Eliminating Multiple (Duplicate) Messages in Eudora
GW
Does anyone have a solution?
First, here's the problem:
The need to consolidate one's mail arises when one has various
computers from which mail is retrieved, for instance, home, work,
mobile etc. In my case it can be many computers, some use Eudora
clients whilst others use Outlook, Outlook Express and Pegasus etc.,
so I always leave mail on the server to reacquire it at different
locations
To consolidate this mail from various [Eudora] computers the mailbox
files (in.mbx/toc etc.) are copied to one's main computer. These
files are put into the mailbox directory after renaming the 'in',
'out' files to stop overwriting the resident files, then using Eudora
they are dragged to respective mailboxes (mbx files). However, now
there are multiple instances of the same message and these duplicates
need to be deleted. Eudora does not have a function to delete
duplicate messages which is a very serious limitation.
This whole shemozzle is further compounded when one sends a cc copy to
another of one's accounts. This message will need to be deleted
during the consolidation BUT it is NOT exactly identical - the content
are identical but the header is not.
It is hard to stress how serious this problem is. At one stage when I
was consolidating my mail (from between multiple machines, CDRs, tape
archives etc. I had between 20 and 30 instances of the same message;
furthermore, the number of multiple instances (duplicates) wasn't
constant for the vintage of each mailbox was different. The only way
I know of to eliminate these duplicate messages within EUDORA is to do
so by hand. In my case the Eudora *.mbx/toc files amounted to 2-3GB
worth of files.
Not only is this extremely boring and time consuming but also the
tedium leads to a very error-prone cleanup as the
deleting-all-duplicates-except-one sometimes turns in to a delete-all.
This is very contrary to a problem that should be amenable to computer
solution!
Surely, I'm not the only one with this problem? Anyone got any bright
ideas?
gw.
PS: The Bat, a comparatively new mail package, has an integrated
dupe-eliminator facility that is quite effective, but far from
perfect. For example, I imported an Eudora in-box file consisting of
37,423 messages into The Bat and after the duplicate eliminator
facility was applied I ended up with only 6,108 messages. This number
amounts to a very worthwhile six-fold reduction in messages. The
problem is that getting the messages out of The Bat and back into
Eudora is another probleem!
--------
Katrina Knight
> The need to consolidate one's mail arises when one has various
> computers from which mail is retrieved, for instance, home, work,
> mobile etc. In my case it can be many computers, some use Eudora
> clients whilst others use Outlook, Outlook Express and Pegasus etc.,
> so I always leave mail on the server to reacquire it at different
> locations
I would suggest using a Zip disk to hold your mailboxes and taking that
disk with you to any computer you use Eudora on. That way you've only got
one set of mailboxes. If the computers don't have zip drives, consider
getting an external one that you can use with all of them. Also consider
standardizing which mail client you use. Why are you using so many
different programs?
> To consolidate this mail from various [Eudora] computers the mailbox
> files (in.mbx/toc etc.) are copied to one's main computer.
If you're leaving mail on the server, why not just download all of it with
your main computer and then delete it from the server? Why are you copying
what's been downloaded on all the other computers as well as downloading
it from the server? Then you'd only have to copy the outgoing messages
from the other computers. It sounds like you're making this more complex
then it needs to be.
> These
> files are put into the mailbox directory after renaming the 'in',
> 'out' files to stop overwriting the resident files, then using Eudora
> they are dragged to respective mailboxes (mbx files).
You should also stop using in and out to store all your mail. They aren't
designed to be used for long-term storage and if they get too big, bad
things will eventually happen to them.
> Surely, I'm not the only one with this problem? Anyone got any bright
> ideas?
I've never heard of anyone managing to get 20 or 30 duplicates of lots of
messages before, but yes other people have expressed a desire to remove
duplicates. In your case, I think you really need to rethink the actions
that are causing the duplicates. Once you've straightened that out, you
should be able to manage to deal with them much easier.
If your duplicates are spread across multiple mailboxes, you might want to
take a look at a program called Mailbag Assistant that allows you to
access multiple mailboxes together, including mailboxes from different
programs and in different data directories. I don't have the address for
downloading it handy, but I know there are other people here who use it,
so someone should be able to tell you.
--
Katrina
GW
Thanks for your comments Katrina. Like just about everything, the
first posting only says part of the story. See my additional
comments:
On Wed, 23 May 2001 18:05:36 GMT, Katrina Knight <kkn...@epix.net>
wrote:
>GW <wils...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>> The need to consolidate one's mail arises when one has various
>> computers from which mail is retrieved, for instance, home, work,
>> mobile etc. In my case it can be many computers, some use Eudora
>> clients whilst others use Outlook, Outlook Express and Pegasus etc.,
>> so I always leave mail on the server to reacquire it at different
>> locations
>
>I would suggest using a Zip disk to hold your mailboxes and taking that
>disk with you to any computer you use Eudora on. That way you've only got
>one set of mailboxes. If the computers don't have zip drives, consider
>getting an external one that you can use with all of them. Also consider
>standardizing which mail client you use. Why are you using so many
>different programs?
Agreed, this is one solution. However, in my case many of the
computers may not be [or are not] mine. Two were in Europe, one in
the US, and three in Australia, not to mention the portable and the
Web mail in countries like Thailand. When one is travelling and
working overseas one takes whatever PC is available. I normally use
Windows 2000 and Linux but unfortunately in some places DOS clients
still predominate.
Lugging around a possibly-un-connectable Zip drive because some
programmer [Qualcomm] hasn't finished his job shouldn't be necessary;
furthermore it's impractical for me for the reasons outlined.
>> To consolidate this mail from various [Eudora] computers the mailbox
>> files (in.mbx/toc etc.) are copied to one's main computer.
>
>If you're leaving mail on the server, why not just download all of it with
>your main computer and then delete it from the server? Why are you copying
>what's been downloaded on all the other computers as well as downloading
>it from the server? Then you'd only have to copy the outgoing messages
>from the other computers. It sounds like you're making this more complex
>then it needs to be.
I wish I was making things more complex than it needs to be, for then
someone could force me to retrain my habits.
