Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Future Eudora Based on Thunderbird

CmdrTaco posted about 8 years ago | from the open-source-is-good dept.

264

theefer writes "Qualcomm announced that future versions of Eudora will be based upon the same technology platform as the open source Mozilla Thunderbird email program. Future versions of Eudora will be free and open source, while retaining Eudora's uniquely rich feature set and productivity enhancements. Qualcomm and Mozilla will each participate in, and continue to foster development communities based around the open source Mozilla project, with a view to enhancing the capabilities and ease of use of both Eudora and Thunderbird. [...] The open source version of Eudora is targeted to release during the first half of calendar year 2007. Once the open source version of Eudora is released, Qualcomm will cease to sell Eudora commercially."

cancel ×

264 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (4, Interesting)

Dynamoo (527749) | about 8 years ago | (#16393975)

Eudora was always an odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio - their primary business is wireless technologies. Eudora didn't really fit in, but to Qualcomm's credit it has been under continual development and revision to this date.

There's a decent Wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org] on it for anyone wanting to know the background, but basically it's been around for an astonishing 18 years. It's evolved gently as a mail client, so any Eudora user can use a new version quickly. Compare this with Outlook which radically redesigns the whole interface every release or so.

To be honest, Eudora probably isn't the simplest mail client in the world. But it's a very powerful, very secure client that's ideal for power users.

When I first heard about this move I went "uh-oh". But on reflection, this could be a good thing. Eudora has some really cool features that would work well in Thunderbird, and both products appeal to the same type of people. I only hope that they don't break Eudora in the process of changing it!

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (2, Interesting)

future assassin (639396) | about 8 years ago | (#16394067)

>o be honest, Eudora probably isn't the simplest mail client in the world. But it's a very powerful, very secure client that's ideal for power users Same with PagasusMail (Pmail) Its one hell of a email client but way too many features for the average email user unless they are willing to dig into it.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (2, Informative)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 8 years ago | (#16394079)

Compare this with Outlook which radically redesigns the whole interface every release or so.

Honestly, I hate Outlook as much as anyone here, but this just isn't true. The Oulook Outlook Express UI has been more or less the same for years.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

mlk (18543) | about 8 years ago | (#16394267)

Outlook (full) has changed over each release, not completely, but things have moved about. Personally I think for the better.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 8 years ago | (#16394383)

Yes... I didn't get the slash in there, "Outlook / Outlook Express".

I agree, there have been *some* UI changes. But the parent post implies radical changes from version to version. I've used Outlook (full) at work for the last 6 years, and over that time, the UI has not changed very much at all. Some, but not much.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

mlk (18543) | about 8 years ago | (#16394615)

I use 2K at one site, and XP at a different site, while the UI is fundamentally the same, it does have a fair few differences. But yeah, not radically different.

I've only touched Outlook Express once and a while (years apart), and it has never seamed to change (I might have just been using the same version :shrug:) so I assumed you was talking about that.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394297)

>>Outlook which radically redesigns the whole interface every release or so.
>Oulook Outlook Express UI has been more or less the same for years.

Outlook Express != Outlook

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (2, Interesting)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 8 years ago | (#16394339)

What I meant to type was "Outlook / Outlook Express".

I've used Outlook (full) for the last 6 years. The UI *has not* changed significantly over that time. Fact.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1, Troll)

telchine (719345) | about 8 years ago | (#16394435)

>What I meant to type was "Outlook / Outlook Express".

Well, you're an idiot then. Outlook Express is a completely different program to Outlook. They don't share a common codebase, they're programmed by different developers. Other than the name, they have nothing at all in common.

>I've used Outlook (full) for the last 6 years. The UI *has not* changed significantly over that time. Fact.

How many times have you upgraded in that time? The UI has changed considerably from Outlook 2000 to Outlook XP.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | about 8 years ago | (#16394587)

"Well, you're an idiot then. Outlook Express is a completely different program to Outlook. They don't share a common codebase, they're programmed by different developers. Other than the name, they have nothing at all in common."

No need to name call. Yeesh.

Anyway, they do have a little in common. If you uninstall OLE you'll kill Outlook. I've done it before, heh.

"How many times have you upgraded in that time? The UI has changed considerably from Outlook 2000 to Outlook XP."

It's not that different, at least in the sense that somebody who was used to an earlier version of Outlook wouldn't have to spend very long to adjust.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

telchine (719345) | about 8 years ago | (#16394931)

>No need to name call. Yeesh.

Fair enough. Not having a good day today, I din't intend for it to sound quite so offensive. I apologise.

>Anyway, they do have a little in common. If you uninstall OLE you'll kill Outlook. I've done it before, heh.

You've managed to uninstall it?! :p

>It's not that different

I guess it's all a matter of opinion. From what I remember of the last version I tried, the UI appeared to have changed quite a bit. The chrome was very different and they seemed to have taken up a lot more screen real estate by default with various different viewing areas.

> at least in the sense that somebody who was used to an earlier version of Outlook wouldn't have to spend very long to adjust.

