Counting the crappinesses in Mail.app
Mindless Fluffiness doesn’t like Mail.app 
much.
In fact, he thinks it’s so bad that he cannot fathom “why people go on about Apple’s great software”.
He has a list of eight grievances, which I’m going to reproduce in full:
1. They broke the ability to bind a key sequence to applescript in latest version
2. Earlier versions failed to check the certificate name of server in SSL connections
3. Can’t filter to display only unread messages
4. Does not spell check the Subject line when spell checking rest of message
5. Can’t include folder name in filter rule criteria
6. Search does not seem to use Spotlight
7. You can choose to check spelling when you send, or to have red squiggles under misspelled words - however you can’t have both. This is “upgrade” from pervious version where you could not spell check on send at all.
8. If you have two email address for a person, no way to set the preferred one.
No one respects the right of people to have an opinion, to use NotifX, to say Mail sucks or whatever more than I do.
Still, I can’t help mentioning:
1. Quicksilver triggers or FastScripts offer excellent workarounds for this.
3. A Smart Mailbox with the condition “Message is Unread” achieves this nicely.
6. Mail uses its own database for searches involving To, From, and Subject lines. For everything else it uses Spotlight. Scott Morrison , the developer of Mail Act-on and MailTags, has written a nice, simple explanation of searches in Mail.
8. Address Book allows you to set a default email address for people with more than one.
That still leaves four.
But a happy relationship with an email client is like the love of a good woman. It’s the art of compromise.
Tags: Address Book, Apple Mail, mail.app, searching, smart mailboxes, unhappy usersRelated posts
May 8th, 2006 at 11:16 pm
…well, then let me add some more
o imap support just sucks
o smart mailboxes are too slow
o smart mailboxes expressions are too limited
o it just crashes way to often (might be related to the crappy imap support though)
o no real offline support
May 9th, 2006 at 12:46 am
“2. Earlier versions failed to check the certificate name of server in SSL connections”
Ummm. this is not exactly a legitimate grievance against the CURRENT version of Mail. Seeing this in the list really weakens any respect I might have had for the opinions of “Mindless Fluffiness.”
May 9th, 2006 at 2:32 am
What is so difficult about a return receipt option? Thunderbird has it. Why not Mail.app?
May 9th, 2006 at 3:33 am
It’s frelling free! Don’t use it if you don’t like it and quit whining.
May 9th, 2006 at 4:27 am
Maybe there is a solution or explanation for this problem I have. The regular Inboxes have a “From” column. The regular Outboxes have a “To” column. However ALL folders created on my Mac for archiving emails have a To column, a From column, both, or none. The columns cannot be set for each archive folder. The Inbox Archive folder has to have From column to be useful. The Outbox Archive folder has to have a To column to be useful. In order for that to happen, they both have to have both columns, taking up space from the Subject column. In the Outbox Archive folder the From column is superfluous - it only has my name. Same problem in the To column in the Inbox Archive.
Has anyone fixed this problem, or do we all just live with it?
Archiving locally frees up IMAP storage space and it lets me make sure I don’t lose important emails if the server disk crashes or I change ISPs.
May 9th, 2006 at 5:41 am
What is frelling free? Frelling? Mail.app isn’t free by any means. Macintosh purchasers pay for their software and have every right to ask for improvements.
Please cool your emotions - nothing to get excited about.
May 9th, 2006 at 7:33 am
Not only we somehow pay for it …real options are lacking. But we are working on it. http://vafer.org/blog/tag/thunderbird
May 9th, 2006 at 4:38 pm
Actually, Zarembo and Torsten, for this comparison, Mail.app is free, since it comes with the Mac OS X Operating System. Any other Mail program (free or shareware) would have to factor in the same “cost”, since it would need the Operating System to function.
And I would agree that “Macintosh purchasers … have every right to ask for improvements” Except when the suggested improvements are “xxxx sucks”, “xxxx is too slow”, “xxxx is too limited”, etc. If you can’t tell the programmers what’s wrong specifically, you’re wasting the time of everyone that’s involved … “The mail program crashes everytime I start it up the 1st time, but the 2nd time, it works perfectly” goes a lot further than “xxxx crashes too often” …
Just some suggestion from a 20+ year programmer — for what they’re worth!
May 9th, 2006 at 6:10 pm
I’ve no problem with your last comment except if you’re inferring I’ve made any comment such as the ones you’ve stated. I haven’t, I was merely making a suggestion.
