MacInTouch Amazon link...

email issues and products

Channels
Security, Products
This sounds interesting! It seems like it would be a lot of work, though, for a site that you might want to hear from regularly. I would worry that I may miss an email whose alias I forgot to "extend", or from a sender who suddenly had a valid reason to increase frequency.

While it's true that spamgourmet may not be a good fit for such cases, I'm not sure how many senders I have that absolutely would be good candidates for it, apart from maybe the extremely rare truly one-off situation.
In spamgourmet, you can set an “authorized sender” address for each alias (only one, alas); messages from the “authorized sender” are not counted against the message count, but all others are. This should resolve your problem in at least some situations.
 


Granted, I recently encountered one web site whose “create account” process started with “Enter your e-mail address” as the only field on the page. After entering an alias, it returned “Invalid address”. Even after I e-mailed their support group from the alias address, they would not budge. In addition, the reply from the support group was immediately followed by a “Rate your interaction” e-mail from a third party.

I chose not to do business with that site, despite their mendacious claim that “We do not share our users’ personal information”. It seems obvious that they would only accept user addresses that they can tie to other sites and services for data aggregation.
Something like that might be used as a security measure to block scammers, phishers and spammers from using disposable email addresses to gain access to the web site. That said, their use of a third-party rating system does raise suspicions about the web site's own behavior.
 


I've been using Pair Networks (pair.com) since 1998 for email and web hosting. Their basic account runs me $65 a year. I park my main domain there and I get 500 email addresses and 15 gig of data storage. You can park additional domains there at no additional charge and get additional separate email addresses. They support Let's Encrypt free SSL certs and their own SSL certs. I've had total reliability, no problems and very responsive support the few times I've needed it. I believe I first heard about them [via] MacInTouch....
 




The field for setting the number of allowed messages appears to be two digits, so the practical limit may be 99.
If it supports two digits, whether or not it goes up to 99, I would call that sufficient for any needs I might have. Thank you again for sharing about it. I remember reading about it in the past, but I completely forgot about it in the intervening years.
 


My domain server (Pair Networks) recently discontinued support for Transport Layer Security (TLS) 1.0, which in turn prevented PowerMail (from CTM Dev) from accessing my mail server. Unfortunately, all development at CTMDev has ceased for PowerMail - their response was to change ISPs and to not upgrade beyond Mojave, if PowerMail use is important.

I've been casting about for a replacement, and the closest thing is Postbox, which doesn't have the same ease of use but which offers most of the same features as PowerMail. The biggest Postbox benefit is a much more robust IMAP implementation (PowerMail corrupts the IMAP cache occasionally, requiring the user to nuke the IMAP cache in order to re-enable the IMAP account).

Moving an extensive email collection over took time (I had to do it on a flat folder-by-folder basis; nested folders are a no-go). Worse, Postbox apparently doesn't allow folders to be moved between archives (i.e. what you imported vs. "on My Mac". Instead, you have to create a recipient folder, then manually move all the files over. This can take a lot of time.

As of Postbox 6.x, integration with SpamSieve is unfortunately pretty non-existent. It's also disappointing that IMAP accounts cannot have rules executed on them (such as extracting certain types of messages and archiving them automatically). PowerMail didn't allow this either, but I wish Postbox did. After all, the only reason I'm using IMAP in the first place is that Apple doesn't allow POP3 access to its icloud mail servers. (Boo!)

I also tried AirMail and am sorry I did... it's so unresponsive! For example, emptying a 1000-message bin of trash literally locked up the program (spinning beachball) for 10 minutes. No progress bar, no feedback, just a unresponsive program. On PowerMail, Postbox, etc. this operation takes at most 2 seconds. One has no idea if the program is working or not. Worse, this program has to be purchased outright, no trial period like Postbox. That's a pretty good tell - the Postbox developers are obviously confident that you'll like their program enough to buy it.

For those of us who are looking for a PowerMail replacement but are not in a hurry yet, GyazMail may be a good option as soon as their 64-bit version of the program has finished development. The author promises TLS 1.1+ support in that version as well. My Postbox transition is almost complete, so I'm unlikely to make the jump at that point, but others may benefit once more ISPs make TLS 1.1 and beyond mandatory.