Which computer? Well, it depends which PC is my main computer! When
in Vienna, Austria it's one of two, when in Sydney, Australia it can
be one of three. Sometimes the 'main' PC may only be the main PC for
two or three weeks, perhaps even less.
Deleting mail from the server can be disastrous when one is using a
temporary machine, someone else's machine or a development system, for
if these messages are lost then when one gets back to a more stable
environment there's nothing left to recover.
>> These files are put into the mailbox directory after renaming the 'in',
>> 'out' files to stop overwriting the resident files, then using Eudora
>> they are dragged to respective mailboxes (mbx files).
>
>You should also stop using in and out to store all your mail. They aren't
>designed to be used for long-term storage and if they get too big, bad
>things will eventually happen to them.
Where does Qualcomm say that 'in and 'out' boxes aren't designed to be
used for long-term storage? Again, if this is a problem known to
Qualcomm then it should have fixed it by now. After all Eudora is in
version 5.10 and that's an awful long way from version one, many years
in fact.
As I see it, this fault is attributable to both Microsoft and
Qualcomm. If Windows had a file system that used archiving and
history attributes of a file (i.e.: where a file's been and what it's
been doing etc.) and then attributed the file accordingly, then it
would require considerable effort on the part of the user to lose
data. Put another way, the operating system would automatically know
how to concatenate old and new files with the same name; or at least
ask the user what he/she wanted to do.
On the other hand, Qualcomm faced with a brain-dead operating system
such as Windows, could ameliorate the problem from within Eudora.
Several solutions come immediately to mind, perhaps there are others:
Suggestion 1.: Either allow the user to define the default 'in-box'
file name at both Eudora's installation time or later in the
'Options'. This would allow users to have different in-box filenames
on different machines and thus avoid overwriting in-box files.
Suggestion 2.: Randomize the in-box filename at Eudora installation
time, for instance: in_xxxxxx.mbx/toc, where xxxxxx is randomised.
The chances of having more than one in-box with the same name are
hugely diminished. Also, it would avoid problems where users forget
to rename in-box file names thus reduce the possibility of overwriting
a main in-box file etc.
Suggestion 3. Qualcomm make available full details of its TOC file
structure etc. in order that others can write import/export routines
to and from non-proprietary file formats. Proprietary file formats
(e.g.: TOC files) are good for the software developer but are the
enemy of data integrity - and hence the user's enemy.
>> Surely, I'm not the only one with this problem? Anyone got any bright
>> ideas?
>
>I've never heard of anyone managing to get 20 or 30 duplicates of lots of
>messages before, but yes other people have expressed a desire to remove
>duplicates. In your case, I think you really need to rethink the actions
>that are causing the duplicates. Once you've straightened that out, you
>should be able to manage to deal with them much easier.
To be fair Eudora is not the only mail program with this problem,
Microsoft mailers also suffers from it (and others too). However, as
these are either 'free' or a part of MS Office, a competing product as
Eudora should offer features not offered by Microsoft, and the
elimination of duplicate messages is surely one them.
As a person who's been in IT management I can assure you I've seen
many cases of multiple messages in users' mailboxes. Again, Eudora is
far from being alone here; both colleagues and me have seen Outlook
users' PST files exceed many gigabytes in size and contain hundreds of
duplicates; so many in fact that a restoration of mail files from a
portable has brought the operating system to its knees on a 'main' PC
as the hard disk has totally filled up in the process. If you've not
seen things like this you're not in IT management or have wonderful
users.
>If your duplicates are spread across multiple mailboxes, you might want to
>take a look at a program called Mailbag Assistant that allows you to
>access multiple mailboxes together, including mailboxes from different
>programs and in different data directories. I don't have the address for
>downloading it handy, but I know there are other people here who use it,
>so someone should be able to tell you.
Thanks; I had a brief look at it some weeks ago when this problem
raised itself again. I looked at everything I could lay my hands on
but nothing seemed to suit, but I'll follow your suggestion and check
it out again.
Nonetheless, I think that Qualcomm should fix up these niggling
problems, for let's face it, they could be easily fixed if Qualcomm
wanted to. I first raised some of these issues with the Qualcomm
developers as far back as version 3 but to no avail; I got nothing
more than an automated response.
(Yes, I understand it is not reasonable for Qualcomm to respond to
every single user's request. I also understand the recent imperatives
forced on Qualcomm to code in ad support and perhaps even moodwatch -
which where I come from can only be considered as quaint and mildly
amusing, for the majority of words it traps are used on free-to-air TV
including the four-letter ones. But I digress....)
In summary, I just don't have the time, inclination or patience to
develop a plug-in solution. I suppose I was hoping some bright-spark
might have already confronted the problem and tackled it head on. Of
course, I keep hoping for a miracle such as Qualcomm redirecting its
programmers from coding trivia into coding for data integrity's sake
but that's a forlorn hope methinks.
Again, thanks for your comments, we'll wait and see what happens.
Grahame Wilson
Han Broekman
Your post is too long to read exhaustively (sorry to have to be blunt).
If you are forced to use crashing development machines to read your
precious mail, then there is much more wrong than Eudora (how does that
get on all those machines anyway?). I suspect the fault is between the
chair cushion and the keyboard (again, sorry to have to be blunt).
Your only solution is to use either webmail, or carry a floppy with one
of the earliest Eudora versions, the one talked about here in the past,
that will allow you to have program and email on the same disk (no html
support, probably).
Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
mail gets to an IMAP server.
Sorry, if this doesn't help much ...
--
Best regards
Han Broekman
(Please answer to the newsgroup only, I will not answer email)
Katrina Knight
> Agreed, this is one solution. However, in my case many of the
> computers may not be [or are not] mine. Two were in Europe, one in
> the US, and three in Australia, not to mention the portable and the
> Web mail in countries like Thailand. When one is travelling and
> working overseas one takes whatever PC is available. I normally use
> Windows 2000 and Linux but unfortunately in some places DOS clients
> still predominate.
Oh my. I'd suggest trying to arrange to use something other than a pop3
mail account. IMAP is a much better choice for this kind of situation.