I'd argue that virtually all GUI email clients are the same if you use that criteria for measuring differences. You have your mailboxes/folders on the left and your message on the right, it doesn't take much to adjust from one to the other.

Outlook has changed considerably more than Express has in the same time period, in my opinion.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 8 years ago | (#16394707)

Well, you're an idiot then. Outlook Express is a completely different program to Outlook.

Can you read? I said we've used the *full* version of Outlook for the last 6 years (and yes, I know Outlook Express has a different code base, though that has little to do with the look/feel of the UI). We have upgraded *with every new version*. The UI and functionality of Outlook (the full version) has changed *but not that much* over the last 6 years. Fact.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (3, Insightful)

thparker (717240) | about 8 years ago | (#16394809)

Well, you're an idiot then. Outlook Express is a completely different program to Outlook. They don't share a common codebase, they're programmed by different developers.

Wipe the froth from your mouth, boy. In case you hadn't noticed, end users don't give a fuck about the codebase or the developers' names. They're just a couple mail clients from Microsoft, one with more functionality than the other.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

telchine (719345) | about 8 years ago | (#16395145)

>end users don't give a fuck about the codebase or the developers' names. They're just a couple mail clients from Microsoft, one with more functionality than the other.

Correct. However, that's not at all relevant to the issue being discussed.

The poster was trying to argue a point about Outlook, by usining Outlook Express as an example.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (3, Interesting)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 8 years ago | (#16394735)

I've used Outlook (full) for the last 6 years. The UI *has not* changed significantly over that time. Fact.
While Outlook 2000, XP, and 2003 look relatively simular at first glace, the menus to change various options are totally different. At work, we recently had to change everyone's settings to use authentication, and the instructions for changing it were completely different for each version.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394739)

How many new versions of Outlook have been released in the past 6 years though?

Makes perfect sense though (4, Interesting)

BeeBeard (999187) | about 8 years ago | (#16394185)

Eudora was always the next best alternative for people who didn't want to worry about obscene things like getting viruses just by looking at emails through the Outlook preview pane. For people who were stuck running Windows but savvy enough to know that there were other email clients out there besides Outlook, it was really ideal.

Fast-forwarding to the present: As Thunderbird slowly gains acceptance as an alternative email client in its own right (due in no small part to the continuing success of Firefox) the combination of Eudora and Thunderbird technologies could only help Eudora. If they want to ride Mozilla's coattails to greater acceptance in the email program marketplace, they are certainly welcome to do so. Every time a company adopts open source, an angel gets his wings.

Re:Makes perfect sense though (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 years ago | (#16394291)

The reason I used Netscape Communicator from the moment it existed, replacing Eudora which I was using before, is that Eudora (at the time) simply could not do a decent job of displaying MIME mail. The whole idea is basically a web page in email, trust the web browser to get it right. Today I use thunderbird, for much the same reason. Well, that and the plugin architecture. I love anything extensible :)

But really, I think the real reason they're going to stop selling Eudora is that this is a relatively cheap way to buy some goodwill towards qualcomm, and Eudora is dying out anyway. In a world with Evolution and Thunderbird, who needs Eudora? Certainly, there's no reason to pay for it, or use an ad-supported program.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

tokul (682258) | about 8 years ago | (#16394617)

But it's a very powerful, very secure client that's ideal for power users.
So that's why Eudora has abismal unicode and charset support. Real men use only ASCII.

Re:An odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio (1)

fhic (214533) | about 8 years ago | (#16395055)

Eudora was always an odd thing in Qualcomm's portfolio
You've got that right. It's always been kind of an orphan that they don't quite know what to do with. Quite a few years ago I interviewed for a technical manglement position in their Eudora group, but I kept getting the feeling that they didn't know what to do with it. On the one hand, it doesn't make enough money to kept under the Qualcomm umbrella as current product. On the other hand, the name recognition is high and it's their oldest ongoing product, and the only Qualcomm product that a consumer ever sees for sale.

I ended up not taking the job because I didn't think they were going to keep Eudora alive. So much for my business prediction skills. Now I go to work every day at another place in the shadow of the Qualcomm development center, high on the hill above. :-)

It seems to be that this latest move will be a good thing. I use Eudora myself, but I looked seriously at Thunderbird as a replacement during one version change when they added a license agreement that I couldn't stomach. At the time, I didn't think Thunderbird was quite ready for prime time, and Eudora has since relaxed the licensing agreement to my satisfaction.

Good! (1)

RedOregon (161027) | about 8 years ago | (#16393997)

Sounds good to me. I always like Eudora, and only dumped it when it became adware. I like Thunderbird, too, but Eudora had a lot more bells and whistles that I actually liked and used. Hope it comes out well.

Re:Good! (1)

viniosity (592905) | about 8 years ago | (#16394131)

I liked Eudora's *Mac* version back in the OS9 days. The trouble with Thunderbird and all current clients I can think of is that they put the entire client in one window: folders, preview pane, email list, etc.