CTMDev continues to support and update FoxTrot, their file-searching app. It was born in PowerMail, when it made fast searches possible. Now it helps people with the whole OS. I guess it's been more popular, hence the ongoing development vs. the abandonment of PowerMail.
 


IMAP-based mail services are certainly attractive for folks who like to "set and forget" their mail services. Mail program providers like Postbox make strong cases for IMAP, mostly due to users who managed to lose their email thanks to inadequate backup strategies. However, using a cloud provider is not a replacement for a viable backup strategy, if that data is important to you.

Host providers can and have failed their users in the past, either by going out of business, losing the data, account hijackings, or whatnot. Even world-class, dedicated cloud backup providers like Backblaze have lost data at times. A 0.0000001% failure rate sounds impressive until you consider how storage needs and file quantities have exploded.

In other words, don't be lazy or be fooled by the hype. The cloud certainly provides a lot of convenience, but I would never solely rely on the cloud for data that I consider important. Backup drives are cheap, off-site storage can be as simple as your work cubicle, a friend's house, etc. If it's important to you, take ownership and back it up yourself.
 


My domain server (Pair Networks) recently discontinued support for Transport Layer Security (TLS) 1.0, which in turn prevented PowerMail (from CTM Dev) from accessing my mail server. ... Postbox ... GyazMail ...
Not quite the same thing, but if you're interested in a somewhat traditional, seriously high-function power-user IMAP client MailMate is also well worth a look. In addition to technical capabilities, it has the advantage that the developer (no connection) is active and engaged. My only quibble is that he's got a super-linear algorithm in there somewhere that gets really slow once you have more than 50,000 or so messages saved across your full set of mailboxes..
 


Not quite the same thing, but if you're interested in a somewhat traditional, seriously high-function power-user IMAP client MailMate is also well worth a look. In addition to technical capabilities, it has the advantage that the developer (no connection) is active and engaged. My only quibble is that he's got a super-linear algorithm in there somewhere that gets really slow once you have more than 50,000 or so messages saved across your full set of mailboxes..
It is a fine program indeed – but as I mentioned in another thread, the program does not support a local folders feature, which is critical if one's quota is limited.
 


Unfortunately, all development at CTMDev has ceased for PowerMail - their response was to change ISPs and to not upgrade beyond Mojave, if PowerMail use is important.
Sad news, indeed. Always liked that program, not only for its fast searching capability, but also because the interface reminded me, in many ways, of Claris Emailer. (I'm probably the only person on the planet who liked that program.)
 


It is a fine program indeed – but as I mentioned in another thread, the program does not support a local folders feature, which is critical if one's quota is limited.
All of that is true. How I got around this quandary was to run both MailMate (on my laptop) and Postbox (on my home server). MailMate supports SpamSieve while Postbox lets me extract emails from my various IMAP accounts and store them locally. It would be nice if one email program would do it all, but until then...
 


All of that is true. How I got around this quandary was to run both MailMate (on my laptop) and Postbox (on my home server). MailMate supports SpamSieve while Postbox lets me extract emails from my various IMAP accounts and store them locally. It would be nice if one email program would do it all, but until then...
Thank you! I truly don't know how I got it in my head that I had to use only one IMAP client for everything – that goes against the whole point of IMAP!
 


FYI: Starting today, nobody at our company can see RSVPs within incoming Apple Mail invitation messages created in Google Calendar. This has never been an issue. We also discovered a lack of RSVPs in the AirMail app, and I would suspect all other 3rd-party apps such as Postbox, Canary and ThunderBird will also now fail to display RSVPs.

I spent hours on the phone with Google's G-Suite support, and their final answer is "Works as intended. Please only use webmail for RSVPs."

I patiently explained we had made zero changes to our computers and software. I also commented that Apple Mail had, for literally more than a decade, always clearly received and displayed RSVPs from Google Calendar invitations.

One of our web designers dug deep into the raw source headers of an old invitation in Apple Mail and discovered the links for "Going?" -- 'Yes', 'Maybe' and 'No' definitely used to be included in the emails sent by Google, but now they are not.

Not a happy camper. This decision by Google seems arbitrary and capricious.
 