Does your ISP offer a choice by any chance? (Mine will let me use either
one.) IMAP leaves mail on the server. Eudora doesn't work quite so well
with IMAP, but it sounds like a much better solution than what you are
doing. Failing that, is it possible that you could get a web mail account
and use that instead? I've never seen a web mail interface that I like
anywhere near as much as Eudora, but it sounds like you are being forced
to just use whatever mail program someone else has installed already
anyway, so it might not be bad. A lot of web mail interfaces feature the
ability to gather all the mail from your pop accounts as well, so you can
read everything from the web interface and you'd be able to access it from
wherever you were without worrying about whose computer you were using. I
very rarely recommend to anyone to use web mail as their primary email
interface, but this situation sounds like it was made for that kind of
interface. Plus, using either IMAP or a web interface would leave your
mail somewhere else so that it wouldn't end up where the normal user's of
all those other computers could read it at will. Having assorted people
having access to my mail while I was on the road would be very
distasteful to me, especially if there was any kind of important business
info involved.
> Lugging around a possibly-un-connectable Zip drive because some
> programmer [Qualcomm] hasn't finished his job shouldn't be necessary;
> furthermore it's impractical for me for the reasons outlined.
I think it is kind of unfair to say the programmer didn't finish his job,
but I can see why that solution wouldn't work for you.
> Which computer? Well, it depends which PC is my main computer! When
> in Vienna, Austria it's one of two, when in Sydney, Australia it can
> be one of three. Sometimes the 'main' PC may only be the main PC for
> two or three weeks, perhaps even less.
Okay, so despite the way your questions were worded, it sounds like you
really don't have a 'main computer'. You just have some that you use more
often at times. That makes it much harder.
> Where does Qualcomm say that 'in and 'out' boxes aren't designed to be
> used for long-term storage?
I don't remember, but it is there somewhere.
> Again, if this is a problem known to
> Qualcomm then it should have fixed it by now. After all Eudora is in
> version 5.10 and that's an awful long way from version one, many years
> in fact.
Qualcomm doesn't regard it as a problem. The design was intentional on
their part. The inbox and outbox are designed to be kept in memory for
quick access. That's fine. It only becomes a problem if you leave massive
amounts of mail in them and the amount of resources and memory used for
them gets to be more than is readily available. They should do a better
job of explaining to people that they need to move mail elsewhere once in
a while, but most people never have a problem with it. If you want to
complain about a job left unfinished, the help file/manual is what I'd
attack. I think the help file could have been made much more useful to
people who don't already know how to use the program.
> As I see it, this fault is attributable to both Microsoft and
> Qualcomm. If Windows had a file system that used archiving and
> history attributes of a file (i.e.: where a file's been and what it's
> been doing etc.) and then attributed the file accordingly, then it
> would require considerable effort on the part of the user to lose
> data. Put another way, the operating system would automatically know
> how to concatenate old and new files with the same name; or at least
> ask the user what he/she wanted to do.
This isn't a matter of concatenating files. It is a matter of examining
the files and taking bits and pieces from each file. Concatenating files
is going to give you exactly the results you are complaining about -
duplicates. I have lots of complaints with MS and their OSs, but I don't
think this complaint is related to the problem you have.
> Suggestion 1.: Either allow the user to define the default 'in-box'
> file name at both Eudora's installation time or later in the
> 'Options'. This would allow users to have different in-box filenames
> on different machines and thus avoid overwriting in-box files.
That wouldn't be a bad idea, but how is it going to fix the problem you
have? I don't quite see what it has to do with duplicates.
> Suggestion 2.: Randomize the in-box filename at Eudora installation
> time, for instance: in_xxxxxx.mbx/toc, where xxxxxx is randomised.
> The chances of having more than one in-box with the same name are
> hugely diminished. Also, it would avoid problems where users forget
> to rename in-box file names thus reduce the possibility of overwriting
> a main in-box file etc.
If you can't remember not to overwrite files, you probably don't know
enough to be copying the files between versions anyway. Any program that
the average user uses to copy files is going to ask before overwriting a
file. Plus, this still doesn't do a thing to stop you from having
duplicate messages when you combine mailboxes from multiple computers
that downloaded the same messages. Besides, I have no desire for my inbox
to have some random name. 'In' works quite fine and looks good.
> Suggestion 3. Qualcomm make available full details of its TOC file
> structure etc. in order that others can write import/export routines
> to and from non-proprietary file formats. Proprietary file formats
> (e.g.: TOC files) are good for the software developer but are the
> enemy of data integrity - and hence the user's enemy.
The mbx files are totally nonproprietary text files. There isn't anything
to stop you from combining them and then rebuilding the toc files.
The mbx files include all the information you really need. You don't
need the index and while the status information is nice, it is not
essential to the much of anything. There is some information on how the
toc files are structured available somewhere. If you really want to know,
and you have the type of skills that would be needed to work with toc
files, I think you could figure them out. And for dealing with combining
the mailboxes, I think something like a Perl script could probably sort
through the mailboxes and pick out the pieces that are different.
> As a person who's been in IT management I can assure you I've seen
> many cases of multiple messages in users' mailboxes. Again, Eudora is
> far from being alone here; both colleagues and me have seen Outlook
> users' PST files exceed many gigabytes in size and contain hundreds of
Having hundreds of duplicates is a very different thing from having twenty
or thirty of the same message. And no, the people I support have never
come to me with problems anywhere near that bad. They aren't trying to do
what you want to do though.
> Thanks; I had a brief look at it some weeks ago when this problem
> raised itself again. I looked at everything I could lay my hands on
> but nothing seemed to suit, but I'll follow your suggestion and check
> it out again.
Mailbag Assistant sounds like the best thing I can think of to do some of
what you need to do. At least you could read all those different mailboxes
at once with it.
> Nonetheless, I think that Qualcomm should fix up these niggling
> problems, for let's face it, they could be easily fixed if Qualcomm
> wanted to.
It would be nice if they'd add a duplicate checker, but in the meantime
I think you need to find a better way of dealing with the way you check
mail. Even without dealing with duplicates, it sounds like what you're
doing takes a bunch of effort.