The old Eudora used to just have the menu bar up top and allow you to open and place any window independently. It took a while to get used to it but it was sure nice once you had it configured.

Seems like it's all more or less the same these days with the "known paradigm" of UI becoming more important than any large improvements of usability. It's too bad really.

I hope Qualcomm the best with their plan, but I wish they had just open sourced the code to their own client rather than building on Thunderbird.

Re:Good! (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 years ago | (#16394357)

The trouble with Thunderbird and all current clients I can think of is that they put the entire client in one window: folders, preview pane, email list, etc.

If you drag the bar between the message list and the view pane down to the bottom, you can double-click to open messages in separate windows. (Or even if you don't, but the point is, the view pane will be gone from there.) Once you drag it down past a certain point (just past where the header starts scrolling off) it pops down, so I assume it's not drawing it there (even hidden) any more.

Also, the address book is and always has been a separate window, even since the netscape days.

I know it's not quite the same level of configuration, but it's a lot more flexible than you imagine.

Re:Good! (2, Informative)

AVryhof (142320) | about 8 years ago | (#16395337)

Wouldn't it be easier just to hit F8? or go to View -> Lyout -> Message Pane?

Hurray? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394003)

Yay, a free obsolete e-mail client.

What features does Eudora have that people actually like?

Re:Hurray? (1)

creimer (824291) | about 8 years ago | (#16394179)

Back in the 1990's, the messages were kept in text files that were easy to backup and move to a different system (unlike Outlook and Outlook Express). When the manager at one company I worked for got canned for trying to get his boss fired, he walked out the door with a complete set of emails since he was the only manager to use Eudora. Not sure if that helped him or not since I heard he was unemployeed for a year and his wife was furious at him since they took a loan against her 401K to buy a house in uber-expensive Silicon Valley that she had to keep working.

I still use Eudora for its portability... (5, Interesting)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | about 8 years ago | (#16394349)

I have a big D:\Mail directory on my machine. I back that up and all my client-side mail is backed up. When I migrate to new machines, hard drives, etc, I reinstall Eudora and then just lay the old contents of D:\Mail back over the just-installed contents of D:\Mail. Even the INI files are kept in mail so my just-migrated copy pops open windows in their last positions...

I tried going to Thunderbird a few years ago. I couldn't make the switch because the Thunderbird search wasn't as good as the Eudora search and Thunderbird couldn't do simple things like sort search result dates in "date order". Maybe it's better now...guess I'll find out one way or another.

Re:I still use Eudora for its portability... (1)

Coneasfast (690509) | about 8 years ago | (#16394693)

I tried going to Thunderbird a few years ago. I couldn't make the switch because the Thunderbird search wasn't as good as the Eudora search and Thunderbird couldn't do simple things like sort search result dates in "date order". Maybe it's better now...guess I'll find out one way or another.

Just an FYI, it can definitely do that now.

Re:I still use Eudora for its portability... (1)

akahige (622549) | about 8 years ago | (#16394779)

Eudora's kind of unique in that you don't actually have to INSTALL it. If you have it backed up to CD (or whatever) all you have to do is drag it where you want it and run it. It will recreate whatever registry entries it needs. The only thing you have to do is make sure that the data path listed in eudora.ini is correct.

Re:Hurray? (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | about 8 years ago | (#16394397)

Netscape Communicator and its descendants have always used mbox files to store mail, with one or two headers added - one of them being the deletion status, and unlike traditional mbox messages are not removed until you compact folders, to reduce disk thrashing while reading email. I once wrote a simple perl script that undeleted 'em. It's pretty easy. :)

I was just looking at upgrading Eudora... (1)

waif69 (322360) | about 8 years ago | (#16394035)

Now, I will either wait until the new OSS version comes out or I'll switch to Thunderbird.

People still use Eudora? (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about 8 years ago | (#16394057)

People still use Eudora? Seriously, I used it years ago, but forgot it still even existed...

Re:People still use Eudora? (1)

andersvirtualsolutio (986833) | about 8 years ago | (#16394129)

Ha - i'm still longing for pmmail for OS/2 :P Those were the days! Anders

Re:People still use Eudora? (4, Informative)

niola (74324) | about 8 years ago | (#16394269)

Eudora has a niche of us loyal users. Many, myself included, tried pretty much every other client out there and find ourselves coming back to Eudora for the reliability and the feature set.

It was one of only a few clients early on that supported multiple email accounts, and because of how it stores email in flat text files (as opposed to Outlook and some others) it was really easy to migrate your mailboxes and settings from computer to computer - even between platforms ie moving from Windows to Mac.

The filter tools are starting to show their age, but are still solid. There was a point where I would definitely say Eudora's filtering tools were the best in any commercial email client.

Hopefully both Eudora and Thunderbird benefit from this.

Re:People still use Eudora? (1)

gelia (991935) | about 8 years ago | (#16395163)

eudora filtering and rapidity in creating filters is still the best for me
regards
g.