Try not to take things so personal - there’re many things in life that are much more stressful.
Take care.
May 9th, 2006 at 6:25 pm
Sorry, I disagree. I have to pay for every version of OSX. I don’t understand why this should not matter for this comparison. As long as I cannot download or upgrade mail.app without upgrading the OS I don’t see any reason why it should be concidered “free”. If it was really that free - hell, let them open source it. It just comes with the system - that’s a difference.
If you buy a combo meal at McDonalds …do you consider the drinks to be free?
Regarding the suggestions: I am sure the programmers are aware of the imap problems, that there is timelag between the arrival of the mail and the when it appears in the “smart folder”. Not to talk about that nesting of expression is not possible with the “smart folder” expressions gui.
But this is not the forum for all these details - as I am not talking to the programmers here. This is just a comment in a blog post and frankly speaking …although I am also a 20+ year programmer I cannot yet see a real pattern why mail.app crashes exactly. I just dutifuly send in the crash report every time.
May 9th, 2006 at 9:34 pm
My biggest bugbear with Mail is that it doesn’t seem to be possible to set up sending-only accounts. This is a really big deal for many people with multiple identities. It would be a trivial thing for Apple to enable, but for some benighted reason it’s just not possible. The account setup process actively conspires to prevent it.
May 9th, 2006 at 10:33 pm
Nick, at least that is possible ;-) …although obviously not too straight forward. See http://vafer.org/blog/20060110111530
May 9th, 2006 at 10:36 pm
Like this.
May 9th, 2006 at 11:19 pm
OK, let me rephrase my original point! It’s pathetic that Mail has such a deeply hidden option for sending mail from multiple addresses. This should be properly and clearly exposed in the UI.
May 9th, 2006 at 11:20 pm
But many thanks for the pointers to where this information can be found. Believe me, it will come in VERY handy with some of my clients who want to be able to use Mail but haven’t been able to because of this perceived limitation…
May 11th, 2006 at 1:34 pm
Zarembo, Just wanted to let you know I wasn’t accussing of making those type of comments (I believe that was actually Torsten ;^) Just pointing out why the program should be considered “free” (I’ll elaborate in just a second) and why those type of comments (that I mentioned) don’t help programmers much … As far as as taking comments personal, they don’t affect me one way or the other — I just look for the facts and then discuss my viewpoint. My opinion, as others, is free and worth about that much!!
The reason the program should be considered free, Torsten, is that it’s bundled with the Operating System. You have to have the Operating System to make any mail program work, therefore the cost ( of the Operating System) is irrelevant for the comparison of email programs; and since it doesn’t cost you any extra to purchase the Mail.app program (once you have the Operating System), it’s free!!
School’s out!! ;^)
May 11th, 2006 at 2:32 pm
Brad, seems like you are just ignoring my points …so it does not seem to be worth following up on that matter. Bundling software does not mean it’s free. But go and ask Apple whether they consider Mail to be free or not. And for what it’s worth - I was providing facts. No bugzilla entries - but facts. Cheers.
May 11th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
Actually, Torsten, I was getting ready to say the same about you … you seem to be ignoring my points! =:0
So, let’s start with what seems to be your only point:
‘As long as I can not download or upgrade mail.app without upgrading the OS, I don’t see any reason why it should be considered “free†‘
Sorry, but that’s an opinion, not a fact. Downloading or Upgrading was not the problem you mentioned initially; it was that the Mail.app program had lots of bugs that needed to be fixed.
As a reminder:
“o imap support just sucks
o smart mailboxes are too slow
o smart mailboxes expressions are too limited
o it just crashes way to often …
o no real offline support”
These don’t require you to have the ability to download or upgrade the Mail.app program; you’re only required to have Software Update, and any fixes will be automatically applied accordingly. If you’re wanting additional *Features*, that’s a *whole* different discussion …
May 11th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
Perhaps you guys would have a lot more fun if you took your conversation to email.
I’m all for open, free and frank debate, but I wonder if this is the place for this particular discussion?
May 11th, 2006 at 4:52 pm
Sorry, for the spam Tim. This became a slashdot conversation and it’s just waste of time discussing this further via email. It was meant to be just a nod that mail.app has a few areas that need to be fixed or improved. It has become a ridiculous waste of time. Please feel free to delete my comments …no - please do so! Sorry, about that.
May 11th, 2006 at 4:54 pm
No need to apologise, either of you.
I like people who are passionate about email clients :)
It’s just that there comes a point….