What is Digg?45 Comments
- lsinger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Being able to "make the port yourself" is actually all open source ever promised to me.
- koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Here's a direct download link for those who don't want to read the post about it: http://correo-mail.org/
Update: I have never seen such a good looking development wiki in my life: http://wiki.correo-mail.org/Roadmap - jnagel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Mail.app is fine until Mozilla gets on the ball with a flashy new Thunderbird. There is no market for this, although it's a decent program.
- drlha, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Or perhaps it will move in new and interesting directions that Mail.app and Thunderbird don't and become an essential application for Mac OS X? Come on guys, why are people so down on this development? I personally think theres a lot of room for innovation in the email client space.
- Firehed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Honest question here, not trolling, but what advantage does this have over Mail.app? I understand Thunderbird on Windows as compared to Outlook Express (or did when I switched anyways - spam filtering; I don't know of OE has been updated since though). But Mail.app is doing everything I need right now - does this have some feature that I don't know I'm missing out on, or is the only reason to switch the Mozilliness of it? Of course, maybe I'm being really ignorant on the email front, as I always feel a bit clueless as to why people say that Mail.app is lacking.
- Mcaruso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Being Mac OS X oriented is the whole point of this app: Correo is a more native OS X version of Thunderbird, just like Camino is to Firefox.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm still waiting on a Cocoa Firefox, until then, it's Camino all the way (though I do miss extensions)
- michaelGregoire, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Not a show-stopper for me yet, but I'll definitely keep an eye on this.
- WiseWeasel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I guess this will be good until Mozilla org comes out with a Cairo-based Thunderbird release that runs using a native Cocoa interface. With Firefox 3 nightly builds already running well in Mac OS X, I have to wonder how long there will really be a market for this particular project...
- hartze11, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Any idea when a new Camino browser update is due? E.g. 1.1?
- strcmp, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Mail.app is terrible at IMAP though. It handles IMAP slowly and doesn't properly implement certain features, such as prefixes. IMAP users make up the market for this product.
- Naga10, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4You DO realise how horribly eye-scalding that is, right?
- navvvv, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4the only exciting thing I think is the fact its osx native, hence won't do weird little things lik firefox and thunderbird does at the moment and the fact they're integrating it with address book
- avetenebrae, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4That's just a 0.1 release ;)
Wait and see, functions will be added with every versions ! - ElectricSoup, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"I think Firefox and Thunderbird are both headed in the OS X native direction, no?"
No. They're _meant_ to be cross-platform applications. That's easier for Mozilla, and it also means that the applications work the same way wherever you find them. I'd expect some more platform-specific stuff over time, but don't gets your hopes up too high if that's what you want, because that's not fundamentally what Firefox and Thunderbird are about.
The confusion as to what's "native" possibly arises from, for example, Mozilla's decision to move Firefox to use Cocoa widgets. "Uses (some) Cocoa" does not equate to "is native". Nor does it mean "will render form buttons on webpages as rounded blue buttons". For example, iTunes is written in Carbon but has pulsing blue action buttons. The reasons for the move are different -- it's mostly so as to save maintaining two sets of widgets. It's well explained here:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/josh/archives/2005/12/why_cocoa_widgets.html
Firefox and Thunderbird won't be using aqua:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/overview/aquauserinterface.html
They'll continue to have their interfaces in Mozilla's own XUL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XUL
And they'll continue to sit somewhat apart from whatever OS they're running on -- on it but not of it, so to speak.
But I'm not really sure what Correo can bring to the table. It seems to be intended as a companion to Camino.
Now, Camino has an obvious advantage: it's fully native and, therefore, has no trouble looking good and "playing nice" with all your other apps (storing your password in the keychain, passing stuff to other apps via the Services Menu, and all the rest of it), but it shares a rendering engine with browser that has a fairly good market-share on Windows and that has been actively developed for longer than webkit has. That means that Camino might well be able to cope with a site that Safari can't. IIRC, the advanced functions in Gmail's web interface would be an example.
