Current Status of Pegasus

29 views
Skip to first unread message

Dor

unread,
Apr 29, 2017, 1:29:30 PM4/29/17
to
Is Pegasus still in develpment?

Euler German

unread,
Apr 29, 2017, 1:52:58 PM4/29/17
to

On article <_34NA.11338$4a5....@fx01.iad>, Dor wrote:

>
> Is Pegasus still in develpment?

Yes! Here's author last statement:

http://www.pmail.com/devnews.htm

--
Kind regards,
Euler German

Please, reply preferably to the list.
Reply-To: partially ROT13, invalid=com
Due to spam I'm filtering-out GoogleGroups. Sorry. :(

Nil

unread,
Apr 30, 2017, 2:58:44 AM4/30/17
to
On 29 Apr 2017, Dor <foruse...@optimum.net> wrote in
comp.mail.pegasus-mail.ms-windows:

> Is Pegasus still in develpment?

Probably. The author David Harris is still talking about new
developments and refinements, but no ETA has been mentioned. I expect
it will happen eventually, but if there's anything in particular that
is is bugging you... don't hold your breath until it's (possibly)
fixed.

Dor

unread,
Apr 30, 2017, 12:09:21 PM4/30/17
to
I was more curious than anticipating. I'm learning Linux (and all new
programs) but plan on keeping one Windows notebook current - just in
case. It's a shame that Pegasus didn't provide enough income for it to
be a full time job. As good as it is, imagine how much better it could
have been if it had a full time development team.

Ray_Net

unread,
Apr 30, 2017, 7:09:56 PM4/30/17
to
In article <Q_nNA.37589$1w7....@fx19.iad>, foruse...@optimum.net
says...
If he had a full time development team, Pegasus will stop to be free.

Evertjan.

unread,
Apr 30, 2017, 7:15:40 PM4/30/17
to
Ray_Net <Ray...@picarre.be> wrote on 01 May 2017 in comp.mail.pegasus-
mail.ms-windows:

> If he had a full time development team, Pegasus will stop to be free.

... would ...

There are degrees of freedom.

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

Dor

unread,
Apr 30, 2017, 7:38:11 PM4/30/17
to
On Mon, 01 May 2017 01:09:55 +0200, Ray_Net wrote:

> If he had a full time development team, Pegasus will stop to be free.

So? I contributed by purchasing a manual. Have you? Not everything is
free; not everything should be free; not everything must be free.

AnthonyL

unread,
May 1, 2017, 8:24:11 AM5/1/17
to
On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 23:38:11 GMT, Dor <foruse...@optimum.net>
wrote:
David Harris insists on it being free, insists on being sole developer
and insists on rigidly sticking to RFCs which hinder useability.

He has unfortunately underestimated the amount of effort required to
totally rewrite a feature rich product and with a world of mobile
phone apps and interconnectivity I fear he's going to be so far behind
by the time he does (if he ever does) finish that the result will be a
disappointment, though I hope I'm wrong.

I've used Pegasus for 25+ years, going back to Novell networking days
and it is still my main, but not only, email client. Reliable IMAP is
becoming more important for me and that leads to Thunderbird and apps
on Android.

His April statement on progress is at:

http://www.pmail.com/devnews.htm



--
AnthonyL

Dor

unread,
May 1, 2017, 9:55:27 AM5/1/17
to
On Mon, 01 May 2017 12:24:09 +0000, AnthonyL wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Apr 2017 23:38:11 GMT, Dor <foruse...@optimum.net> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 01 May 2017 01:09:55 +0200, Ray_Net wrote:
>>
>>> If he had a full time development team, Pegasus will stop to be free.
>>
>> So? I contributed by purchasing a manual. Have you? Not everything is
>> free; not everything should be free; not everything must be free.
>>
>>
> David Harris insists on it being free, insists on being sole developer
> and insists on rigidly sticking to RFCs which hinder useability.