> (Yes, I understand it is not reasonable for Qualcomm to respond to
> every single user's request.
Bah. They could respond to at least some and they could certainly add
a few of the simpler things people commonly ask for. Although, to be
truthful, they have added several of the things I've been wanting in 5.1,
so I won't complain too much.
I also understand the recent imperatives
> forced on Qualcomm to code in ad support and perhaps even moodwatch -
> which where I come from can only be considered as quaint and mildly
> amusing, for the majority of words it traps are used on free-to-air TV
> including the four-letter ones. But I digress....)
Moodwatch doesn't claim that it is trying to check for obscene words, so
the standard of whether or not they're said on TV isn't germane. It claims
to be looking for 'possibly objectionable' content - including angry
responses and discussions of topics that might be offensive as well as
curse words and obscenity. 'Moodwatch' seems to be a somewhat accurate
description. It doesn't like words that might be indicitive of a bad mood.
In any case, you're right about its value. It is good entertainment if
you're bored, but that's about it.
> In summary, I just don't have
the time, inclination or patience to
> develop a plug-in solution. I suppose I was hoping some bright-spark
> might have already confronted the problem and tackled it head on.
I would guess that the number of people for whom it is a big problem is
relatively small and those people who are in the same type situation as
you probably also don't have the time or desire to do something about it.
--
Katrina
Roedy Green
wrote or quoted :
>I've never seen a web mail interface that I like
>anywhere near as much as Eudora, but it sounds like you are being forced
>to just use whatever mail program someone else has installed already
>anyway, so it might not be bad.
Carrying a Eudora-equipped laptop around and having an ISP with a
global phone access is the way my globe trotting engineer friend
Angela handles it. If you have a PCMCIA 10 base T ethernet card, you
can pretty easily plug into anyone's 24-7 Internet access. See IPass
and ISP in the Java glossary.
She still has the problem of figuring out how to dial the nearest ISP
when she lands in Uruguay.
See http://mindprod.com/project.html#LONGDISTANCE
for my suggested solution to that problem.
My girl friend handles the problem by having both web-based and
Eudora-style accounts and just tells people she wants to talk to
where they can get her today. She collects email accounts the way some
people collect stamps. What a list of Eudora personalities! She
tries to explain to me why each one is necessary.
My sister uses web based email. She was even able to send me
"postcards" from China at some sort of Internet cafe where they
insisted on doing the typing for you.
-
For more detail, please look up the key words mentioned in this post in
the Java Glossary at:
http://mindprod.com/gloss.html or http://209.153.246.39/gloss.html
If you don't see what you were looking for, complain!
or send your contribution for the glossary.
--
Roedy Green, Canadian Mind Products
Custom computer programming since 1963.
Almost ready to take on new work.
Grahame Wilson
<j.bro...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Your post is too long to read exhaustively (sorry to have to be blunt).
I apologize for that, but sometimes a failure to state or restate the
obvious is the reason why things don't happen or software ends up with
bugs and limitations. You see I strongly agree with H.L Mencken's old
maxim "that for every difficult and complex problem there is a
solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"! Your suggestions are neat
work-around solutions but it's no substitute for Eudora with the
feature built in. Unless customers complain the product won't be
fixed.
>If you are forced to use crashing development machines to read your
>precious mail, then there is much more wrong than Eudora (how does that
>get on all those machines anyway?). I suspect the fault is between the
>chair cushion and the keyboard (again, sorry to have to be blunt).
I agree with you fully, it would be good if I had a more organized way
of working. However, consider this: snail-mail has been around for a
long time - about 160 years, but for email, at a stretch, perhaps 25.
The long lineage of the former means there's an accepted way of doing
things but email is not there yet for if it were we wouldn't have the
many help groups like this around. I can't ever recall seeing a self
help group for a traditional mail service but I suppose they existed
once.
Seeing the problems being experienced by all and sundry in these
postings indicates to me that there are many ways of using email, and
in ways I'd have never thought of. My useage might be a little
unusual but it's far from being rare.
>Your only solution is to use either webmail, or carry a floppy with one
>of the earliest Eudora versions, the one talked about here in the past,
>that will allow you to have program and email on the same disk (no html
>support, probably).
I do use webmail but it's not a substitute for a good mail client.
Unfortunately, my mail won't fit on a floppy, many of my mail
attachments are several megabytes long, I even received a 12MB
attachment last month. This happens when network users don't bother
to consider that the recipient might be on the other side of the
planet and not in the next room.
>
>Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
>mail gets to an IMAP server.
Unfortunately, many servers don't use IMAP, but when available I do.
>Sorry, if this doesn't help much ...
That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
my original posting.
Thanks,
Grahame
GW
<j.bro...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Your post is too long to read exhaustively (sorry to have to be blunt).
I apologize for that, but sometimes a failure to state or restate the
obvious is the reason why things don't happen or software ends up with
bugs and limitations. You see I strongly agree with H.L Mencken's old
maxim "that for every difficult and complex problem there is a
solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"! Your suggestions are neat
work-around solutions but it's no substitute for Eudora with the
feature built in. Unless customers complain the product won't be
fixed.
>If you are forced to use crashing development machines to read your
>precious mail, then there is much more wrong than Eudora (how does that
>get on all those machines anyway?). I suspect the fault is between the
>chair cushion and the keyboard (again, sorry to have to be blunt).
I agree with you fully, it would be good if I had a more organized way
of working. However, consider this: snail-mail has been around for a
long time - about 160 years, but for email, at a stretch, perhaps 25.
The long lineage of the former means there's an accepted way of doing
things but email is not there yet for if it were we wouldn't have the
many help groups like this around. I can't ever recall seeing a self
help group for a traditional mail service but I suppose they existed
once.
Seeing the problems being experienced by all and sundry in these
postings indicates to me that there are many ways of using email, and
in ways I'd have never thought of. My useage might be a little
unusual but it's far from being rare.
>Your only solution is to use either webmail, or carry a floppy with one
>of the earliest Eudora versions, the one talked about here in the past,
>that will allow you to have program and email on the same disk (no html
>support, probably).
