Mark Smitka
United States of America
No favorite files added yet
4.0 Build 3350 (Oct 24, 2005)
Having been a beta tester of version 4, and now a registered user, I can say PocoMail has taken a giant leap forward in terms of functionality, particularly in areas of IMAP and online folders. Across the board though, it's much improved, and is well supported. I highly recommend it.
2.0 RC2 (Oct 8, 2005)
The very first MS Word doc I opened with it doesn't display properly. The author of the document composed it with Office 2003, and it appears has used some tables or text blocks (I'm certainly no Word guru). The bottom line though, is that it's a very professional looking document when read in Word. In OO, it's totally unreadable. Other documents look find, but if OO was all I had, I'd be out of luck.
Build 2077 (Sep 5, 2005)
They got an e-mail from me as well, complaining about their attempt to strong-arm people into paying annually for the junk mail filter. I also uninstalled and rolled back to build 2031. I use it for only a few accounts, so it'll be easy enough to dump it all together. I have a feeling they got plenty of complaints about this. I'm betting (though I hope I'm wrong) that they'll do nothing about it though.
3.0.9.5 Alpha (Mar 12, 2005)
Like the previous reviewer, I have yet to get any of the recent alphas to even launch (on WinXP Pro SP2). The message, "Thebat.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close", appears just as the splash screen appears. These are alphas after all though.
3.2 (Nov 3, 2004)
There was a time when this program was valuable. Now though, with a choice between FreePops (as kmleow mentioned), and AOL's open access (via IMAP), there's really no need for it at all.
3.2 (Nov 22, 2005 - 8:21 PM)
Did the truth slip out? Notice he said, "With the inclusion of our free AIM Mail product, we expect AIM to remain the most viral, social and popular communications application among the Internet generation". VIRAL! ROTFL!!
3.2 (Nov 8, 2005 - 3:01 PM)
This guy is an idiot, and it's exactly this kind of behavior that is turning everyone into a law breaker and pirate. I won't be buying any music from Sony/BMG, or any other of their affiliates. I really hope there's a class action lawsuit filed against Sony. I can't see any way that they (Sony) could prevail. In the meantime, Sony's President might not know what a good kick to the testículos is either, so hell, he might like it!
3.2 (Oct 24, 2005 - 8:21 PM)
The e-mail applet isn't bad on my V551, but with the Cingular/cell connectivity being what it is, mobile IM (AOL) has to be the worst/slowest way to IM I've ever seen. It's all but totally impractical. Still the applets are free, so I guess any enhancement is better than none.
3.2 (Aug 5, 2005 - 4:08 PM)
I wonder how the MS folks will feel about being paid $7.25/hr, and having to wear a funny blue vest? :)
3.2 (Aug 5, 2005 - 4:04 PM)
> Most of the people who download stuff never
> would have bought it in the first place - so
> are there really any lost profits?
Exactly. If the listener truly believes the performance and artist are of value, most will buy it. Or, if after having taken the opportunity to preview exactly what they'll be throwing the dollars at, they make the educated decision that the performance is garbage. The RIAA and others would prefer everyone pay to that out.