Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

What's the best The BAT! version?

(1/5) > >>

CodeTRUCKER:
I have a license for The BAT! up to version 4.0.34, but I have not been real impressed with all I've read on Ritlabs forums.  So, I am interested in if anyone is favorably impressed with any version after 4.0.34 and why you like that version.  Thanks.

<Edit> Added, "and why you like that version" to clarify my request. </Edit>

f0dder:
I moved from TheBAT to Thunderbird; I didn't like the "skinning" and draggable toolbars they added (makes the app look uglier, and there were enough reasonable things to spend their development time on instead of that useless crap). Add to that the uncanny feeling having your mail archive in a proprietary format without any easy way of getting it exported feels...

Thunderdbird definitely isn't perfect, but it works well enough that it's a viable choice for me, and I know it will be easy migrating to something else if necessary, because it uses industry standard message store format (yes, mbox is an utterly lame format, and totally unsuitable for file-based backups, but just about anything can process it :)).

CodeTRUCKER:
I moved from TheBAT to Thunderbird; I didn't like the "skinning" and draggable toolbars they added (makes the app look uglier, and there were enough reasonable things to spend their development time on instead of that useless crap). Add to that the uncanny feeling having your mail archive in a proprietary format without any easy way of getting it exported feels...

Thunderdbird definitely isn't perfect, but it works well enough that it's a viable choice for me, and I know it will be easy migrating to something else if necessary, because it uses industry standard message store format (yes, mbox is an utterly lame format, and totally unsuitable for file-based backups, but just about anything can process it :)).
-f0dder (November 07, 2010, 05:15 AM)
--- End quote ---

Given the above and aside from the free vs. pay issue, do you see Postbox as an improvement to TB or is it heading in the wrong direction?

Renegade:
I'm currently having major Outlook issues... 7 GB of PST nonsense...

I would like a decent, intelligently designed client that works. i.e. I want a client that uses an RDBMS instead of flat files (grrrrr).

I looked at The Bat a long time ago, but never got into it.

I used to use Thunderbird for a long time, but unresolved critical bugs forced me over to Outlook Express, which worked. I then moved to Outlook as it became usable in 2007 (2003 was insane).

I have a lot of email, and that's a concern. Flat file programs break down because they are not capable of managing large amounts of email. Hence, my desire for an RDBMS-based email client.

I'd use The Bat if it worked. Any recommendations? I'm getting sick of my email client and email server lately, and considering just getting a new server entirely then switching my current one to a LAMP stack.

Darwin:
Renegade, I freakin' LOVE Outlook and am using 2010, which is great, IMHO. What I have done to keep my PST file size down is to install an attachments manager. A very good one is DetachPipe but I use EZDetach. Both save attachments to a separate folder and create a link to it. Both have LOADS of options... EZDetach has a more generous license than DetachPipe*, or it did when i purchased several years ago. Anyway, doing this keeps my PST file well below 300MB while I have several GB of attachments stored separately.

*DetachPipe was actually superior when I purchased EZDetach - I bought the latter and then discovered the former - but I suggested the features that I missed from DetachPipe and they were implemented fairly quickly... Datamystic (DetachPipe developer) uses a subscription based licensing model whereas AFAICT EZDetach, which is updated several times a year, has either a lifetime license or the developer has yet to release a major upgrade (despite adding the options that I requested. I thought they really added to the package!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page