OT: "New" Open Source "Eudora"

Look, I don't know if anyone here is/was a Eudora user, but........

I had used it faithfully from like '95 up until about a year and a half
ago when I did a fresh install of XP.

Eudora was one of the best e-mail clients around. The last version was
released a couple of years ago. Shortly after that the website revealed
that Qualcomm didn't want to continue support for Eudora, so it was
transferring it to open-source, and that a new & improved version would
be coming out in time.

I'd check back at the website periodically and there was nothing new
until I looked this morning. There was a new beta version available for
tryout.

It's not Eudora anymore, what these people are trying to pass of as
Eudora is nothing more than another f'n branch-off of Mozilla
Thunderbird, which I didn't find out until I installed it and ran it,
which subsequently f'd up some of my current T-Bird settings.

So.....don't even bother.

Here's the readme, which i wish I would have read before-hand......

================================================== =======================
=====
EUDORA VERSION 8.0
================================================== =======================
=====

Eudora is a mail and news application from Qualcomm based on the open
source Thunderbird client from Mozilla. It's *not* our intention to
compete with Thunderbird; rather, we want to complement it.

Qualcomm is committed to both preserving the Eudora user experience and
to maintaining maximum compatibility, for both developers and users, with
Thunderbird. It is our goal to build a single development community
around Thunderbird and Eudora, so that both mailers advance faster than
they previously have.

Whereas "Eudora" is a branded version of Thunderbird with some extra
features added by the Eudora developers, "Penelope" is an extension (also
called an "add-on") that is used in Eudora and can also be used with
Thunderbird. The Eudora installer includes the corresponding version of
Penelope along with it so there is no need to install Penelope if you are
installing Eudora. Most features in Penelope can be accessed when used
with
Thunderbird, but there are a few that require Eudora in order to work
correctly and it's not something that gets tested.

Sometimes in documentation there is a need to differentiate the older
versions of Eudora made by Qualcomm from current Thunderbird-based
versions of Eudora. This will normally be done by labeling the older
versions of Eudora as "original Eudora" or "Classic Eudora".

The main web page for Eudora/Penelope can be found at
<http://wiki.mozilla.org/Penelope>.

We encourage people to help the progress of Penelope, whether you know
how to write code or not. This was one of the main drivers to our
decision to go open source with Eudora. More details can be found here:
<http://wiki.mozilla.org/Penelope#Get_Involved>.

DanS wrote:

<snipped>

No one cares.

"Paul Montgumdrop" <> wrote in message
news:O1N1%...
> DanS wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> No one cares.


Shut up you idiot.

ss.

Synapse Syndrome wrote:
> "Paul Montgumdrop" <> wrote in message
> news:O1N1%...
>> DanS wrote:
>>
>> <snipped>
>>
>> No one cares.
>
>
> Shut up you idiot.
>
> ss.
>
>

Do you think you can make me? :-P

Paul Montgumdrop <> wrote in
news:O1N1#:

> DanS wrote:
>
> <snipped>
>
> No one cares.
>

Stop crying about your pitiful existance.

DanS wrote:
> Paul Montgumdrop <> wrote in
> news:O1N1#:
>
>> DanS wrote:
>>
>> <snipped>
>>
>> No one cares.
>>
>
> Stop crying about your pitiful existance.

Hey, don't get your panties in a pinch now.

The only one that has a pitiful existence is you. Maybe if you got your
life straighten out, because you're on Usenet just a little too much to
be normal, learn how to spell *existence* and drink prune juice to keep
your mind right and be regular, it can only be brighter for you. You
seem a little tense.

On Sep 13, 5:41*pm, DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h....@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t>
wrote:
> Look, I don't know if anyone here is/was a Eudora user, but........
>
<snip>

I can see that this would be pain in the proverbial. Unfortunately I
wonder just how many Eudora users would think of looking on this group
to find out about this?

Have you considered sending an email to the current developers telling
them about your experience and asking them to make it clearer that
it's not really Eudora before the user downloads?

"Paul Montgumdrop" <> wrote in message
news:%...
> DanS wrote:
>> Paul Montgumdrop <> wrote in
>> news:O1N1#:
>>> DanS wrote:
>>>
>>> <snipped>
>>>
>>> No one cares.
>>>
>>
>> Stop crying about your pitiful existance.
>
> Hey, don't get your panties in a pinch now.
>
> The only one that has a pitiful existence is you. Maybe if you got your
> life straighten out, because you're on Usenet just a little too much to be
> normal, learn how to spell *existence* and drink prune juice to keep your
> mind right and be regular, it can only be brighter for you. You seem a
> little tense.

DanS's Sheep has been holding out on him so it's making him crazy. He needs
to take "matters into his own hands" if you know what I mean!

Bill Bell <> wrote in news:deb93b3f-54d9-4b9d-bfed-
:

> On Sep 13, 5:41*pm, DanS <t.h.i.s.n.t.h....@a.d.e.l.p.h.i.a.n.e.t>
> wrote:
>> Look, I don't know if anyone here is/was a Eudora user, but........
>>
> <snip>
>
> I can see that this would be pain in the proverbial. Unfortunately I
> wonder just how many Eudora users would think of looking on this group
> to find out about this?

Understandable. I don't think anyone would go looking for info on Eudora
anywhere other than it's website though anyway.

It was just a general FYI, without saying FYI.

> Have you considered sending an email to the current developers telling
> them about your experience and asking them to make it clearer that
> it's not really Eudora before the user downloads?

I did send them an e-mail already.

But, to be fair, I didn't read the readme file I included in the original
post. There was a d/l link to the readme elsewhere on the d/l page, but
many don't read those prior to d/l'g. Not a simple readme anyway, maybe
if it was a notice about incompatibilities with (whatever) or some other
technical notes.

After posting, I did find out some details of the branching effort, and
honestly, if I wasn't already using (the real) T-Bird, I might use T-
Eudora.

What I DO find appealing about the branch is that the Eudora T-Bird works
just like the original (now called Eudora classic) did.

By that I mean:

-It is portable
-Mailboxes are each stored in their own file
-Attachments are d/l'd and stored as the actual file intot he specified
attachments directory, not BLOB'd into a big database, along with the e-
mails themselves.

The one thing I always liked about Eudora was that it was portable. If
you needed to replace a drive, or re-install your system, or move to a
new PC, all you needed to do was backup the Eudora directory, and then
copy it back to the new place and it was ready to go.

I always hated the big database way of doing things, like T-Bird,
Outlook, etc. D/L'g attachments to the actual files was also a plus to
me.

Hmmm. The more I talk about, the more it seems like my big gripe was that
I thought it was....well......version 9 of Eudora, and not a variant of
T-Bird.

"Spanky deMonkey, ESQ" <> wrote in
news:gIXyk.294$:

>> The only one that has a pitiful existence is you. Maybe if you got
>> your life straighten out, because you're on Usenet just a little too
>> much to be normal, learn how to spell *existence* and drink prune
>> juice to keep your mind right and be regular, it can only be brighter
>> for you. You seem a little tense.
>
> DanS's Sheep has been holding out on him so it's making him crazy. He
> needs to take "matters into his own hands" if you know what I mean!

Sorry, I don't own any farm animals, loser. Go back to whatever farm you
were visiting the last few days and be gone with you for good.