FYI: Starting today, nobody at our company can see RSVPs within incoming Apple Mail invitation messages created in Google Calendar. This has never been an issue. We also discovered a lack of RSVPs in the AirMail app, and I would suspect all other 3rd-party apps such as Postbox, Canary and ThunderBird will also now fail to display RSVPs.

I spent hours on the phone with Google's G-Suite support, and their final answer is "Works as intended. Please only use webmail for RSVPs."

I patiently explained we had made zero changes to our computers and software. I also commented that Apple Mail had, for literally more than a decade, always clearly received and displayed RSVPs from Google Calendar invitations.

One of our web designers dug deep into the raw source headers of an old invitation in Apple Mail and discovered the links for "Going?" -- 'Yes', 'Maybe' and 'No' definitely used to be included in the emails sent by Google, but now they are not.

Not a happy camper. This decision by Google seems arbitrary and capricious.
Email and systems manager for quite a few shops here. Apple Mail is a poor client for use with Google G-Suite. It has quite a few ongoing issues that don't appear to be on the roadmap to be resolved. If you are a Google G-Suite customer, it is highly advisable to use the web based interface in the native Chrome browser for the best experience. Everything else will be a step down in performance, capability, and functionality. If Apple Mail is a necessity, another email platform may be more suited.
 


Apple Mail is a poor client for use with Google G-Suite. It has quite a few ongoing issues that don't appear to be on the roadmap to be resolved.
Peter, please provide specifics on these ongoing issues. Our company has been pleased as punch with Apple Mail and G-Suite over the years and we've not had any complaints. Thanks!
 


Peter, please provide specifics on these ongoing issues. Our company has been pleased as punch with Apple Mail and G-Suite over the years and we've not had any complaints. Thanks!
Scott, the issues and their type have wavered over the years... to the point where it's never been solid in recent memory. In addition to the issue you mentioned here, we're commonly seeing freezing and high system processor utilization. This is a biggie.

Additionally, Apple Mail will eventually just choke itself out once mailboxes reach high message counts (10K+). It's easy to advise a user not to get there, and another thing to enforce it, and then the IT cycles required to extricate them.

By and large, Google intends you to use their native platform - it has the most functionality and seamless experience and will always work well. The user trouble ticket volume in aggregate went down immensely once we disallowed Apple Mail utilization.
 


Scott, the issues and their type have wavered over the years... to the point where it's never been solid in recent memory. In addition to the issue you mentioned here, we're commonly seeing freezing and high system processor utilization. This is a biggie.
Additionally, Apple Mail will eventually just choke itself out once mailboxes reach high message counts (10K+). It's easy to advise a user not to get there, and another thing to enforce it, and then the IT cycles required to extricate them.
By and large, Google intends you to use their native platform - it has the most functionality and seamless experience and will always work well. The user trouble ticket volume in aggregate went down immensely once we disallowed Apple Mail utilization.
Peter, thanks for your opinion. I have had a different experience in supporting users. Apple Mail has been superb. It has proven to not grab a ton of processor cycles nor be crashy.

I do work with users who have a large amount of older messages to make sure they store them locally / "On My Mac", which then keeps the IMAP synching process smooth and reliable. Those older messages are not important enough to be referenced frequently, thus local storage has proven sufficient.

In addition, we utilize the MailButler, MailTags, and CG's Anti-Inline add-ons for several important additional features. Apple Mail stores a local copy of all G-Suite messages, thus allowing the user to not be dependent on having an active internet connection in order to create drafts, review messages in their Inbox, Sent items, and any Google-based folders ("labels" in the Googleverse.) This has proven to be a huge advantage over browser-based, internet-dependent webmail.

Apple Mail also allows for the creation of extremely-useful Smart Mailboxes, simple or complex rules, conversation view and various display options, wonderful synchronization with Apple Contacts and Calendar, better / more complex signatures, "endless scrolling", instead of viewing pages of 50 or 100 messages at a time, and the advantage to opening up multiple, separate, resizeable message windows. I could go on, but for us, Apple Mail is vastly superior to webmail with regards to overall functionality and seamless experience.

Just wishing Google engineers or decision-makers will read this thread and choose to reinstate the RSVP code in outgoing calendar invitations.
 