I do use webmail but it's not a substitute for a good mail client.
Unfortunately, my mail won't fit on a floppy, many of my mail
attachments are several megabytes long, I even received a 12MB
attachment last month. This happens when network users don't bother
to consider that the recipient might be on the other side of the
planet and not in the next room.
>
>Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
>mail gets to an IMAP server.
Unfortunately, many servers don't use IMAP, but when available I do.
>Sorry, if this doesn't help much ...
That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
Grahame Wilson
<j.bro...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Your post is too long to read exhaustively (sorry to have to be blunt).
I apologize for that, but sometimes a failure to state or restate the
obvious is the reason why things don't happen or software ends up with
bugs and limitations. You see I strongly agree with H.L Mencken's old
maxim "that for every difficult and complex problem there is a
solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"! Your suggestions are neat
work-around solutions but it's no substitute for Eudora with the
feature built in. Unless customers complain the product won't be
fixed.
>If you are forced to use crashing development machines to read your
>precious mail, then there is much more wrong than Eudora (how does that
>get on all those machines anyway?). I suspect the fault is between the
>chair cushion and the keyboard (again, sorry to have to be blunt).
I agree with you fully, it would be good if I had a more organized way
of working. However, consider this: snail-mail has been around for a
long time - about 160 years, but for email, at a stretch, perhaps 25.
The long lineage of the former means there's an accepted way of doing
things but email is not there yet for if it were we wouldn't have the
many help groups like this around. I can't ever recall seeing a self
help group for a traditional mail service but I suppose they existed
once.
Seeing the problems being experienced by all and sundry in these
postings indicates to me that there are many ways of using email, and
in ways I'd have never thought of. My useage might be a little
unusual but it's far from being rare.
>Your only solution is to use either webmail, or carry a floppy with one
>of the earliest Eudora versions, the one talked about here in the past,
>that will allow you to have program and email on the same disk (no html
>support, probably).
I do use webmail but it's not a substitute for a good mail client.
Unfortunately, my mail won't fit on a floppy, many of my mail
attachments are several megabytes long, I even received a 12MB
attachment last month. This happens when network users don't bother
to consider that the recipient might be on the other side of the
planet and not in the next room.
>
>Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
>mail gets to an IMAP server.
Unfortunately, many servers don't use IMAP, but when available I do.
>Sorry, if this doesn't help much ...
That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
Grahame Wilson
<j.bro...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Your post is too long to read exhaustively (sorry to have to be blunt).
I apologize for that, but sometimes a failure to state or restate the
obvious is the reason why things don't happen or software ends up with
bugs and limitations. You see I strongly agree with H.L Mencken's old
maxim "that for every difficult and complex problem there is a
solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"! Your suggestions are neat
work-around solutions but it's no substitute for Eudora with the
feature built in. Unless customers complain the product won't be
fixed.
>If you are forced to use crashing development machines to read your
>precious mail, then there is much more wrong than Eudora (how does that
>get on all those machines anyway?). I suspect the fault is between the
>chair cushion and the keyboard (again, sorry to have to be blunt).
I agree with you fully, it would be good if I had a more organized way
of working. However, consider this: snail-mail has been around for a
long time - about 160 years, but for email, at a stretch, perhaps 25.
The long lineage of the former means there's an accepted way of doing
things but email is not there yet for if it were we wouldn't have the
many help groups like this around. I can't ever recall seeing a self
help group for a traditional mail service but I suppose they existed
once.
Seeing the problems being experienced by all and sundry in these
postings indicates to me that there are many ways of using email, and
in ways I'd have never thought of. My useage might be a little
unusual but it's far from being rare.
>Your only solution is to use either webmail, or carry a floppy with one
>of the earliest Eudora versions, the one talked about here in the past,
>that will allow you to have program and email on the same disk (no html
>support, probably).
I do use webmail but it's not a substitute for a good mail client.
Unfortunately, my mail won't fit on a floppy, many of my mail
attachments are several megabytes long, I even received a 12MB
attachment last month. This happens when network users don't bother
to consider that the recipient might be on the other side of the
planet and not in the next room.
>
>Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
>mail gets to an IMAP server.
Unfortunately, many servers don't use IMAP, but when available I do.
>Sorry, if this doesn't help much ...
That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
Katrina Knight
You seem to have a duplication problem with outgoing news messages too.
This was posted at least four separate times.
> The long lineage of the former means there's an accepted way of doing
> things but email is not there yet for if it were we wouldn't have the
> many help groups like this around. I can't ever recall seeing a self
> help group for a traditional mail service but I suppose they existed
> once.
There are lots of books devoted to how to write letters and how to do
postal marketing and all sorts of things that relate to how to use snail
mail. There used to be whole courses taught in how to write effective
letters. I imagine such classes are still offered. Different
methods of support exist for different mediums of communication.
>>Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
>>mail gets to an IMAP server.
> Unfortunately, many servers don't use IMAP, but when available I do.
You don't need many servers. You need one IMAP accunt on one server that
you can access from wherever you are. If you need multiple mail accounts,
have the messages from the others forwarded/redirected to the IMAP
account. Then you're all set. If you are using a different email account
everywhere you go, you really are setting yourself up to try to do the
impossible in managing your email.
> That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
> my original posting.
There are solutions, you just don't find any of them to your liking. You
don't expect the mailman to sort out whether you've been sent multiple
copies of snail mail, while do you expect your email program to sort out
whether or not you have personally made 30 copies of a message? It would
be nice if it could, but it doesn't, so figure out how to stop making the
30 copies to start with and your problem is greatly reduced.
--
Katrina
Han Broekman
<snip>
> That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
> my original posting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Grahame
It is now clear to me that I should not employ you in a setting where
logic might be remotely usable. Your posts and requests for help have
been amply answered in very useful ways, but you have chosen not to like
any of the very useful answers.
Let me repeat/paraphrase Katrina:
Get a new, good account (preferably but not necessarily with an IMAP
server), and forward all you diverse accounts to that server. Just make
sure the service is reliable and has enough space reserved for you.
Voila, you are all set.
The previous paragraph was lengthy, but still fit on 3 lines in my
window of NS Messenger (not recommended as a real news or email
program).