Re:People still use Eudora? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394651)

Hi:

I've been using Eudora since 1986 or 87 or so on my Macintosh. I've stuck with it thick and thin. Apple Mail seems a bit under-powered by comparison. Granted, Eudora doesn't look like as snazzy, but it is infinitely customizable and incredibly easy to back-up and whatnot.

A zillion years in Internet time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394061)

...which is how long Eudora has been with us. Interesting to see Qualcomm bail, but not surprising. Oh yeah frist psot too :-P

Raise your hand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394085)

...if you just had a flashback to working in ISP tech support ten years ago, helping some senior citizen "get their Endora working"...

...oh God I'm old...

Re:Raise your hand... (1)

generationxyu (630468) | about 8 years ago | (#16394307)

I'll slightly raise my hand, cause it was last year. Hooray for universities who only support 3 of the worst mail clients -- Eudora, Pine, and SquirrelMail.

Re:Raise your hand... (1)

ggalvao (1000487) | about 8 years ago | (#16394337)

Uber radical Linux fanatics will kill you for flaming on PINE!

This is a great thing (1)

glomph (2644) | about 8 years ago | (#16394107)

A stable mail client that's been around 'forever', guaranteeing its future. I hope that many lusers
are prevented from going with that non-portable klient-O-krap from Redmond by this development.

Qualcomm wants an excuse to dump it (1)

jifl (471653) | about 8 years ago | (#16394117)

This reeks of Qualcomm just wanting to abandon Eudora, while not wanting to appear to be abandoning it to the Eudora userbase.

I can't imagine it making much sense trying to get Eudora working over the Thunderbird "technology platform". The whole design, architecture and frontend would be wildly different - it would be quicker to write Eudora features for Thunderbird from scratch.

Good deal (1)

JoeLinux (20366) | about 8 years ago | (#16394135)

I remember back in the day, when i was considering making the jump from Winders to Linoox, Eudora was one of the only things that kept me in the MS world.

Well, that and I liked playing Quake2.

Lordy, could I railgun...And Yes, I cheesed it up with the BFG...

Re:Good deal (1)

Bert64 (520050) | about 8 years ago | (#16394537)

You couldn't play quake2 on linux? I played all 4 versions of quake on linux...

hopefully this will stabilize thunderbird (4, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | about 8 years ago | (#16394147)

Qualcomm and Mozilla will each participate in, and continue to foster development communities based around the open source Mozilla project,

Hopefully this will do wonders for Thunderbird's reliability; I had to stop recommending thunderbird to clients because of the near constant complaints. Disappearing email, crashes, disappearing contact lists. At least 6 months ago, Thunderbird had all sorts of problems with mailboxes and indexes getting corrupted, which would lead to fun bugs like my clients checking their mail, getting 5 new messages according to the new message count next to the mailbox...and not finding the 5 messages actually IN their inbox. Some bugs related to the index not getting cleaned up properly when messages were deleted, and "rebuilding" the mailbox didn't fix the index; you had to completely remove the index files by hand. WTF?

It stunned me how much 'housekeeping' the Thunderbird developers expect users to do to keep it working properly, and how thoroughly they knew of many problems...yet had done nothing to fix them.

I'd also like to see some effort to make GnuPG configuration part of the default install and get users set up with a keyset...and encourage them at every step of the way to use signing and encryption with their email.

Re:hopefully this will stabilize thunderbird (1)

Bert64 (520050) | about 8 years ago | (#16394585)

I've had situations where i couldn't see new email, but they usually revolved around the sorting... I have mail sorted by date, but thunderbird sorts it by the date in the mail header (and thus controlled by the sender)... If the sender's clock is wrong, then mail will appear in the wrong place in thunderbird's list.

Other than that, it's been rock solid stable for several years for me...

And I too would like to see GPG there by default, encouraging users to use it.

Re:hopefully this will stabilize thunderbird (1)

NSIM (953498) | about 8 years ago | (#16395065)

Strange, I've been using TBird as my primary e-mail client at work and home for almost two years now. I've never had a problem with lost mail, index corruption or anything else for that matter. I would have to suspect that the end-user is doing something out of the ordinary for this to occur with such frequency.

Re:hopefully this will stabilize thunderbird (0, Troll)

cptnapalm (120276) | about 8 years ago | (#16395005)

And thanks to Mozilla Corp's trademark enforcement, you can't fix their bugs and call it Thunderbird. Otherwise, Mozilla could not guarantee the same unfixed bugs for all users. That might alter the perception of Mozilla. And we can't be havin' that.

Re:hopefully this will stabilize thunderbird (1)

ElleyKitten (715519) | about 8 years ago | (#16395307)

Strange, I've been using thunderbird since it was at version .3, on several different computers, using both Linux and Windows, and I've never seen those problems. Ok, sometimes I can't find my new mail, but clicking View: Unread always shows it (same thing that sibling post mentioned). Hey, did you ever suggest your clients try View: Unread before trying to rebuild their mailboxes?

