Netscape integration

[Ralph Cohen]

On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 16:11:10 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:

>On Wed, 30 Jun 1999 19:00:00 -0400 (EDT), Ralph Cohen wrote:
>
>>You left out the one thing that Bob & Ike could have done with a
>>greater chance of success, and that is to work *SMARTER* instead of
>>harder.
>
>    No, that is what I meant by working less.  Using resources that are
>available to them from other areas so they don't have to do the work
>themselves.
>

One of the most important resources they have available are the fixes
they've already created for the current version but have yet to
release.  How much effort could it possibly take to upload a fixed
version to Hobbes, Tucows or Winfiles??  The truth is that it would
cost virtually nothing in terms of time or money, but it would have the
potential of doing a tremendous amount of good for PMMail.

>>At this point, the editor and speller, etc. have already been created
>>and integrated and just need to be tweaked a bit.  
>
>    Define "tweaked a bit."  They are nowhere near the level of full featured
>counterparts.  
>

By "tweaked a bit" I am referring to little things like a
Paste-As-Quoted feature (which has already been publicly promised), a
fix for wordwrap reflow problems, an COPY option on the RMB pop-up menu
when highlighting a url or mail address, etc.  These are not major
enhancements, but including these an a few other minor tweaks would
proivde me with an editor that would fulfill 99.999% of my email needs.

>    Yes there is, how about a spell checker that knows about contractions and
>usually gets the right word on the guest list up front with no change in the
>interface?
>

The 'Add To Dictionary' button on the built-in speller as a solution to
the contraction problems and many of the other word-not-found type
problems.  After just a little bit of use, a significant percentage of
your vocabulary which is not found in the virgin dictionary will soon
be recognized (and ignored) by the personalized one.

>
>>There are relatively very few people out there who would be willing to "roll
>>their own" fantastically great email program when they can get a somewhat
>>adequate one already rolled.  
>
>    Uhm, Ralph, which part of "bundled" did you miss?  I think every mention
>of it that I've ever made.  To the end user all the same functions would be
>there.  If PMMail linked against the aspell libraries it would be *shipped*
>with those libraries.  If PMMail went to an external editor only it would be
>shipped *and configued* for that editor.  That is what "bundled" means in the
>software world.
>

What happens when there's a problem with the spelling checker that
causes the editor to crash?  Which author of which program is
responsible?  Who's gonna fix it?  What number do you call?  Who do you
email?  There's a lot to be said for the warm fuzzy feeling you get
when only having one place you need to turn to when you have a problem
or complaint.  The widespread problems with finger-pointing between
component software makers in years past had a tremendous amount to do
with the current success of integrated programs.

Ralph

rpcohen@neurotron.com

rpcohen@neurotron.com