GW
wrote:
>GW <wils...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>Oh my. I'd suggest trying to arrange to use something other than a pop3
>mail account. IMAP is a much better choice for this kind of situation.
>Does your ISP offer a choice by any chance? (Mine will let me use either
>one.) IMAP leaves mail on the server. Eudora doesn't work quite so well
>with IMAP, but it sounds like a much better solution than what you are
>doing.
Well it depends some use IMAP others don't. The ISP I'm using at the
moment does but seeing I'm using the portable my mailer been defaulted
to POP. You're right I think IMAP seems to be a stitch-on rather than
native.
> Failing that, is it possible that you could get a web mail account
>and use that instead? I've never seen a web mail interface that I like
>anywhere near as much as Eudora, but it sounds like you are being forced
>to just use whatever mail program someone else has installed already
>anyway, so it might not be bad.
Agreed, the only reasons I persevere with Eudora are that I'm used to
it and I like the interface but it too could do with some improvement.
However, wherever I go these days I'm confronted with Outlook, in fact
I reckon I'm using it more than Eudora because it's the default on so
many systems. As I implied in an earlier posting it's no better, and
in fact those nasty PST files often cause systems administrators
nightmares. Converting to Outlook does have a one-time advantage
though - it can eliminate all identical duplicates during an import
from Eudora. However, this is hardly a reason to change mailers.
> A lot of web mail interfaces feature the
>ability to gather all the mail from your pop accounts as well, so you can
>read everything from the web interface and you'd be able to access it from
>wherever you were without worrying about whose computer you were using.
>very rarely recommend to anyone to use web mail as their primary email
>interface, but this situation sounds like it was made for that kind of
>interface.
Agreed, I use Web often but I really don't like them for the reason
you've outlined.
>Plus, using either IMAP or a web interface would leave your
>mail somewhere else so that it wouldn't end up where the normal user's of
>all those other computers could read it at will. Having assorted people
>having access to my mail while I was on the road would be very
>distasteful to me, especially if there was any kind of important business
>info involved.
>
Well there's passwords and PGP etc. - now there's no problem fitting
the key on a floppy - but most of the time security really isn't the
main concern. What I am most concerned about is the loss of data, so
I'm forever protecting it. Of course, sometime later down the track,
comes the great consolidation now the duplicates problem arises.
>> Lugging around a possibly-un-connectable Zip drive because some
>> programmer [Qualcomm] hasn't finished his job shouldn't be necessary;
>> furthermore it's impractical for me for the reasons outlined.
>
>I think it is kind of unfair to say the programmer didn't finish his job,
>but I can see why that solution wouldn't work for you.
I spend most of my working life picking up the pieces left over from
bad programming. Suffice to say I could go into this in considerable
detail but this is not the forum to do so (if you're interested I
refer to some of the issues, albeit a little tangentially at
http://www.zdnet.com/tlkbck/comment/22/0,7056,109945-782432,00.html.)
The only other comment I'd make is that if the Lemon Laws that now
apply to the auto industry were to be applied to software then Bill
would be broke, so too would many others! Do you ever read those
software licensing agreements where it says no warranties etc? I can
assure you good reliable software can and is being written every day,
it's just that most of us don't see it. For instance, organizations
like Boeing, NASA etc, use standardized code whose compilers go
through years of testing before any program is compiled, for instance,
take a tiny glance at: http://www.nag.co.uk/sc22wg5/overview.html.
I can't speak specifically about Eudora for I haven't checked it but I
can about some other common programs and the only reasonable
description of them is that they are spaghetti code. That's why PCs
have to be rebooted regularly. Imagine having to get up and reboot
your TV half way through a movie - we wouldn't tolerate it but we do
for software.
>> Which computer? Well, it depends which PC is my main computer! When
>> in Vienna, Austria it's one of two, when in Sydney, Australia it can
>> be one of three. Sometimes the 'main' PC may only be the main PC for
>> two or three weeks, perhaps even less.
>
>Okay, so despite the way your questions were worded, it sounds like you
>really don't have a 'main computer'. You just have some that you use more
>often at times. That makes it much harder.
That's basically it.
>
>> Where does Qualcomm say that 'in and 'out' boxes aren't designed to be
>> used for long-term storage?
>
>I don't remember, but it is there somewhere.
Incidentally, I've found all mailboxes to be equally fragile.
>> Again, if this is a problem known to
>> Qualcomm then it should have fixed it by now. After all Eudora is in
>> version 5.10 and that's an awful long way from version one, many years
>> in fact.
>
>Qualcomm doesn't regard it as a problem. The design was intentional on
>their part. The inbox and outbox are designed to be kept in memory for
>quick access. That's fine. It only becomes a problem if you leave massive
>amounts of mail in them and the amount of resources and memory used for
>them gets to be more than is readily available. They should do a better
>job of explaining to people that they need to move mail elsewhere once in
>a while, but most people never have a problem with it. If you want to
>complain about a job left unfinished, the help file/manual is what I'd
>attack. I think the help file could have been made much more useful to
>people who don't already know how to use the program.
There are several points here:
1. I think the lack of attention to detail has affected Qualcomm.
Perhaps if Qualcomm had developed its program further to the point
where there was no comparison between Eudora and say Outlook (e.g.:
as Macromedia's Dreamweaver is compared to Frontpage) then it wouldn't
have had to divert programmers onto writing a convoluted ad-based
download system. These guys would have been much better off employed
developing important new user features for Eudora or even improving
its manual [I note we still have no ads in Outlook as yet]. Have you
really considered how much effort must have gone into that ad
infrastructure? It's huge.
2. The reason why Qualcomm doesn't regard data management and data
integrity as paramount is unknown to me, but if it had done so
previously then it's almost certain that the ad-based system wouldn't
have need to be deployed. Many large corporations who use MS's mail
products by default would have stayed with or switched to Eudora
because for its technical advantage. At the moment there's little
incentive to do so.