Re:hopefully this will stabilize thunderbird (1)

emilv (847905) | about 8 years ago | (#16395341)

I think this one goes as "housekeeping the developers expect the users to do".

Things not in TFA: (5, Interesting)

Kartoffel (30238) | about 8 years ago | (#16394153)

1. A list of which parts of the "rich feature set and productivity enhancements" will be retained in the Thunderbird/Eudora.

2. Which license(s) the new Eudora will be using. Presumably, it'll be MPL, but TFA didn't say.

3. Whether Qualcomm considers this move as shifting Eudora into shutdown mode, economically, or whether they genuinely see a potential for future profits from the new FOSS Eudora.

Re:Things not in TFA: (3, Interesting)

_|()|\| (159991) | about 8 years ago | (#16394755)

Eudora FAQ [eudora.com] : "QUALCOMM has decided not to remain in the email market." Also, "QUALCOMM plans to stop trafficking advertisements [to the existing Sponsored mode] at some point during open source development."

If you read the Penelope page [mozilla.org] at the Mozilla Wiki, you'll see that the six core members of the project are Qualcomm employees. "QUALCOMM continues to have a keen interest in the users of Eudora, and is being kind enough to donate the time of the above staff members to the Penelope project." Rather than becoming faceless contributors to Thunderbird, they chose to continue the Eudora legacy.

This is good news (1)

esconsult1 (203878) | about 8 years ago | (#16394163)

Even though I don't use Eudora, I use Thunderbird on OS X day in and day out. It beats Mail.app in many many ways, not the least of which its almost the one mail client on the platform where you can order your messages by read status, thus floating all of them at the top. If Eudora can help smooth out some of the features and squash some more bugs in Thunderbird that's clearly a win for everyone.

Hmmm... (2, Interesting)

Otter (3800) | about 8 years ago | (#16394203)

Once the open source version of Eudora is released, Qualcomm will cease to sell Eudora commercially.

I was reading the blurb and wondering what kind of viable long-term plan that scheme has -- apparently they don't have one.

It's certainly laudable of them to wind it down so gracefully. Like a lot of others, apparently, I haven't used it in ages but there was a long time when it was the only decent GUI for Internet email. I ditched it when I switched to OS X and Entourage at home, and they make me use Lotus Freaking Notes at work, but whatever it looks like nowadays, it has to at least be better than the latter.

Re:Hmmm... (1)

booch (4157) | about 8 years ago | (#16395351)

they make me use Lotus Freaking Notes at work, but whatever it looks like nowadays, it has to at least be better than the latter.

Duh! I've seen dog shit that looks better than Lotus Notes. Easier to use too.

As a long-time Eudora user... (4, Insightful)

Dzimas (547818) | about 8 years ago | (#16394227)

I'm saddened by this news. I've used Eudora since the early 1990s, except for one very painful stretch in the early 2000s where it was "strongly suggested" that I use Outlook at work. My favorite feature is the lightning-fast search functionality (which makes me look brilliantly well organized when someone asks about an email conversation from several years ago). I can't say I was fond of the programs ad sponsored option, though. Having your email program pitch the DVD version of Bambi is really annoying.

In the end, the program got really expensive -- maintaining an annual subscription is a slight embarrassment when the accounting department calls me to query the need to "buy another copy of the same program").

My big concern with the new version of the program is that it will prove to be a dead-end fork of Thunderbird code. I'll know for sure the moment I try to search my old mail folders in the upcoming open-source version. If it takes longer than a second, the baby's going out with the bathwater.

Re:As a long-time Eudora user... (1)

Jerf (17166) | about 8 years ago | (#16394705)

I've shopped all around for mail clients and I've settled on Thunderbird, not because I love it, but because A: It's not bad and B: I've gotten used to its interface because I've used Netscape for mail for a long time.. But it's certainly not a powerhouse.

I would worry less about Eudora becoming a dead-end fork of Thunderbird and more about Thunderbird becoming a dead-end fork of Eudora.

Re:As a long-time Eudora user... (1)

Orig_Club_Soda (983823) | about 8 years ago | (#16394757)

Still using Eudora on a Mac (Since 1995!). I dont understand people's issues with the adware version. You have two other options: use the lite version, or pay money. What's there to complain about? I actually like th ad version because I was paying and paying and paying. You can even put the ad anywhere on the screen. I put in the bottom right and I never see it.

My main comnplaint about Eudora is the the Mac version is about 10 years old with no significant improvements. Without some basic improvements that would allow for better 3rd partty improvements. But its filters and mail boxes and search are way more powerful and easier to use than Apple Mail or Outlook.

I wonder what this direction means to me.

developer,s developers, developers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394243)

Back in the day, in the early morning haze of the Internet, I received a free Copy of Eudora with a Qualcomm modem. I had some issues with the application and I noticed the 'About' pop-up had two names in a "developed by:" line. I had the Qualcomm HQ number and I decided to call. The first person was no longer with the company but the secretary connected me to the second person. She was suprised that I was a user fielding her a help desk question. But she knew the issue and sent me through the mail a fixed copy. You can't do that nowadays.