Not implying that Google isn't at fault here, but a year or so ago I found that event alarms created in Apple's Calendar app would not trigger the alarm in my phone. Examining the event on the phone showed no alarm set. I switched to BusyCal, and everything works as expected. Just saying that Apple sometimes makes some changes in order to... you know.

Edit: My post would make sense if I had mentioned two things:
1. I use Google Calendar for sync'ing.​
2. I use an Android phone.​
 


Not implying that Google isn't at fault here, but a year or so ago I found that event alarms created in Apple's Calendar app would not trigger the alarm in my phone. Examining the event on the phone showed no alarm set. I switched to BusyCal, and everything works as expected. Just saying that Apple sometimes makes some changes in order to... you know.

Edit: My post would make sense if I had mentioned two things:
1. I use Google Calendar for sync'ing.
2. I use an Android phone.
I had a similar problem with Apple's Calendar app, but it stopped triggering alarms on my Mac. (I don't use a smartphone.) Somehow it had apparently changed preference so no alarms were being set, and/or when it imported events from Mail or a calendar item, it was not setting the alarms. There may be problems with preferences resetting themselves or wiping themselves out. Now I have taken to double-checking events for the coming few days to make sure the alarms are set. This is annoying.
 


By and large, Google intends you to use their native platform - it has the most functionality and seamless experience and will always work well. The user trouble ticket volume in aggregate went down immensely once we disallowed Apple Mail utilization.
For myself, regarding any issue wherein Apple Mail stops working with Google services, my inclination is to reflexively blame Google for one important reason: I've seen too many instances where Google "improves" something by no longer adhering to published RFC standards.

This latest RSVP issue is just one more example of Google creating a problem just for people who don't use Google services/apps exclusively. And Peter's reaction demonstrates how effective their plan is at tying users in.

In other words, it's not fair to blame Apple when Google changes how its infrastructure and APIs work to benefit Google (and its users), when those changes deviate from the standards all are expected to follow.
 


Reading the posts about how Google wants to push us to using its webmail portal, I decided to try it (for a few minutes, anyway). I get voicemails forwarded from my MagicJack system sent to my Google email account. When I opened such an email in Google's web portal, the audio attachment would not play. Gmail suggested I connect some other apps from Drive; I did so and, again, nothing would play. I searched for Chrome extensions and found a few, but none of them worked. Apparently, GSM-encoded WAV files just can't be played using any of the tools available in Chrome.

Those same files play perfectly on my Samsung phone using the Google-supplied audio player (Google Play Music) that pops up an overlay in the email.

In an unbelievably ironic twist, however, those same audio files will play directly within the email without any additional software when I use Safari instead of Chrome. According to this document, WAV will continue to be supported in macOS 10.15.
 


FYI: Starting today, nobody at our company can see RSVPs within incoming Apple Mail invitation messages created in Google Calendar. This has never been an issue. We also discovered a lack of RSVPs in the AirMail app...
Update / good news! Someone at Google listened to feedback (or perhaps even read this discussion here on MacInTouch) — the RSVP option from Google calendar invitations has magically re-appeared in Apple Mail. Yay!

Glad those affected didn't have to resort to an online petition. ;-)
 





Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Since the Google fiasco started yesterday, Postbox will not let me get my Google email, spewing disturbing errors like this, no matter what I try:
Google via Postbox said:
You've reached this page because we have detected that cookies are disabled in your browser. The page you attempted to load cannot display properly if cookies are disabled.

Please enable cookies and retry the operation or go back in your browser.
This is really frustrating, and I already went through the hassle of restoring my whole system from backup, which didn't help, so I'm not about to try that again.

Is anyone else having these problems? (Any suggestions for resolving them?)
 