3. Rank beginner programs written by one or two people now compete
very well with Qualcomm's dozens. For instance, The Bat is a new
email client with about one tenth the lineage and one tenth the
programmers and it's sweeping Europe by storm (check the reviews,
ZDNET editor's choice, Twocows and so on) . Why? Because it offers
extras that Eudora doesn't (including the elimination of duplicates).
Then why don't I use it you may well ask? First, its developer,
Ritlabs, screwed up my credit card order - a worry given it's based in
Moldova, and second, they don't have sufficient miles on the clock yet
(perhaps this is unfair of me). Nevertheless, even this week I was
looking at it again.
Simply, Eduora is falling behind!
>> As I see it, this fault is attributable to both Microsoft and
>> Qualcomm. If Windows had a file system that used archiving and
>> history attributes of a file (i.e.: where a file's been and what it's
>> been doing etc.) and then attributed the file accordingly, then it
>> would require considerable effort on the part of the user to lose
>> data. Put another way, the operating system would automatically know
>> how to concatenate old and new files with the same name; or at least
>> ask the user what he/she wanted to do.
>
>This isn't a matter of concatenating files. It is a matter of examining
>the files and taking bits and pieces from each file. Concatenating files
>is going to give you exactly the results you are complaining about -
>duplicates. I have lots of complaints with MS and their OSs, but I don't
>think this complaint is related to the problem you have.
Sorry, I've just deleted what I'd written here - it was many
paragraphs about the limitations of operating systems and data
archiving, which is somewhat irrelevant to Eudora (other than to say
that's the borader issue).
>> Suggestion 1.: Either allow the user to define the default 'in-box'
>> file name at both Eudora's installation time or later in the
>> 'Options'. This would allow users to have different in-box filenames
>> on different machines and thus avoid overwriting in-box files.
>
>That wouldn't be a bad idea, but how is it going to fix the problem you
>have? I don't quite see what it has to do with duplicates.
>
>> Suggestion 2.: Randomize the in-box filename at Eudora installation
>> time, for instance: in_xxxxxx.mbx/toc, where xxxxxx is randomised.
>> The chances of having more than one in-box with the same name are
>> hugely diminished. Also, it would avoid problems where users forget
>> to rename in-box file names thus reduce the possibility of overwriting
>> a main in-box file etc.
>
>If you can't remember not to overwrite files, you probably don't know
>enough to be copying the files between versions anyway. Any program that
>the average user uses to copy files is going to ask before overwriting a
>file. Plus, this still doesn't do a thing to stop you from having
>duplicate messages when you combine mailboxes from multiple computers
>that downloaded the same messages. Besides, I have no desire for my inbox
>to have some random name. 'In' works quite fine and looks good.
You missed the point. There are problems amenable to computer
solution, and there are others that are not (well, not at the moment).
This is a simple repetitive problem amenable for computer solution.
Humans shouldn't need to be involved in the process unless the
computer programming is inadequate.
Simply, in this instance Eudora is inadequate for the task at hand.
(I'm sorry if I didn't make this point clear in the earlier posting.)
>> Suggestion 3. Qualcomm make available full details of its TOC file
>> structure etc. in order that others can write import/export routines
>> to and from non-proprietary file formats. Proprietary file formats
>> (e.g.: TOC files) are good for the software developer but are the
>> enemy of data integrity - and hence the user's enemy.
>
>The mbx files are totally nonproprietary text files. There isn't anything
>to stop you from combining them and then rebuilding the toc files.
>The mbx files include all the information you really need. You don't
>need the index and while the status information is nice, it is not
>essential to the much of anything. There is some information on how the
>toc files are structured available somewhere. If you really want to know,
>and you have the type of skills that would be needed to work with toc
>files, I think you could figure them out. And for dealing with combining
>the mailboxes, I think something like a Perl script could probably sort
>through the mailboxes and pick out the pieces that are different.
I patch them now by hand with a hex editor. A totally, unnecessary
task, or it sould be.
>> As a person who's been in IT management I can assure you I've seen
>> many cases of multiple messages in users' mailboxes. Again, Eudora is
>> far from being alone here; both colleagues and me have seen Outlook
>> users' PST files exceed many gigabytes in size and contain hundreds of
>
>Having hundreds of duplicates is a very different thing from having twenty
>or thirty of the same message. And no, the people I support have never
>come to me with problems anywhere near that bad. They aren't trying to do
>what you want to do though.
It would be interesting to know the parameters re mail usage in large
corporations. Especially where in an organization spans not only many
time zones but many different mailers.
I can only speak from my experience. And I can assure you there's a
lot of money to be made by some entrepreneur who wishes to tackle the
problem.
>> Thanks; I had a brief look at it some weeks ago when this problem
>> raised itself again. I looked at everything I could lay my hands on
>> but nothing seemed to suit, but I'll follow your suggestion and check
>> it out again.
>
>Mailbag Assistant sounds like the best thing I can think of to do some of
>what you need to do. At least you could read all those different mailboxes
>at once with it.
>
>> Nonetheless, I think that Qualcomm should fix up these niggling
>> problems, for let's face it, they could be easily fixed if Qualcomm
>> wanted to.
>
>It would be nice if they'd add a duplicate checker, but in the meantime
>I think you need to find a better way of dealing with the way you check
>mail. Even without dealing with duplicates, it sounds like what you're
>doing takes a bunch of effort.
It's not me so much becasue I've managed to accommodate the problem
(although I'd like a solution). It's my users who are complaining for
I'm supposed to have the solution.
>> (Yes, I understand it is not reasonable for Qualcomm to respond to
>> every single user's request.
>
>Bah. They could respond to at least some and they could certainly add
>a few of the simpler things people commonly ask for. Although, to be
>truthful, they have added several of the things I've been wanting in 5.1,
>so I won't complain too much.
Agreed, but what does one do in the absence of effective competition?
Another way of looking at the problem is that the fact that there are
no effective maintenance utilties for Eudora, either by Qualcomm or
anyone else, is quite a problem. For instance the contact manage,
Act!, has utilities by Oakhurst Systems or for that matter one can use
Foxpro to modify the files outside Act! We need the same for Eudora.