So there is a "one big thing" that Camino offers that other native browsers (e.g., Safari) don't -- namely, its rendering engine. What's the "one big thing" that Correo can offer over other native Mac mail clients? I'm not sure there is one. - SilentSpyder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Quería ver que pasaba si decía eso. Lo dije en broma.
- wphj, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4No me importa.
Vete. - musicbear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Looks promising, but it's not going to really be worth messing with until a 1.0 comes out. It looks like a Mail / Thunderbird mashup... but I think Firefox and Thunderbird are both headed in the OS X native direction, no? But a great looking companion to Camino none the less.
- modularsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'll be using this once they add address book compatibility.
- raynevandunem, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3A few comments on Mail.app, according to Mark Pilgrim:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/07/13/mail-checks-in
http://diveintomark.org/archives/2006/06/16/juggling-oranges
Me, if I were on Mac 24/7, I would juggle between Mozilla and Apple as much as I can, since WebKit is OK, while Gecko has XUL ('nuff said).
Since I'm on WinXP natively, however, I swear by Firefox exclusively. IE has always felt alien to me (MSN Explorer was awesome, though).
Then again, however, I never really used offline mail clients like Thunderbird or Outlook, so I'm only going by hearsay on Mail.app.
Anyway, Correo looks lickable. Hope it gets developed further, although it'll be harder to do so since XUL and Cocoa have bad relations at the moment (see Firefox for Mac). - colonelpanic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This app is a nice step towards moving to open source software. I've been using its big brother, camino for a while and I'very happy with it. However this is version0.1 and its feature set is fairly limited. I didnt notice any built in junk filtering, and some other features mail supports. As it becomes more developed I'll switch to it.
- jnagel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I guess I would agree with that. I'm not a big IMAP user, only my school account, so I don't really notice it much.
- WiseWeasel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I definitely have nothing against more choices, but it seems that it would be more beneficial (especially for other platforms) to have these devs add their resources to the Thunderbird project, since Thunderbird is going Cocoa-native, and their efforts would help a larger audience. I agree that Thunderbird is not the best email client by a long shot, but instead of forking it as a Mac-only project, it would be better if they could help fix Thunderbird itself...
- etherbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I know I shouldn't feed the troll but I handle a very high volume of email quite happily in Mail.app
Considering part of what I do is support Enterprise level systems whose primary support contact is via email I would assume that means it works for business. Not that it doesn't have flaws, but the worst part of my job is dealing with Outlook and its various moods and bad behavior. - mikev, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3the only spanish I know is chupa la verga.. :|
either way, it's a ***** APPLICATION NAME...not all programmers are from the states/uk - WiseWeasel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I handle large volumes of IMAP and POP mail with Mail.app without any problems. Moving mail to local mailboxes for archiving fixes any lag issues, and I use Mail Templates for Mail.app to handle form responses. No complaints here...
- betovarg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Esto no es américa, es internet.
- koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think WiseWeasel makes a valid point. But I also agree with drlha, in that it's always better to have more choice.
In the end, it was the developer's decision, and I think he's planning to take Correo in a totally different direction than the one in which Thunderbird is heading. It seems that he's planning to make it more of an open source Entourage. One of his main goals is to allow Correo to sync with PDAs and the like. - koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I might add an IMAP account or two to Correo once the UI and icons get an overhaul. They are seriously ugly right now. I wouldn't even mind if the Camino ones were used.
- koregaonpark, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hey, isn't he allowed to have his point of view? I get a lot of e-mail everyday, and Mail.app was starting to get laggy. I now use a 'rule' that archives all e-mail older than 30 days. Works fine for me now. As for Entourage, I wouldn't touch that with a stick. Although, I did try it out for a day. All I can say is: yucky.
- badtz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2please explain what you mean by not supporting prefixes? I thought it does, it's in the last tab under the email account ....?
- coldfusion1970, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Obviously hes taking the piss.
- iRobie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I do agree that OSX is missing a very powerful, business (Exchange) compatible email client. I've tried Entourage, but given that it is PPC only and I use an Intel machine, it cannot be used in a corporate environment (too slow). Mail.app plays somewhat nicely with Exchange email server, but iCal has no calendar support. Because of this, I haven't tried using Mail.app, or any other non-Entourage client, as my primary business computer. Plus, Mail.app doesn't work as nicely with Blackberry/Exchange combo as other software.
