renaming would be if they bought B, and called it A, but it didn't end up resembling the old A.

So, which is OS X? :-)

]]> By: Matt http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8118 Matt Mon, 02 May 2005 23:27:02 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8118 Michael: How can you <i>not</i> see the distinction? There were two programs: Program A and Program B. The makers of Program A purchased Program B and renamed it "Program A." They didn't replace part of Program A with new code, and they didn't take Program B's code and merge it into Program A. They scrapped Program A and rewrote some of its features anew inside Program B, because Program B didn't have them before. How could that <i>possibly</i> be considered "rewriting Program A?" Michael: How can you not see the distinction? There were two programs: Program A and Program B. The makers of Program A purchased Program B and renamed it "Program A."

They didn't replace part of Program A with new code, and they didn't take Program B's code and merge it into Program A. They scrapped Program A and rewrote some of its features anew inside Program B, because Program B didn't have them before.

How could that possibly be considered "rewriting Program A?"

]]> By: Michael McCracken http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8117 Michael McCracken Mon, 02 May 2005 22:44:27 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8117 I'm very curious about this - I've always felt that Eudora was so much more powerful than Apple's Mail, but a few things kept me away, while I'd gladly pay for the extra power if the old-style UI is updated, and it integrates nicely with the OS X Address Book. It'll be interesting to see if they say anything about how they did the rewrite. I would expect that much of the code for the features that make eudora eudora wouldn't have to change. The real distinction is behind the GUI layer, I'd say. I wonder if it ends up just being a Cocoa-bindings success story. I'm very curious about this - I've always felt that Eudora was so much more powerful than Apple's Mail, but a few things kept me away, while I'd gladly pay for the extra power if the old-style UI is updated, and it integrates nicely with the OS X Address Book.

It'll be interesting to see if they say anything about how they did the rewrite. I would expect that much of the code for the features that make eudora eudora wouldn't have to change. The real distinction is behind the GUI layer, I'd say.

I wonder if it ends up just being a Cocoa-bindings success story.

]]> By: Michael http://mjtsai.com/blog/2005/05/02/eudora-cocoa/#comment-8108 Michael Mon, 02 May 2005 19:30:27 +0000 /?p=1018#comment-8108 Matt: I don't see much distinction there. Do you not want to call it a rewrite because some of the code came from outside Nisus? Or because Express is somewhat of a redesign, not a superset of the old Nisus Writer? What about Transmit? Is that just "renamed" since Panic replaced its homegrown FTP engine with NcFTP? Matt: I don't see much distinction there. Do you not want to call it a rewrite because some of the code came from outside Nisus? Or because Express is somewhat of a redesign, not a superset of the old Nisus Writer?

What about Transmit? Is that just "renamed" since Panic replaced its homegrown FTP engine with NcFTP?

]]>