Author Topic: TheName! (Read 30885 times)

Scott · « **on:** May 16, 2005, 03:02 PM »

If I ever release a program that has an exclamation point at the end of its name, please shoot me.

Really. I find it pretty stupid as well. I always hated the name Yahoo! chose as well. See, didn't you mentally think "end of sentence" after "Yahoo!"?

Regarding PocoMail... What exactly is confusing about handling multiple accounts? You can easily specify the incoming and outgoing mailboxes to use (and you can specify any one of your mailboxes for each), and you can use filters for more control.

Still, I will give TheBat! a look (you did it again after the "!", didn't you?). I'm tired of PocoMail's bugs. None are severe, but putting up with several minor-but-annoying bugs has put my blood on a slow boil, especially when the author was notified of these bugs years ago in some cases.

Scott · « **Reply #1 on:** May 16, 2005, 03:38 PM »

Still, I will give TheBat! a look
-Scott (May 16, 2005, 03:02 PM)

I have to take that back. Unless a serious discount comes through, there's no way I will or can pay this much for an email client:

35 Euro = 44.15600 US Dollar (The Bat! Home Edition)
45 Euro = 56.77200 US Dollar (The Bat! Pro Edition)

I can't believe that PocoMail itself is $40. I paid $25 for it originally (don't know what the 3.0 upgrade cost, though).

This just seems excessive to me. Maybe I'm just out of the loop. It seems as if TeraByte Unlimited is the only shareware author who hasn't gone insane with the prices lately.

Jibz · « **Reply #2 on:** May 16, 2005, 03:57 PM »

PocoMail	- $40
Eudora	- $50
Opera	- €34
Becky	- $40

.. seems to be about the price level today, but I agree it's a lot of money.

Scott · « **Reply #3 on:** May 16, 2005, 04:00 PM »

Opera is $40 USD, but I don't think that's as bad, since it is a lot of things rolled into one, not the least of which is a nice, secure browser. (Yes, I know it's really "$39", but I can't stand those targeted-at-idiots mind games, and don't like to play along.)

mouser · « **Reply #4 on:** May 16, 2005, 04:50 PM »

scott,

I went back and gave PocoMail another look and I've updated the review to indicate that in fact the way pocomail handles folders vs. accounts is a very nice idea. Jibz and I were talking about how Becky! tries to do something similar but in a rougher way, and i completely overlooked that in fact PocoMail was doing this in a nice way.

JeffK · « **Reply #5 on:** May 16, 2005, 05:40 PM »

Still, I will give TheBat! a look
-Scott (May 16, 2005, 03:02 PM)

I have to take that back. Unless a serious discount comes through, there's no way I will or can pay this much for an email client:

35 Euro = 44.15600 US Dollar (The Bat! Home Edition)
45 Euro = 56.77200 US Dollar (The Bat! Pro Edition)

I can't believe that PocoMail itself is $40. I paid $25 for it originally (don't know what the 3.0 upgrade cost, though).

This was my reaction too. But I would pay $US15-20 (maybe stretch to 25) for something that gives me a better client than Thunderbird.

Jeff

Jeff

This just seems excessive to me. Maybe I'm just out of the loop. It seems as if TeraByte Unlimited is the only shareware author who hasn't gone insane with the prices lately.
-Scott (May 16, 2005, 03:38 PM)

zridling · « **Reply #6 on:** May 16, 2005, 11:16 PM »

There are several bad naming conventions that drive me nuts, but the exclamation point is the worst, followed by attaching "zilla." Don't get me started on prices. If they continue to rise and the USD continues to fall, I'll be using freeware only in the future.

Scott · « **Reply #7 on:** May 17, 2005, 10:02 AM »

So, you wouldn't like an email client named, say, MailZilla! ...?

Jibz · « **Reply #8 on:** May 17, 2005, 10:17 AM »

MailZillaGator!.NET XP

tenseiken · « **Reply #9 on:** May 17, 2005, 10:52 AM »

That XP bit is annoying. Most of you should recall that they did the same when windows 95, 98 and 2000 were released. GenericApp! 2000. .NET is a whole other beast. *grumbles*

Scott · « **Reply #10 on:** May 17, 2005, 11:24 AM »

We should start a whole new thread for this... I think it deserves one: Stupid Application Naming Conventions!

mouser · « **Reply #11 on:** May 17, 2005, 11:44 AM »

jibz you are losing your touch, you forgot to add the year into the program name, perhaps the most inegeniusly bad of all the naming conventions:

MailZillaGator!.NET XP 2000 Pro

Jibz · « **Reply #12 on:** May 17, 2005, 12:02 PM »

Hmm .. I thought XP was Microsoftish for 2002?

Pro was a nice touch though

.

mouser · « **Reply #13 on:** May 17, 2005, 06:56 PM »

we also forgot to include the company's name in the product name.

"EvilCore's MailZillaGator!.NET XP 2000 Pro"

(why are so many of these evil conventions used by microsoft?)

has MS ever use a ! yet in one of their program names yet?

tenseiken · « **Reply #14 on:** May 18, 2005, 01:16 AM »

I really doubt that anybody at Microsoft has ever been enthusiastic enough about some piece of their own software to add an exclamation point to the name. Although, Windows ME might have been a possible candidate. "Windows <insert expletive here> ME!"

mouser · « **Reply #15 on:** May 18, 2005, 01:41 AM »

speaking of microsoft,

this has to be one of my favorite flash interactive things. still makes me laugh histerically.

Windows RG -> http://www.albinobla....com/flash/winrg.php

make sure you don't exit it before you see clippy.

tenseiken · « **Reply #16 on:** May 18, 2005, 09:24 AM »

There are a few programs that I wouldn't mind terminating in the same way the clip was...

nudone · « **Reply #17 on:** May 18, 2005, 01:30 PM »

that 'windows RG' is the only computer joke i've found genuinely amusing. except for windows ME itself that is.

zridling · « **Reply #18 on:** May 22, 2005, 02:16 AM »

Let's trademark this now!

Ronco's Advanced Master Total iMailStyleZillaFoxGatorFX4all!.NET Power Plus XP Ultra Pro 2005 CS3 Win Suite

tenseiken · « **Reply #19 on:** May 22, 2005, 03:10 AM »

It's already taken. :p

jpfx · « **Reply #20 on:** May 28, 2005, 06:34 AM »

kinda forgot Izilla!

edited for: Gnzilla too