Having said that, and agreeing with those that say Mac is not ready for the business world (ones that use Exchange, anyway), I disagree that Outlook is the prefered email client. The rules on it are overly simplistic, it crashes if your PST files get above 4gb (about 6 months of email for me), and promotes bad email behavior: sending (bloated) HTML instead of Rich Text, having the email alert notify you instantly when you get a message, etc. Those settings you can customize, but by default it has bad settings.
Really, the dealbreaker for me is the rules. You can only filter based on three commands (do this, if that, unless that), you cannot change between AND/OR conditions, cannot combine conditions (such as do this, if [that OR that] AND [this], unless [[this AND that] OR that]), you cannot create rules for messages sent or messages read, and (if on Exchange), you are limited to 64k worth of rules on the server. Too limiting for my use (but I get ~1000 emails a day).
Personally, I use The Bat! on Windows, and use Outlook as my calendar program. - simonbarratt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2if you want a flexible, business grade email environment, take a look at the new Lotus Notes offerings.
- etherbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I felt he was painting the whole platform with a broad brush in his comments in a way that at least in my experience wasn't very accurate. Same as the commenter he's leaning on for support. It felt a little bit like he was trolling, but maybe I'm not being fair. I don't know. Whenever someone uses the worst email client available for Mac (Entourage) as their example of the least crappy email client I wonder how much they've really used other clients. I have noticed myself that Apple's built in mail drags a bit when you stuff the inbox but liberal use of rules/procmail has kept it running very nicely for me across multiple machines and some of the little things regarding signatures, ldap handling and search keep me around. Still I'm interested to see how Correo turns out or a Cocoaized t-bird as there is certainly room for competition improvement in the email space on all platforms (excepting *nix boxes without x-windows where Pine still pretty much rules!). End of follow up rant and my apologies to maxxed for calling you a troll. Looking back it really wasn't called for.
- ElectricSoup, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It might be worth adding that if people want to try alternative mail clients for the Mac, then the open-source client GNUMail might be another one to look at:
Version 1.2pre1 is here:
http://www.collaboration-world.com/gnumail/
And, according to the mailing lists a pre3 with a unified title bar / toolbar and other fixes and improvements will be coming soon.
Again, I'm not sure what it offers over Mail. There's a few features in there that Mail hasn't got, but overall it's not quite so finished and slick -- it has no HTML rendering, for example. But at least if you want to use PGP/GPG you can use its plugin; with Mail the only solution I know of is to use a third-party plug-in that is described by its developer as a:
"complete hack, relying on Mail's private internal API. Use it at your own risks!"
http://www.sente.ch/software/GPGMail/English.lproj/GPGMail.html - Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1blocked for the offensive name
and spam - betovarg, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0damn spammer.
- maxxed, on 10/12/2007, -6/+3Monergism is right, MacOS is very deprived in the email space. This is the sole reason I cannot use it. Outlook may have its bugs, but Mail, Thunderbird, Entourage etc are simply not powerful enough for serious business use (300+ emails/day or more). Now is MacOS meant for business? That is debateable - but you simply cant claim that these apps can work in a serious business setting when they cant.
- monergism, on 10/12/2007, -12/+2Yes fanboys. Digg me down. Productivity is second to flashy interfaces.
- monergism, on 10/12/2007, -14/+2The Mac has nothing near Outlook. That's sad. :(
I try and use Entourage but it still is lame. - SilentSpyder, on 10/12/2007, -16/+3How can you guys support this? This is America, not Mexico! Name your programs in English! We're on the road to becoming a third world country.
- schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -28/+3I have followed the link, but it appears to be Mac OS X-oriented, which makes you wonder about the promise offered by Open Source (other than transparency and some freedoms). There is still a lockin in terms of platform, unless you are willing to make the port yourself.
Hmmm.. filed under "Apple"... so I expect to be modded down regardless of the validity of my claim.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is