Post by Katrina KnightPost by Jim HigginsPost by Katrina KnightWhich version of Eudora are you using? I know that time-queueing works in
general in 7.0.1, but it seems to me that there was at least one version a
while back where it didn't work quite right.
Sorry - I sould have mentioned earlier... I'm using 7.0.1.0 Paid
Version. That's the latest unless there's been a beta posted since.
What do you mean when you say that time queueing "works in general?"
It isn't categorically broken - that is it works for me and some other
people. That doesn't mean it isn't broken under some specific set of
circumstances though. If you're having a problem, then it obviously is
broken for you for some reason.
So, we now know that you're using a version of Eudora that is known to be
able to correctly send time-queued messages. What we need to do is figure
out whether there's a specific set of circumstances that make it unable to
do so or whether there's something going on with your data files that is
causing the problem or whether something else is interfering. I can't
think of an explanation of how anything outside of Eudora could be causing
this problem.
What happens if you set up another instance of Eudora with a clean data
directory, setting up just the minimal amount to allow you to send mail
with a single personality. Can you get it to send time-queued mail then?
I changed the name of the original data directory and then created a
new empty directory with the original data directory name. Had to
fill in new server/account info after which I confirmed ability to
send and receive email, but NOT to send queued mail. No joy.
Understand something here... dating back quite a few versions Eudora
has had an admitted problem with determining whether an Internet
connection is available on some systems. The reasons for the problem
have never been explained and I suppose - OK, I at least hope - that
if they were known they would be fixed. I think the failure to send
time-queued mail is related to this other problem that also doesn't
manifest on all systems. But I don't know. And the point is that I
shouldn't have to wonder version after version.
I truly wish Qualcomm would look a bit more proactively into finally
fixing the remaining problems they DO know about. Skip work on new
features for a while just work on known problems. Fixing that memory
leak a version or so back was a bigger improvement than all the
feature additions like Bosswatch and that silly chilli pepper thing.
Best thing I can think of that wasn't purely a bug fix is the new
faster search.
Post by Katrina KnightPost by Jim HigginsI wish they'd fix this nagging little stuff before adding any more
features like Boss Watch and that Chili Pepper thing I don't care
enough about to load Eudora to get the real name of... ;-)
Moodwatch. Moodwatch is definitely one of the more useless features I've
ever seen. If the rumor I once heard was correct, someone designed that
and gave it to them though, so I don't know if they really spent any time
on it at all. I think its main use was to shut up the media
people who were complaining that Eudora didn't have anything in
it to protect users from "offensive" mail. Bosswatch actually does have
uses, although the one hinted at by its name is not the most useful one.
Moodwatch and Bosswatch are both "nanny" features. I only hope their
functions are all contained in separate DLLs that don't load unless
these features are turned on. I suspect that isn't the case.
Post by Katrina KnightOne good use for it is to warn you if you're replying to more than one
person. Some people end up having issues with accidentally replying to a
list of people when they only meant to reply to the sender, or with
replying to a mailing list instead of the individual sender. Bosswatch can
be used to prevent that from happening, thus potentially saving a lot of
embaressment.
What can I say? When I compose mail I can see who I address it TO:,
who I CC: it to and who I BCC: it to and I can take responsibility for
my actions. It's nanny-ware and I don't like nanny-ware. I suppose
the guy I used to work with who sent the email saying that he barely
recognized the boss's wife at the company Christmas party because she
didn't have her legs up in the air would disagree with me. Natural
selection can be a real bitch. ;-)
Post by Katrina KnightThe big problem with fixing this type of problem is that some problems
are caused by problems with the user's data files, not with the program.
Some are also caused by a combination of factors that is sufficiently
obscure that no one reports the problem during beta testing, or they
report it but no one figures out how to reproduce it. I don't know which,
if either, category this one falls into. It may fall into the category of
being sufficiently obscure that they just haven't gotten around to fixing
it. I know they don't always fix problems even when they know about them,
and that can definitely be annoying.
And there you have it. I think I'll just accept that at least one
other person recognizes and has given voice to the fact that Qualcomm
ignores known problems. That's likely to be the most satisfaction I'm
going to get.
Thanks for trying to help.