Since the Google fiasco started yesterday, Postbox will not let me get my Google email, spewing disturbing errors like this, no matter what I try...
This is really frustrating, and I already went through the hassle of restoring my whole system from backup, which didn't help, so I'm not about to try that again.
Is anyone else having these problems? (Any suggestions for resolving them?)
Apple Mail has been able to retrieve Gmail from all three of my Gmail accounts today. I also can access Gmail through the Gmail web interface with Firefox. Could you be having a Postbox problem?
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
Apple Mail has been able to retrieve Gmail from all three of my Gmail accounts today. I also can access Gmail through the Gmail web interface with Firefox. Could you be having a Postbox problem?
I finally resolved the problem by using this Postbox procedure:
Postbox Support said:
Error: You've reached this page because we have detected that cookies are disabled in your browser
If you are experiencing the error: "You've reached this page because we have detected that cookies are disabled in your browser" then please navigate to Postbox > Preferences | Options > Privacy and select the option for "Accept cookies from sites"
The sequence of events went like this:
  1. Postbox hangs up
  2. I force-quit Postbox
  3. Later, I am unable to get Gmail via Postbox
  4. With demanding WWDC/MacInTouch workloads, I restored from a recent backup.
  5. Problems continued with Gmail, and I had additional problems as a consequence of the restore operation.
  6. On a whim, I checked online for possible Gmail problems, and it turned out that Google had massive outages across its services.
  7. After Google recovered, I still could not retrieve Gmail in Postbox.
  8. Apple Mail could retrieve Gmail, but I don't normally use that app, because of its bad behavior for a relative I support and due to Apple's lousy software quality standards.
  9. I searched Postbox support and found the note linked above. (I think I've had to do this same procedure in the past but had forgotten all the details.)
  10. The preference setting change in Postbox seems to have resolved the problem, although I had made no changes to Postbox at all for a very long time. (Perhaps the force-quit corrupted the prefs file?
 


Ric Ford

MacInTouch
In case anyone's interested, Postbox Inc. is currently selling a permanent license of the email app with free upgrades in the future, for $39. The offer is good until July 8, and the company promises a new Version 7 is "just around the corner" (though it's not clear exactly what it will bring).

While it falls short in some respects vs. the long-lost Eudora, and I don't care for its threading/labeling model, Postbox has proven to be a decent email app for me in heavy usage, with a fairly traditional approach and a unified Inbox that I find very helpful.
 


In case anyone's interested, Postbox Inc. is currently selling a permanent license of the email app with free upgrades in the future, for $39. The offer is good until July 8, and the company promises a new Version 7 is "just around the corner" (though it's not clear exactly what it will bring).
While it falls short in some respects vs. the long-lost Eudora, and I don't care for its threading/labeling model, Postbox has proven to be a decent email app for me in heavy usage, with a fairly traditional approach and a unified Inbox that I find very helpful.
Is this really a special deal? Some earlier reviews list the price as $40 for a permanent license. Some years back, when I was having issues with Apple Mail on Yosemite, I looked at Postbox and some other email clients. I never ended up making a switch, because after moving to Sierra, those Apple Mail problems went away. I've never used Eudora, but would anyone care to comment on how Postbox 6 compares to current versions of Apple Mail?
 



Sorry for the length of what follows, but the dog has a lot of shag on it.

I sent an email message, using a verizon.net email address via Apple Mail on my desktop system running Mojave yesterday morning, to an address at a server at my former place of employment. It went through, and I received a reply from the user.

I sent him a further message in reply to his, and it got bounced by the server with the rather unhelpful message that the service wasn't available. I tried again a few hours later with the same result.

Today I contacted the sys admin for that server, and he informed me that the reason was that Sorbs blacklisting service had noted 179 spam messages emitting from that server two days before, as well as a virus some months earlier. I did a lookup on the numerical IP address provided, and it was, to my surprise, a yahoo.com address.

As many of you probably remember, Verizon farmed out its email provision to its then newly acquired AOL subsidiary a couple of years ago. I haven't had significant issues with the service until now, though I did note with some dictate that an outfit (AOL) which tried to sucker its users into a $14.99 a month package of "protective" services of dubious value for even the simplest tech support call is not a customer-oriented organization.

After a quick online chat with Verizon support produced the answer I expected but dreaded: contact AOL support. I went down that rabbit hole, but sure enough, had to agree to the $14.99 a month service (to their credit, free for the first month but cancellable at no charge during that time) to talk to someone i tech support. I can't say it was worth even the first month's non-price.