> I also understand the recent imperatives
>> forced on Qualcomm to code in ad support and perhaps even moodwatch -
>> which where I come from can only be considered as quaint and mildly
>> amusing, for the majority of words it traps are used on free-to-air TV
>> including the four-letter ones. But I digress....)
>
>Moodwatch doesn't claim that it is trying to check for obscene words, so
>the standard of whether or not they're said on TV isn't germane. It claims
>to be looking for 'possibly objectionable' content - including angry
>responses and discussions of topics that might be offensive as well as
>curse words and obscenity. 'Moodwatch' seems to be a somewhat accurate
>description. It doesn't like words that might be indicitive of a bad mood.
>In any case, you're right about its value. It is good entertainment if
>you're bored, but that's about it.
>
Agreed, its fun, especially when one is from where I come. But I'll
put money on it it would have taken 10 times as long to program the
Moodwatch stuff as to fix the problem I'm referring to.
>
>> In summary, I just don't have
> the time, inclination or patience to
>> develop a plug-in solution. I suppose I was hoping some bright-spark
>> might have already confronted the problem and tackled it head on.
>
>I would guess that the number of people for whom it is a big problem is
>relatively small and those people who are in the same type situation as
>you probably also don't have the time or desire to do something about it.
As I inferred earlier I wouldn't too sure about that.
On the other hand perhaps I'm expecting professional performance from
what really is only an amateur package.
Again, thanks for your comments.
Grahame W.
GW
<j.bro...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Your post is too long to read exhaustively (sorry to have to be blunt).
I apologize for that, but sometimes a failure to state or restate the
obvious is the reason why things don't happen or software ends up with
bugs and limitations. You see I strongly agree with H.L Mencken's old
maxim "that for every difficult and complex problem there is a
solution that is simple, neat, and wrong"! Your suggestions are neat
work-around solutions but it's no substitute for Eudora with the
feature built in. Unless customers complain the product won't be
fixed.
>If you are forced to use crashing development machines to read your
>precious mail, then there is much more wrong than Eudora (how does that
>get on all those machines anyway?). I suspect the fault is between the
>chair cushion and the keyboard (again, sorry to have to be blunt).
I agree with you fully, it would be good if I had a more organized way
of working. However, consider this: snail-mail has been around for a
long time - about 160 years, but for email, at a stretch, perhaps 25.
The long lineage of the former means there's an accepted way of doing
things but email is not there yet for if it were we wouldn't have the
many help groups like this around. I can't ever recall seeing a self
help group for a traditional mail service but I suppose they existed
once.
Seeing the problems being experienced by all and sundry in these
postings indicates to me that there are many ways of using email, and
in ways I'd have never thought of. My useage might be a little
unusual but it's far from being rare.
>Your only solution is to use either webmail, or carry a floppy with one
>of the earliest Eudora versions, the one talked about here in the past,
>that will allow you to have program and email on the same disk (no html
>support, probably).
I do use webmail but it's not a substitute for a good mail client.
Unfortunately, my mail won't fit on a floppy, many of my mail
attachments are several megabytes long, I even received a 12MB
attachment last month. This happens when network users don't bother
to consider that the recipient might be on the other side of the
planet and not in the next room.
>
>Alternatively, do carry your Palm or laptop with you and be sure the
>mail gets to an IMAP server.
Unfortunately, many servers don't use IMAP, but when available I do.
>Sorry, if this doesn't help much ...
That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
GW
<j.bro...@verizon.net> wrote:
>Grahame Wilson wrote:
>
><snip>
>> That's ok. It just confirms my suspicion that there's no solution for
>> my original posting.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Grahame
>
>It is now clear to me that I should not employ you in a setting where
>logic might be remotely usable. Your posts and requests for help have
>been amply answered in very useful ways, but you have chosen not to like
>any of the very useful answers.
>
Funny that, I'm employed to test vulnerabilities. There one thing I
have learned it doesn't require much skill for a great deal of
software is like delicate crystal vases and users huge bulls.
All I've got to do is watch.
>Let me repeat/paraphrase Katrina:
>
>Get a new, good account (preferably but not necessarily with an IMAP
>server), and forward all you diverse accounts to that server. Just make
>sure the service is reliable and has enough space reserved for you.
>Voila, you are all set.
>
As I've said in earlier posts I've done that.
But that's not the issue. I apologize for my inability to adequately
express myself in English.
GW
wrote:
>GW wrote:
>
>> Which computer? Well, it depends which PC is my main computer! When
>> in Vienna, Austria it's one of two, when in Sydney, Australia it can
>> be one of three. Sometimes the 'main' PC may only be the main PC for
>> two or three weeks, perhaps even less.
>
>and
>
>> As a person who's been in IT management
>
>Well if you are in IT and travel, why can't you collect all your email
>on a laptop and carry it around with you instead of downloading it on
>other people's computers and moving around? I agree that you are making
>it needlessly complicated.
>
Unfortunately, I don't always travel with a laptop, besides there are
many locations where the only 'phone' access is an Internet cafe. One
then forwards one's email to various 'home' addresses, which
exacerbates the duplicate email problem in Eudora!
Besides, I'm not only one with this problem, my clients have it too.
I think the point is getting lost. Simply, it is the fact that Eudora
has limited facility to manage its email data.
In summary, all the postings to date support that point by virtue that
almost every one provides an alternative solution. No one has
suggested a way of eliminating duplicate messages from existing data.
I am examining ways of avoiding this problem in the future (such as
exploring features in other mailers) but the immediate problem
pertains to existing Eudora data.
Grahame
Grahame Wilson
wrote:
>Grahame Wilson <wils...@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
>You seem to have a duplication problem with outgoing news messages too.
>This was posted at least four separate times.
The reason for the multiple posting is simple. Different machine at a
different location, transmissions through the SMTP server to an
independent news server stopped as it was down, the messages were
buffered in the 1st server but an error was indicated, hence resent.
This is just a normal day's snafus, you don't experience them? The
different machines are indicated by my abbreviated and full names in
the postings.
I may have a multiple message problem but in 22 years of using email
I've never lost a *received* message like so many others I see here.
Perhaps having multiple messages is its penalty.
Incidentally, do you work for Qualcomm?