Funny, it was also the same year I beta tested a web browser by a company called SpyGlass...

I'll miss it (2, Interesting)

ymos (804610) | about 8 years ago | (#16394257)

I love the way that I can move my mail to a new computer just by copying the Eudora folder to the new install. I doubt that'll work in the new version.

Re:I'll miss it (1)

kfg (145172) | about 8 years ago | (#16394733)

I love the way that I can move my mail to a new computer just by copying the Eudora folder to the new install. I doubt that'll work in the new version.

You could do that because Eudora uses the standard UNIX mail format. It's just a directory full of ASCII text, so to "import" or "export" you just copy the directory.

Thunderbird uses . . .the "Eudora" mail format, as does nearly every non Microsoft based mail app in the known universe. You can read your "Eudora" mail from a Linux console. If you're hard core you can use ed to do it.

KFG

Re:I'll miss it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16395277)

True, Eudora uses mbox format, however, the newlines are still system dependent, so you need to use a CR/LF converter if your switching between MacOS and Windows (or importing it into a Unix/Linux based system). But that aside, I think that its great that it uses such a common format-- if you're forced to switch mail clients, the move is generally trivial.

From what a Eudora customer service agent told me, though, you will lose your status flags if you move between MacOS and Windows versions of Eudora, so they probably don't store the statuses within the mail themselves like some clients do. (Now, I wish _that_ was a bit more standard.)

--Dave Romig, Jr.

Looking back, looking ahead (4, Interesting)

viewtouch (1479) | about 8 years ago | (#16394281)

Every time software is 'set free' like this I see not only yet another confirmation that Stallman right about the absolute need for software to be free but also that his life's work since he first dedicated his life to free software has ensured that free software would inevitably triumph over software that isn't free. Those of us who have been around for several decades remember all too well when you needed a lot of money and official permission to even be allowed to create software. It was not fun and it was not a way forward. In an era when many things are becoming less free it is a significant comfort to know that software is becoming more free and is consequently better in so many ways.

Re:Looking back, looking ahead (2)

mmeister (862972) | about 8 years ago | (#16395247)

Every time software is 'set free' like this I see not only yet another confirmation that Stallman right

Eudora wasn't "set free". Eudora was effectively dumped.

The dumping is not unexpected (at least for Mac users) given the endless promising of a new version that actually used OS X. It just sucks that they put it off for so long. They'd had been promising a complete rewriting of the OS X version since Tiger was released (Apr 2005). Now they're starting over again. They're not releasing Eudora's source code. They're just taking Thunderbird code and renaming it Eudora.

As for Thunderbird. It is generally a very disappointing product and an example of why free software sometimes amounts to getting what you pay for. The interface is horrible, doesn't conform to the standards of the OS. I haven't used it enough to question its reliability, but have read many concerns about it not being the most stable product.

This announcement was not a declaration that free software is the way to go, that was just a convenient way for Qualcomm to dump the product. Nothing more.

A most excellent day! (1)

hockeyrink (264208) | about 8 years ago | (#16394293)

Very good. VERY VERY good! Being a long-time user of Eudora (since 4.2, I think), I've been impressed especially with Eudora's search functions. Sorry, never using Outlook, I can't comment on that. BUT since shifting my own email client to Thunderbird due to IMAP flaws in Eudora, I've sorely missed Eudora's searching. It's the one major flaw in Thunderbird, IMHO.

Now that they're shifting gears to F/OSS, I'm *thrilled*. Time to go throw more money at both projects, as it's a most excellent day that my two fave email clients are merging! Woohoo!

Re:A most excellent day! (2, Interesting)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 8 years ago | (#16394875)

Well, I dropped pay-Eudora in favor of T-bird, in hopes of losing vendor lock-in on the format and an annual software fee. To be honest, I liked eudora better, but I can get around in thunderbird. Problem is, t-bird is such a space hog - the last time I looked I had over a gig and a half of storage in my directory, and that was just from the last 14-18 months. If eudora turns out to be a viable oss project and the future is truly bright, I'll probably switch back. Imho, this looks like a graceful EOL for Eudora as a qualcomm supported product. Hopefully theres a satble base of users that will maintain it at a high level. (I'm not a programmer - i can guarantee you wouldn't want me writing code!)

Thunderbird's better (1)

lymond01 (314120) | about 8 years ago | (#16394341)

In my humble opinion, I'd recommend Thunderbird over Eudora any day. Eudora's GUI for IMAP folders (with the second inbox at the bottom??) is confusing at best. The way LDAP works in Eudora is lame (you have to open a particular part of your address book, type in the name, press Search, then use the address from there). It's always felt clunky, having to move windows out of the way, as EVERYTHING has its own window (filters, address book, etc).

One thing that IS superior in Eudora? Multiple signatures. You can select which signature you want on the fly.

I've always preferred the Netscape/Mozilla/Thunderbird client, mainly for the reasons listed above. Eudora, I think, started out as a mainly Mac program, and its interface hasn't improved in over 10 years.