Everybody with whom I spoke was extremely polite and repeatedly apologized for putting me on hold, even thanking me for waiting patiently (I guess they don't have customer blood pressure monitoring.... yet). But it took an hour and twenty minutes of speaking to both a first-line customer support person, who I never suspected would be able to help me except for passing on the information, and then to the subscription-gated, first-line tech support person, to determine that (1) they couldn't explain why my outgoing email was sometimes being randomly routed via a known-bad Yahoo server and sometimes via one or more apparently OK AOL ones, and that (2) it was unlikely that they could even pass my information, including the IP of the offending relay, to anyone who could do anything about their outgoing email servers. (My call was also dropped when it was supposed to be transferred to the tech support person, but to AOL's credit, they had at least given me a reference number so I could start at the same point when I called back.)

But it gets "better." The AOL tech wanted to get remote control of my system to see if things were "configured correctly." Seriously. I repeated that I had sent mail to the same address successfully earlier in the day, and suggested in as mild and polite manner as I could muster that logic pretty much dictated it was not an issue with my mail client, which had been working just fine, thanks, for years. And they wanted me to pay $14.99 a month for that?

From all of the above, I can only conclude what others have experienced before: the US Big Comms sector is interested only in upsell and not providing any kind of useful service. (In fairness, I should state that before the move to AOL, Verizon's online FiOS tech support chat, I believe hosted in Chennai, was very helpful. Of course, that's gone now.)

I've already cancelled the AOL support package. Hilariously, their Website offered to up the ante to two free months of time-wasting, privacy-invading non-support and dubious protective services to try to keep me on the books.

Not all mail relays may be as stringently secured as that at my former place of employment in the US federal government. I'll be looking for alternate email service providers, as well as asking my correspondents to provide an address on a different server.

Anybody have recommendations on free or low cost, non-data gulping email service providers that they've used with Apple Mail as their client? I wish ProtonMail could be used with Apple Mail as a sender, but their proprietary encryption evidently requires use of their app — and no doubt makes one a target for surveillance by the FBI and NSA. Thanks in advance.
 


Anybody have recommendations on free or low cost, non-data gulping email service providers that they've used with Apple Mail as their client?
There's iCloud mail, of course.

I've been a satisfied Fastmail user for five years with Apple Mail as an IMAP client. But they don't offer the cheap plan anymore; the Basic plan is $30/year, with a 2GB quota.
 


Anybody have recommendations on free or low cost, non-data gulping email service providers that they've used with Apple Mail as their client?
I have used Runbox for many years with Apple Mail and Postbox. I am a very satisfied customer. They aren't free, but neither are they expensive.

Don't be put off by the fact that they are based in Norway; their staff seem to have excellent English - indeed, I think some are Brits.
 


I'm a fan of the email services of EasyDNS.com - not free, but I'd rather pay a bit than be the 'product' being traded for a free service.
 


Sorry for the length of what follows, but the dog has a lot of shag on it. ... Anybody have recommendations on free or low cost, non-data gulping email service providers that they've used with Apple Mail as their client? I wish ProtonMail could be used with Apple Mail as a sender, but their proprietary encryption evidently requires use of their app — and no doubt makes one a target for surveillance by the FBI and NSA. Thanks in advance.
I cannot stress enough, registering your own domain and then hosting it literally anywhere! Depending on which top-level domain you want (the .com part) and who you want as a registrar, it can be as little as $10/year.

You then can host at FastMail, easyDNS, Rackspace (my current fav), Google (free!), or millions of other places. For very little money, you have long-term ultimate contol.

If your email is not important to you, then continue with hotmail, yahoo, AOL, or others of their ilk. Email to me is very important, and the cost is very low.
 


I would like a mail provider that allows me to exclude incoming email by TLD [top-level domain]. The vast majority of spam I get comes from domains like *.icu, *.faith, *.stream, etc. This would make good spam filtering very easy... if I could do it.

Network Solutions' mail, which I've used to host my domain mail for years, lets me write rules base on subject and content, but spammer's use of Unicode text (it just looks like an "e"!) makes such text-based filters pretty useless. And there's no way to block all mail from, say, "*.icu".

Network Solutions tech support helpfully suggests that I can block (full) individual email addresses, apparently unaware of just how ridiculous that suggestion is in these times of spoofed "From" fields.

(Some years ago the problem became so bad I purchased and configured a Barracuda spam filter for quite a lot of money. It worked until Network Solutions started rejecting all mail with Barracuda headers. Nobody at Network Solutions or Barracuda could tell me why this was happening or what do to about it. Sigh.)
 


Amazon disclaimer:
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Latest posts