Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralPortable MacsHardwareNetworking
Applications
Mac ApplicationsEudoraFirefox / MozillaInternet ExplorerOutlook ExpressMS OfficeEntourageExcelPowerPointWordVirtual PCMedia PlayerOther MS Products
Programming
Mac ProgrammingCodeWarriorPerl
Country Specific
Australian Mac GroupUK Mac Group

Mac Forum / Applications / Eudora / October 2006



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Sponsored mode REQUIRES 6.2.4?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
J R - 12 Oct 2006 02:07 GMT
Hi all

Maybe I'm the only one a bit sad to hear about Qualcomm retiring the
Eudora codebase (but maybe not). I'm curious about one thing in
Qualcomm's announcement [ http://eudora.com/faq/ ].

"Sponsored mode users that upgrade to Eudora version 7.1 for Windows and
6.2.4 for Mac will be able to remain in Sponsored mode in perpetuity.
QUALCOMM plans to stop trafficking advertisements at some point during
open source development. "

Any idea why they would REQUIRE upgrading to 6.2.4 for sponsored mode?

Makes me a little suspicious

Cheers,
jr
Kathy Morgan - 12 Oct 2006 02:47 GMT
> Maybe I'm the only one a bit sad to hear about Qualcomm retiring the
> Eudora codebase (but maybe not). I'm curious about one thing in
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Any idea why they would REQUIRE upgrading to 6.2.4 for sponsored mode?

It sounds to me like right now they don't require it.  It's been years
since I've used Eudora in sponsored mode, but I believe versions before
6.2.4 will revert to Lite mode if you stop receiving ads.  Since they
plan to stop trafficking ads (which means your Eudora would not receive
them), it sounds like they've modified the coding in 6.2.4 so that it
will stay in sponsored mode even if no ads come in.

Signature

Kathy - If you're reading this in your web browser from Google or
similar forum, NNTP "newsreaders" are a better way to access the
content. <http://www.aptalaska.net/~kmorgan/how-it-works.html>
Links to NNTP newsreaders at <http://www.newsreaders.com/>

David Morrison - 12 Oct 2006 06:35 GMT
> Hi all
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> QUALCOMM plans to stop trafficking advertisements at some point during
> open source development. "

This whole "in perpetuity" thing puzzles me somewhat. If it is an open
source project, once the open source version is available, what would it
matter whether you were licensed or not? Wouldn't you get all the
features for free?

Cheers

David
Kathy Morgan - 12 Oct 2006 07:18 GMT
> > Maybe I'm the only one a bit sad to hear about Qualcomm retiring the
> > Eudora codebase (but maybe not). I'm curious about one thing in
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> matter whether you were licensed or not? Wouldn't you get all the
> features for free?

Only for whatever comes out of the new project.  They're talking about
the users who want to stick with Eudora 6.x.

Signature

Kathy - If you're reading this in your web browser from Google or
similar forum, NNTP "newsreaders" are a better way to access the
content. <http://www.aptalaska.net/~kmorgan/how-it-works.html>
Links to NNTP newsreaders at <http://www.newsreaders.com/>

Bill Cole - 12 Oct 2006 21:07 GMT
In article
<davidmor-3F2C5D.15352112102006@eth00.pnews.internode.on.net>,

> > Hi all
> >
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> matter whether you were licensed or not? Wouldn't you get all the
> features for free?

See http://wiki.mozilla.org/Penelope

The open source project won't be based on the existing Eudora source
(which I suspect has a rich set of licensing encumbrances...) but
instead be an attempt to "join the Eudora user experience with the
Mozilla platform."

I'm looking at Mulberry. It looks pretty good.

Signature

Now where did I hide that website...

David Morrison - 12 Oct 2006 22:57 GMT
> I'm looking at Mulberry. It looks pretty good.

"looks" is a poor choice of word :-)

It's feature set seems ok, but it certainly does not "look" good. Far
too cluttered.

David
Bill Cole - 13 Oct 2006 02:42 GMT
In article
<davidmor-1C7133.07571813102006@eth00.pnews.internode.on.net>,

> > I'm looking at Mulberry. It looks pretty good.
>
> "looks" is a poor choice of word :-)
>
> It's feature set seems ok, but it certainly does not "look" good. Far
> too cluttered.

A valid point.

How about: It seems like a suitable replacement for Eudora. Particularly
now that I am migrating to IMAP and am running into some bad problems
with Eudora's IMAP handling. Thunderbird and Apple Mail can't handle my
mail, but it looks like Mulberry might do the trick.

Signature

Now where did I hide that website...

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.