Re:Thunderbird's better (1)

niola (74324) | about 8 years ago | (#16394381)

There was a time when Eudora was the email client in Mosaic Communicator suite ;)

Man time sure flies.

One important question (0, Offtopic)

tommasz (36259) | about 8 years ago | (#16394413)

How long before Debian comes out with the own version of this, too? If there was an issue about the logo in Firefox, I can only imagine what having code from a proprietary product will do.

Re:One important question (1)

Randle_Revar (229304) | about 8 years ago | (#16395147)

Any code that went back into the tbird base would need have the standard mozilla tri-license (GPL, LGPL, MPL), so that would not affect Debian. However, Thunderbird and Seamonkey (and presumably Sunbird, Camino, etc.) have the exact same logo and trademark problems as Firefox. Just as Firefox will become [livejournal.com] IceWeasle [gnu.org] , Thunderbird and SeaMonkey will likely become IceDove and IceApe [asoftsite.org] .

Business model? (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | about 8 years ago | (#16394451)

So much for a business model. I suppose they'll still have the big companies that will pay them for support, but how big is Eudora in the corporate field? And how much will they pay for a thunderbird clone?

Re:Business model? (1)

niola (74324) | about 8 years ago | (#16394485)

I honestly think that Qualcomm is trying to get away from Eudora altogether. As someone else on this discussion pointed out, an email client does not really seem to fit in with their main business developing wireless equipment for telcos or developing protocols etc.

Seems this is just a graceful way of moving on and trying to avoid any ill will from current users.

Jury's out (1)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 8 years ago | (#16394453)

I actually purchased Eudora 4 back some years ago - at the time I loved it. But it didn't seem to move along with the times. IMAP support never really arrived - it felt like they didn't really grok it, and treated it more like "POP3 using the IMAP command set" (e.g. silly issues like not being able to have your trash or sent mail as an IMAP mailbox).

My hope is that Eudora will take what's good from Thunderbird - like its IMAP support - and combine them with Eudora's strengths, such as filtering.

Attachment folder (1)

martin (1336) | about 8 years ago | (#16394461)

Good news - might finally get rid of their unique mailbox format and the dodgy attachment folder feature.

Re:Attachment folder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16394769)

Hi:

Aw man, I love Eudora's attachment folder. It's brilliant: All the crap people send you is in one place that can be sorted by date. Others have commented upon the blistering speed of Eudora searches. It has to be seen to be believed.

My personal set up is to have Spotlight ignore the Eudora folder and do all searches for mail from withing Eudora.app. This way I'm not turning up every thing on my hard drive each time I'm searching for a mail. When searching with Eudora for something, the results come up in a blink.

Of course, I also have .html e-mail stripped out.

Re:Attachment folder (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16395085)

Great! Now I'll spend even more time splitting up >2GB mbox files for my users who use their email app like an archival system.

That's why I use Eudora! (1)

kerecsen (807268) | about 8 years ago | (#16395107)

The "dodgy attachment folder" is the single greatest feature in Eudora. It is one of the fundamental reasons why searching your emails is so fast (there is less junk to go through), and it also allows you to keep your email around for a very long time. I have all my mail for the last 8+ years sitting on my hard disk, and since it is only the mail text without attachments, I can still fit it on a CD, even uncompressed.

I was seriously contemplating switching over to Thunderbird (due to some shortcomings in how Eudora displays complex HTML emails and international characters), and the dealbreaker was that Thunderbird lacked support for storing attachments separately from mail. In fact there are features in Thunderbird that would support this sort of scheme, but nobody ever thought to do it.

I'm hoping desperately that the Qualcomm folks put this feature into Thunderbird. The search I'm not too worried about, since Google Desktop is going to beat anything they come up with anyway...

Who Can't Read Either? (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 8 years ago | (#16394501)

Did anyone else scan that headline and think "what the hell?" because they read it as "Fedora Based on Thunderbird?"

Ugh (1)

daeg (828071) | about 8 years ago | (#16394513)

Am I the only one that isn't welcoming this change? There is a benefit in having mail clients of different code bases. Choice is a good thing -- don't be so quick to give that up. I'd rather be able to choose from two quality, well-developed clients than choose from two, nearly identical clients.

Penelope (2, Informative)

niola (74324) | about 8 years ago | (#16394519)

Penelope is the project name at Mozilla for those that are interested:
http://wiki.mozilla.org/Penelope [mozilla.org]

Debian renames Thunderbird as LightningPigeon (1)

Foofoobar (318279) | about 8 years ago | (#16394599)

Who can see this one coming down the pipeline?

Re:Debian renames Thunderbird as LightningPigeon (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | about 8 years ago | (#16394825)

TornadoTitmouse! Yeah! (insert Howard Dean yell here)

Re:Debian renames Thunderbird as IceDove (1)

Randle_Revar (229304) | about 8 years ago | (#16395273)

Thunderbird will most likely become IceDove [asoftsite.org] .