Yet he asks for "contributions" and includes a mechanism within the
program itself for making contributions. There was also an attempt to
create a "club" of yearly contributors. These are voluntary payments so
Pegasus can be advertised as free. However, it is misleading to claim
that DH insists on it being free without mentioning the above 2 points.

> He has unfortunately underestimated the amount of effort required to
> totally rewrite a feature rich product and with a world of mobile phone
> apps and interconnectivity I fear he's going to be so far behind by the
> time he does (if he ever does) finish that the result will be a
> disappointment, though I hope I'm wrong.

A new version of Pegasus won't be for new users. It will be for long term
Pegasus users who are accustomed to the way Pegasus works and prefer it to
the way any other email client works. Subtle differences in layout,
sorting, keystroke combinations and functionality are important to
people. Some users (like myself) who have moved on will also try out a
new version just to see what it's like. As you suggested, new users do
email on their phones; some (perhaps most) on web interfaces.

> I've used Pegasus for 25+ years, going back to Novell networking days
> and it is still my main, but not only, email client. Reliable IMAP is
> becoming more important for me and that leads to Thunderbird and apps on
> Android.

So even some experienced long term users may not go back to Pegasus.

Which brings me back to my original point: it is a shame that a program
as good as Pegasus wasn't kept current.

Ray_Net

unread,
May 3, 2017, 5:52:00 PM5/3/17
to
In article <DzuNA.189965$7%3.8...@fx33.iad>,
foruse...@optimum.net says...
You are true.

Noah Sombrero

unread,
Apr 9, 2018, 10:45:31 AM4/9/18
to
Also stop being the child of David's imagination. Teams produce
things like Thunderbird.

Noah Sombrero

David Solimano

unread,
Apr 10, 2018, 11:18:13 PM4/10/18
to
On Mon, 09 Apr 2018 10:45:29 -0400, Noah Sombrero <fed...@fea.st>
wrote:
I will say, it's unfortunate there hasn't been a development update in
a year.
--
David Solimano
da...@solimano.org

Dave Sergeant

unread,
Apr 11, 2018, 1:50:52 AM4/11/18
to
In article <oivqcd1r0dui91snb...@4ax.com>,
da...@solimano.org says...
>
> I will say, it's unfortunate there hasn't been a development update in
> a year.
>
>

And every time someone asks these sort of questions the usual answer is
that loads of development is going on and we should expect something
'soon'. PM v5 has been talked about for well over 5 years now, probably
back in the Windows XP days, it is that long. The current version
continues to work but is starting to look dated and usage must be
declining. It is not yet legacy but not far off.

Always hopeful...

AnthonyL

unread,
Apr 11, 2018, 7:43:57 AM4/11/18
to
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:50:51 +0100, Dave Sergeant <dav...@sky.com>
wrote:
We (running a small software shop) were caught in a similar scenario.
Over 10 years or more we'd developed and modified a suite of software
written in Cobol and basically running a DOS (or a DOS window) and in
1997 with millenium issues arising (dd/mm/yy for all transactions and
future/past dates and date differences were needed) we set about
moving to a Windows platform. As 2000 approached it was clear we were
not going to be anywhere near finished so attention had to be switched
to tackling the date issue. The use of 365 byte strings to record the
state of the record didn't help, nor did the lack of consistent
library routines due to the way the system had evovled.

The result was a working legacy system and the delay cost us future
sales and in the end the software lingered to a slow demise.

Whist I have every sympathy with David Harris, who is not the best of
communicators at any time, I feel that Pegasus is going to have the
same ending as our software. Even if a new version comes out, well
it's going to require ongoing support and development - how long is DH
expected to be up to it?

Been a Pegasus user since Netware v2 and it is still just about the
best out there despite cludgy areas.