Time warp (1)

saboola (655522) | about 8 years ago | (#16394643)

I saw the name Eudora and thought I accidentally traveled back to 1995. I hope this new version of Eudora does not require me to update my version of Trumpet Winsock.

Re:Time warp (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | about 8 years ago | (#16394783)

I saw the name Eudora and thought I accidentally traveled back to 1995.

Nonsense. I'm almost positive if you time travel, it generally has to be on purpose.

Re:Time warp (1)

saboola (655522) | about 8 years ago | (#16394899)

From the wikipedia article about the documentary film on time travel "Back To The Future III"

Like Back to the Future Part II, Back to the Future Part III picks up at the moment where its predecessor left off. Doc Brown has been accidentally sent back to 1885 by a lightning bolt.

As you can clearly see, it can happen by accident. Maybe Back To The Future IV will be about Eudora.

Oracle vs. PostgreSQL (1)

Britz (170620) | about 8 years ago | (#16394745)

Someone (I think on Slashdot) commented that Oracle will someday switch to ProstgreSQL, because their codebase has become too bloated and unmanageble.

Will there be a switch not by the user, but by the software makers themselves towards OSS? It would be interesting to see what real software developers of larger projects (Windows, Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Filemaker) would comment here. Did some of you look into throwing out your codebase and starting with an OSS project, preferably BSD-licsence?

Re:Oracle vs. PostgreSQL (1)

Shados (741919) | about 8 years ago | (#16395009)

Someone (I think on Slashdot) commented that Oracle will someday switch to ProstgreSQL, because their codebase has become too bloated and unmanageble.
Yeah, because PostgreSQL's codebase is lean and clean. Oh...wait...

PostgreSQL is one of the best open source products, all categories, in my opinion, and definately is powerful enough to live in the corporate world (even more so if one considers things like EnterpriseDB, etc). However, the codebase IS a mess. They did wonderful lately to clean it up, but some parts (especialy around the query planner/parser) is still heavily hardcoded and is a total hell to modify, parts of it are extremly slow because of legacy code, etc. While I'm sure Oracle has these issues too, it would just be trading some problems for some others, so really, I don't see Oracle switching. Either way they have to do a partial rewrite. Might as well do it on a database they know best.

I still use Outlook (0, Redundant)

gbr (31010) | about 8 years ago | (#16394775)

I looked at Eudora, but didn't go for it for the same reasons I still use Windows on my laptop:

1. I must be able to sync my Pocket PC
2. Outlook syncs REALLY well with my eGroupware Server.

Gerald

I Miss Mulberry (1)

cmason (53054) | about 8 years ago | (#16394821)

I still haven't found a crossplatform email client that's as featureful as the discontinued Mulberry client.

If they wanted to build a Outlook killer... (2, Interesting)

haggie (957598) | about 8 years ago | (#16394849)

They would focus on pulling together email and calendar in a single open source app. The Eudora team could really accelerate this process. Until there is a unified application, corporate envvironments will not move away from Outlook...

WP5.1 -- the last true master (1)

PMuse (320639) | about 8 years ago | (#16394915)

I tried to convert to Thunderbird. The user interface only worked if you used it the way the designers thought you would -- slowly and with a mouse. (It felt like going from WP5.1 to MSWord 1.0.)

Plus, the Thunderbird memory footprint is far larger. (WP5.1 to MSWord 1.0 again!)

And let's not mention that importing my mail data was a collossal pain in the patoukis. (Chorus, everybody!)

I will mourn this day. Though the apprentice Thunderbird has promise, it has killed the master before the teaching was complete.

lol what? (1)

RLiegh (247921) | about 8 years ago | (#16394985)

Why would I want a eudora-branded version of thunderbird when I can simply run thunderbird proper?

Re:lol what? (1)

Aladrin (926209) | about 8 years ago | (#16395239)

They already explained that, if you'd RTFS. They are adding their old feature set to it.

But... (1)

haxor.dk (463614) | about 8 years ago | (#16395097)

Where Is The Money?

mod dowN (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 years ago | (#16395119)

faster than th1s a popular 'news ReTasons why anyone

wtf? (1)

Danzigism (881294) | about 8 years ago | (#16395189)

I didn't even know Eudora still existed.

Great! I've used only those clients! (1)

^_^x (178540) | about 8 years ago | (#16395205)

I used Eudora for many years until one day a failed message filter blew up and send 100,000+ messages to my own inbox. After that, Eudora crashed every time it tried to load, but then I grabbed a copy of Thunderbird, imported my mailbox and deleted all the filter-spam (over about 3 days...) and have been happily using Thunderbird ever since.

It was really that one fatal weakness to an unreasonable condition that made me switch in the first place, but I remember Eudora quite fondly. It did everything I ever needed it to - then, so does Thunderbird now. I'm sure whatever comes of this collaboration will only do good for both clients.

Oh Rly? (1)

kevlarcowboy (996973) | about 8 years ago | (#16395207)

But does it run on Linux? Oh wait...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?