--
AnthonyL

Euler German

unread,
Apr 11, 2018, 11:22:42 AM4/11/18
to

On article <5acdf2a1...@85.214.115.223>, AnthonyL wrote:

> Whist I have every sympathy with David Harris, who is not the best of
> communicators at any time, I feel that Pegasus is going to have the
> same ending as our software. Even if a new version comes out, well
> it's going to require ongoing support and development - how long is DH
> expected to be up to it?
>

I'm assuming DH may be asking himself if Pegasus Mail is worth the
effort of a major revamp. If you look at today's mail usage you may
think it doesn't. The average user looks for a mobile app instead of
a client so I think it is fair to assume DH is focusing on Mercury
development much more than on Pegasus'.

My tuppence.

Steve Hayes

unread,
Apr 15, 2018, 10:03:48 PM4/15/18
to
On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:50:51 +0100, Dave Sergeant <dav...@sky.com>
wrote:

Does it matter what it "looks" like?

Making things "look" up to date usually means adding more bells and
whistles, not more pistons and cylinders.

I don't think Pegasus needs a major revamp, just a tweak here or
there.

The change I'd most like to see would be a better way of saving
messages.


--
Steve Hayes
http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
http://khanya.wordpress.com

Noah Sombrero

unread,
Apr 16, 2018, 9:37:05 AM4/16/18
to
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:08:36 +0200, Steve Hayes
<haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 11 Apr 2018 06:50:51 +0100, Dave Sergeant <dav...@sky.com>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <oivqcd1r0dui91snb...@4ax.com>,
>>da...@solimano.org says...
>>>
>>> I will say, it's unfortunate there hasn't been a development update in
>>> a year.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>And every time someone asks these sort of questions the usual answer is
>>that loads of development is going on and we should expect something
>>'soon'. PM v5 has been talked about for well over 5 years now, probably
>>back in the Windows XP days, it is that long. The current version
>>continues to work but is starting to look dated and usage must be
>>declining. It is not yet legacy but not far off.
>
>Does it matter what it "looks" like?

In the minds of many people, yes it does. But we know that, of
course, it really does not matter. Would you drive a brand new BMW
that looked like a model T?

>Making things "look" up to date usually means adding more bells and
>whistles, not more pistons and cylinders.

Yes, of course, that is mostly what updates are about. Usually there
will be a list of fixes for problems that you have never seen. And
the ones you do see remain.

>I don't think Pegasus needs a major revamp, just a tweak here or
>there.

My list would be better automatic new message check for IMAP and a
message flag.

>The change I'd most like to see would be a better way of saving
>messages.

You sound like a pop3 user. For pop3 users there are many reasonably
competent email client choices, including Peg. This version of Peg is
a lot better about interaction with an IMAP server than previous, but
still not quite there. Poor message check makes it unusable for me.

Noah Sombrero

Steve Hayes

unread,
Apr 17, 2018, 3:38:42 AM4/17/18
to
On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 09:37:03 -0400, Noah Sombrero <fed...@fea.st>
wrote:

>On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 04:08:36 +0200, Steve Hayes
>>Does it matter what it "looks" like?
>
>In the minds of many people, yes it does. But we know that, of
>course, it really does not matter. Would you drive a brand new BMW
>that looked like a model T?

I'd rather do that than drive an ancient Model T that looks like a
BMW, which is what many software developers expect us to do.


>>Making things "look" up to date usually means adding more bells and
>>whistles, not more pistons and cylinders.
>
>Yes, of course, that is mostly what updates are about. Usually there
>will be a list of fixes for problems that you have never seen. And
>the ones you do see remain.
>
>>I don't think Pegasus needs a major revamp, just a tweak here or
>>there.
>
>My list would be better automatic new message check for IMAP and a
>message flag.
>
>>The change I'd most like to see would be a better way of saving
>>messages.
>
>You sound like a pop3 user. For pop3 users there are many reasonably
>competent email client choices, including Peg. This version of Peg is
>a lot better about interaction with an IMAP server than previous, but
>still not quite there. Poor message check makes it unusable for me.

Aye, I am a POP3 user.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages