Mac OS 10.9's Mail App — Infinity Times Your Spam

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mac OS 10.9's Mail App — Infinity Times Your Spam

Posted by Soulskill on Saturday October 26, 2013 @10:51AM from the that's-a-lot-of-spam dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Email service FastMail.fm has an blog post about an interesting bug they're dealing with related to the new Mail.app in Mac OS 10.9 Mavericks. After finding a user who had 71 messages in his Junk Mail folder that were somehow responsible for over a million entries in the index file, they decided to investigate. 'This morning I checked again, there were nearly a million messages again, so I enabled telemetry on the account ... [Mail.app] copying all the email from the Junk Folder back into the Junk Folder again!. This is legal IMAP, so our server proceeds to create a new copy of each message in the folder. It then expunges the old copies of the messages, but it's happening so often that the current UID on that folder is up to over 3 million. It was just over 2 million a few days ago when I first emailed the user to alert them to the situation, so it's grown by another million since. The only way I can think this escaped QA was that they used a server which (like gmail) automatically suppresses duplicates for all their testing, because this is a massively bad problem.' The actual emails added up to about 2MB of actual disk usage, but the bug generated an additional 2GB of data on top of that."

158 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I guess I have to ask by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 10:55 · Score: 0

Why doesn't fastmail also use servers that suppress duplicates?
1. Re:I guess I have to ask by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:18 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Why doesn't fastmail also use servers that suppress duplicates?
  The guy who approved it sent the approval via email on a Friday evening ... from his Mac. Since the recipient received millions of copies over the weekend he just figured it was spam.
2. Re:I guess I have to ask by homey+of+my+owney · 2013-10-26 11:30 · Score: 2
  
  It's certainly not the only bug in 10.9 Mail.
  
  Watch the Mail Activity section when receiving or sending mail. I have no idea what it's counting.
  
  When I receive two emails and it says receiving 415 and 416 of 416 I kinda get concerned.
  
  When sending one, sending 6 of 6... again, what is it counting?
  
  And set up a smart folder that is all Unread mail. Set it up and watch that it's not very smart... Like it really can't tract unread mail at all...
3. Re:I guess I have to ask by Ford+Prefect · 2013-10-26 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  I'm using Mail.app with Dovecot as the IMAP server - I upgraded to OS X 10.9 a few days ago, and haven't seen anything weird going on (yet). I sent myself a test email a few minutes ago while watching the Mail Activity window, and numbers appeared sensible. dovecot.index and dovecot.index.cache files on the server aren't ballooning - at 178KB and 11MB respectively.
  The Fastmail article mentions Cyrus as the IMAP server. Is it Cyrus-specific, or have I simply not been bitten by this yet? (I get loads of spam, but it gets pre-processed by Spamassassin so Mail.app rarely gets to see any in the main inbox itself.)
  
  --
  Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
4. Re:I guess I have to ask by immaterial · 2013-10-26 13:12 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  One of the reasons they noticed the issue is they don't actually delete expunged messages for a week (the blog post says for backup purposes). The Mail bug, for whatever reason, duplicates the junk mail and immediately cleans up after itself by expunging the originals. If the server were actually deleting them it wouldn't be such a critical issue (but an issue nonetheless).
  
  It's also worth noting though that so far, there is only a single report of this, despite the author implying they have a huge number of users. Most likely this isn't something that happens on the average Mail install; it could be that Mail is hitting some error condition on this user's specific account and that is causing the bug to manifest.
5. Re:I guess I have to ask by houstonbofh · 2013-10-27 04:40 · Score: 1
  
  Why doesn't fastmail also use servers that suppress duplicates?
  "This is legal IMAP, so our server proceeds to create a new copy of each message in the folder."
  
  Because thay followed the standards, unlike Google that made this bastard imap like interface that has very poor "wake up" performance.
6. Re:I guess I have to ask by Bronster · 2013-10-27 13:19 · Score: 1
  
  It appears to only be that one user so far - I've seen a few isolated "copy into same folder and expunge the old ones" in the logs (now that I log that) but not enough to be a pattern.
7. Re:I guess I have to ask by mattack2 · 2013-10-28 08:02 · Score: 1
  
  BTW, the comment link on your page doesn't actually DO anything. You should write a bug with the details, even though it's hitting only one user. bugreport.apple.com
8. Re:I guess I have to ask by Bronster · 2013-10-28 10:34 · Score: 1
  
  I did, and I've passed the user's contact details on to the engineers at Apple so they can talk to them directly. I've also re-enabled the account, and I'm just keeping an eye on the server that the user is on and moving some other users off so we can afford the disk space for a bit.
Apple done fucked up good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:09 · Score: 0

I decided to switch to Macintosh when I saw the Vista betas. It was pretty clear that where MS wanted me to go wasn't where I wanted to go.
I mention that because Apple now seems to be my Microsoft. iOS 7 is ugly as fuck. OS X has been going downhill (the autosave/versioning sucks for how I use software) and now with 10.9 mail.app regressions and iWorks losing features. I'm not upgrading to iOS 7. I'm not sure if I'll upgrade to 10.9 I need to buy a new computer in a couple months so I may switch to OpenIndiana. Maybe Linux for steam box, we'll see.
1. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 12:42 · Score: 0
  
  iOS 7 is ugly as fuck.
  Millions of people love it.
  But you, personally, hate it.
  So... it must suck.
2. Re:Apple done fucked up good by silverdr · 2013-10-26 13:25 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  [...] I mention that because Apple now seems to be my Microsoft. iOS 7 is ugly as fuck.
  My fucks are always beautiful. Or at least pretty (when I am more desperate).
  
  --
  Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
3. Re:Apple done fucked up good by silverdr · 2013-10-26 13:26 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  OS X has been going downhill (the autosave/versioning sucks for how I use software) and now with 10.9 mail.app regressions and iWorks losing features. I'm not upgrading to iOS 7. I'm not sure if I'll upgrade to 10.9 I need to buy a new computer in a couple months so I may switch to OpenIndiana. Maybe Linux for steam box, we'll see.
  The last uphill version was 10.5. This current 10.9 is in big part back-pedalling the visuals of 10.7/8 without removing the functional crap they introduced. I decided not to go beyond 10.6 the moment I saw "Edge Resize" in 10.7 :-(( So... no, thanks - even being free (as beer) doesn't make it more appealing..
  
  --
  Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
4. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Guy+Harris · 2013-10-26 15:22 · Score: 1
  
  I decided not to go beyond 10.6 the moment I saw "Edge Resize" in 10.7 :-((
  As OS X users finally get the power to unintentionally resize their terminal emulator windows when trying to select text that goes right up to the margin, just as other UN*X users have had for ages. :-)
  (Yes, I've done that on a number of times on FreeBSD/Linux/Solaris/etc. inside $PICK_YOUR_TERMINAL_EMULATOR, but didn't feel the joy of doing that on OS X until Lion.)
5. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 16:57 · Score: 0
  
  Millions of peple also hate it. I agree with the AC... it is ugly as fuck.
6. Re:Apple done fucked up good by flargleblarg · 2013-10-26 16:59 · Score: 1
  
  As OS X users finally get the power to unintentionally resize their terminal emulator windows when trying to select text that goes right up to the margin, just as other UN*X users have had for ages. :-)
  This does not actually happen on OS X... But now I'm curious... how on earth does that happen on other UN*Xs?
7. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 19:33 · Score: 0
  
  you click to the right of text that is pushed up against the left edge of the window, but miss the space in between the letter and the window border and hit the windows border instead, then when you drag left to highlight, instead the window resizes. Previously, the text would highlight and the window would stay the same because there was no edge to grab.
8. Re:Apple done fucked up good by behrooz0az · 2013-10-26 21:15 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  If I ever did that, I'd stop working and have my eyes and brain checked for:
  1.Not seeing the cursur icon
  2.Using mouse when working with a terminal
  
  --
  Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
9. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Simon+Brooke · 2013-10-26 22:44 · Score: 2
  
  Out of curiosity I've just tried, with every terminal application I have (xterm, lxterm, uxterm, gnome-termonal, konsole...). I can't do it. Perhaps I'm incompetent? Or perhaps it's a bug in some specific window manager? Or perhaps Guy Harris is special?
  
  --
  I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
10. Re:Apple done fucked up good by frisket · 2013-10-27 00:48 · Score: 1
  
  In Ubuntu at least, the area of sensitivity for dragging a window border appears to be microscopic (actually one pixel). This makes it unbelievably difficult to grab a window border on those occasions when you do want to resize a window. I guess accidentally finding that one-pixel-wide column when trying to select text at the edge must be an application of Sod's Law (aka Murphy's Law).
11. Re:Apple done fucked up good by BitZtream · 2013-10-27 00:59 · Score: 1
  
  How are you unintentionally clicking your mouse on the window border while trying to select text? Just hovering over it doesn't do it, just dragging over it doesn't do it ... not sure what your problem is but you have to actually click the border to drag it. Clicking in the window then dragging over the border doesn't do anything.
  Do you have pulsy or something?
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
12. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Tolleman · 2013-10-27 02:14 · Score: 1
  
  Running what window manager? In Unity on 12.04 theres a good 5-10 pixels worth of border to grab on to.
13. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 03:38 · Score: 0
  
  3. Not using a sane window manager that uses hotkeys instead of hotspots to move/resize windows.
14. Re:Apple done fucked up good by silverdr · 2013-10-27 03:41 · Score: 1
  
  Those things happen. Slightly less often on OS X because they added some constraints on resizing triggers. But all the annoying beauty of this brain-dead idea is there: distracting pointer/cursor changes, unintentional resizes when something completely different was meant. Lost workflow focus, lost time re-sizing the window back to what it was supposed to remain.. And what's worst is that this s**t can't be turned off properly. True, one can edit the plist with either editor or "defaults" command but turning it off this way introduces rendering errors in many windows. Especially there, where the resize gadget is supposed to be placed.
  
  --
  Now, mod me down freely. My karma can't get any worse...
15. Re:Apple done fucked up good by houstonbofh · 2013-10-27 04:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  iOS 7 is ugly as fuck.
  Millions of people love it.
  But you, personally, hate it.
  So... it must suck.
  Millions of people love the Kardashians, Honey BooBoo and Jersey Shore. Your point is irrelevant.
16. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Guy+Harris · 2013-10-27 06:45 · Score: 1
  
  How are you unintentionally clicking your mouse
  I don't have a mouse, but presumably you meant "mouse or trackpad".
  
  on the window border while trying to select text?
  By having the pointer a slight bit to the left of the left-hand edge of the text in the window.
  
  ust hovering over it doesn't do it, just dragging over it doesn't do it ... not sure what your problem is but you have to actually click the border to drag it.
  Wrong. The cursor changes from the text cursor (meaning it'll select text if you drag it) to the horizontal resize cursor (meaning it'll drag the border) before you hit the border.
  
  Do you have pulsy or something?
  No.
17. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 09:24 · Score: 0
  
  Millions of people love it.
  Millions of people use it, nobody except ridiculous fanboys "love" it.
18. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Guy+Harris · 2013-10-27 11:34 · Score: 1
  
  If I ever did that, I'd stop working and have my eyes and brain checked for: 1.Not seeing the cursur icon
  Sorry I didn't notice the cursor image change in the few milliseconds between hitting the region where selecting grabs the border and clicking the trackpad.
  
  2.Using mouse when working with a terminal
  In which desktop environments can I copy text from a terminal window without using a pointing device?
19. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Guy+Harris · 2013-10-27 11:36 · Score: 1
  
  Out of curiosity I've just tried
  If you're trying, you're probably doing it slowly and carefully enough that you don't hit the window border drag region. This happens (on occasion, not particularly often, but often enough to be a small irritation) when I'm doing a quick select-and-copy (or, when not on a Mac, a quick select-and-paste-current-selection).
20. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Shirley+Marquez · 2013-10-28 01:42 · Score: 1
  
  There was a problem with the initial release of Unity on 12.04 where the border selection areas were very small and hard to grab. It was corrected in 12.10; the borders weren't actually made visibly larger but the selection area was. The correction was also backported to 12.04, and Ubuntu variants that use a different window manager (Kubuntu, Lubuntu, Xubuntu) never had the problem.
21. Re:Apple done fucked up good by Tarlus · 2013-10-28 05:46 · Score: 1
  
  And of those, the vast majority didn't adopt it by choice, they just let their device install the update when it notified them that one was available. They use it now whether they like it or not.
  I bought a new phone with iOS7 preinstalled so I never had a choice in the matter, but I've been perfectly fine with it. The icons are kind of bright but the applications themselves are clean and sterile in their design. The visual flair (animated backgrounds, parallax effect) are superfluous but easily disabled.
  
  --
  /* No Comment */
Apple Build Quality by johnsie · 2013-10-26 11:10 · Score: 2, Funny

This must be the Apple build quality that people keep telling me about.
1. Re: Apple Build Quality by shokk · 2013-10-26 11:43 · Score: 0, Troll
  
  Gosh you're right. There's no software that ships with critical bugs these days.
  
  --
  "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
2. Re: Apple Build Quality by ericloewe · 2013-10-26 11:47 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Well, software that generates a thousand copies of junk (seriously, the spam folder of all things...) isn't very typical.
3. Re: Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:48 · Score: 0
  
  Mail.app was better in 10.8. 10.9 is full of regressions.
4. Re: Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 13:17 · Score: 0
  
  If all your friends were shipping critical bugs as features, would you do it too? Maybe. Would you claim high quality elite status while doing so? No, but morons will buy anything if you market it as a status symbol.
5. Re: Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 13:28 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Ships? For the past 3 releases Mail.app will randomly choose not to display the body of a message. I have to quit and reopen Mail.app just to read my e-mail sometimes.
  I thought it was just me and something screwy with my account, but the other day I asked a coworker and immediately heads began popping up from cubicles everywhere within earshot, with people admitting they've had precisely the same problem.
  Apple's focus on iOS and cute little phone apps has, for whatever reasons, caused defect rates in their core desktop code to serious balloon. Maybe it's because they've greatly expanded their workforce, and there's only so many decent engineers in the valley. I dunno....
  I used to admire the high quality of Apple software. Not anymore. And I was never an Apple fanboy. My relationship with Apple was purely practical. They shipped an excellent laptop with a command-line, and I spend 90% of my time staring at terminal windows and logged into various Linux, OpenBSD, and other unix servers writing low-level C code. I still like their laptop, and damnit the command-line stuff still works well enough, but in the other 10% of my time I spend using Apple software, quality has surely dropped precipitously.
  I once criticized in Slashdot post Apple's recent flagging support for POSIX. An actual Apple engineer replied, but rather than see refutations in his post, to my eyes I just saw confirmations and excuses. While Apple is too busy to support the latest extensions and addendums to POSIX, the teeny-tiny OpenBSD and NetBSD teams have been furiously becoming more compliant, including useful extensions of their own.
  Apple isn't doomed, but the glory days of OS X are gone. iOS will destroy OS X. But all you app developers writing the 10,000th calorie counter... I'm sure you're rejoicing in all those endless tweaks to Objective-C.
6. Re: Apple Build Quality by Khyber · 2013-10-26 14:14 · Score: 1, Interesting
  
  "There's no software that ships with critical bugs these days."
  You'd better believe the stuff that ships with my food production systems is FLAWLESS.
  When an entire country's population relies upon your tech to even stay alive, you make sure your shit works.
  And I work on a budget a billionth Apple's worth.
  What's their fucking excuse?
  
  --
  Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
7. Re: Apple Build Quality by BitZtream · 2013-10-26 14:30 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, because this one incident that got reported to slashdot and made the front page for some reason ... is of course happening to everyone on the planet.
  Except its not. Isolated incident != the sky is falling
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
8. Re: Apple Build Quality by BitZtream · 2013-10-26 14:32 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  If you think the 'stuff that ships with my food production systems is FLAWLESS' you are an idiot who doesn't understand the way the world works.
  I've worked in food production and medical, nothing is flawless, you have to be an idiot to make such retarded statements.
  You mitigate the risk, try to double/triple/quadrupal check for problems and build in fail-SAFE systems, but you are not flawless.
  Your statement sounds more like an arrogant cluebie beginner who's going to get a nice spanking when reality finally hits.
  Nothing is flawless, to imply you've created something flawless shows your ignorance.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
9. Re: Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 14:40 · Score: 0
  
  So was iTunes; it hangs on me constantly, especially at the end of syncing my old iOS 6 iPod or when told to quit. Very flaky.
  Preview's hung a few times too.
  Lots of 10.9 seems buggy, but then the .0 releases have been for ages. That's always been a flaw that the more rabid MacFanbois like to hide; the smart folks wait until the .1 bugfix release is out before upgrading, and I expect 10.9.1 will be decent.
  I remember when they released Snow Leopard (10.6) and a new XCode with it and broke CoreData with a weird bug that would delete all data in a persistent store document under some fairly common use case that erroneously saved an empty file if you hadn't changed the data in the document but saved it anyway. I lost like a third of the data in my thesis to that bug (I'd written my own app for handling the data). I swore never to upgrade until the .1 release on any new generation of the OS again and I'd learned what the new bugs were. But here I am with 10.9 anyway, killing iTunes manually.
10. Re: Apple Build Quality by Skuld-Chan · 2013-10-26 14:51 · Score: 2
  
  How long has imap been around now? The RFC was last updated in 2003 - thats only 10 years to get it right.
11. Re:Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 15:25 · Score: 0
  
  It just works.
12. Re: Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 16:30 · Score: 0
  
  Shut the fuck up, you cum drenched whore. Are you happy now?
  Finally!
13. Re: Apple Build Quality by Jeremi · 2013-10-26 17:40 · Score: 1
  
  When an entire country's population relies upon your tech to even stay alive, you make sure your shit works. [...] What's their fucking excuse?
  Nobody relies on Mac Mail to even stay alive?
  
  --
  
  I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
14. Re: Apple Build Quality by Bronster · 2013-10-26 18:42 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, there are plenty of new RFCs coming out all the time. The most interesting bugs in mail clients tend to be trying to support new RFCs and not getting it right.
15. Re: Apple Build Quality by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 19:34 · Score: 0
  
  Flawless software exists. NASA can do it, as have several private companies. It's just that people overestimate the benefit, and underestimate the cost, of flawless software.
  We don't need flawless software. If the marginal cost of excising the last few bugs in a program cost $1 billion, but the social benefit is only $10 million in prospective damage reduction, then it wasn't worth it.
16. Re: Apple Build Quality by Splab · 2013-10-26 20:39 · Score: 1
  
  I can beat that, whenever someone sends me a mail containing a PDF, it will crash, not only the mail client, but take down the userspace with it.
17. Re:Apple Build Quality by behrooz0az · 2013-10-26 21:44 · Score: 0
  
  Your'e confusing apple with apache.
  
  --
  Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
18. Re:Apple Build Quality by behrooz0az · 2013-10-26 21:48 · Score: 0
  
  on second thought, apache says "it works".
  
  --
  Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion. -- Spazmania (174582)
19. Re: Apple Build Quality by AmiMoJo · 2013-10-26 21:54 · Score: 2
  
  10 PRINT "HELLO WORLD" 20 GOTO 10
  Flawless.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
20. Re: Apple Build Quality by Rakishi · 2013-10-26 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, Apple is *gasp* a company and is driven by profits. When something makes up over 80% of your revenue (and increasing) you focus on that and not the remaining (and shrinking) slice.
  
  Apple's focus on iOS and cute little phone apps has, for whatever reasons
  Because that's actually making them money.
  
  caused defect rates in their core desktop code to serious balloon.
  
  Macs and OS X are Apple's side business, they haven't been core for a long long time.
21. Re: Apple Build Quality by BitZtream · 2013-10-27 00:52 · Score: 1
  
  Doesn't meet the design requirements.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
22. Re: Apple Build Quality by BitZtream · 2013-10-27 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  Then you probably have a corrupted mail database. I've experienced the same thing, fortunately, its IMAP so wiping out the mail configuration and recreating it was fairly painless and the problem went away. I've assumed thats due to the fact that I use the beta versions, which of course have bugs.
  
  --
  Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
23. Re: Apple Build Quality by quacking+duck · 2013-10-27 03:03 · Score: 1
  
  Congrats! You managed to get stuck in an infinite loop in a self-contained system just two simple lines, instead of the dozens it took for Apple to do it in Mail against a remote server's junkmail system.
24. Re: Apple Build Quality by hobarrera · 2013-10-27 03:44 · Score: 1
  
  It's perfect. No unfreed memory. Since it's not a function call, there's no stack that can fill up. I can't think of ANY way to improve this!
25. Re: Apple Build Quality by EvanED · 2013-10-27 09:30 · Score: 2
  
  Flawless software exists. NASA can do it...
  But not always, even when they try. The LEM had a couple of bugs that made the Apollo 11 landing even more dicey than it would have otherwise been. Mars Pathfinder had a priority inversion bug that caused software resets. And of course the Mars Climate Observer was lost because of its famous metric vs imperial unit mixup.
  And those are just the ones that I know about.
26. Re: Apple Build Quality by Khyber · 2013-10-27 14:59 · Score: 1
  
  "If you think the 'stuff that ships with my food production systems is FLAWLESS' you are an idiot who doesn't understand the way the world works."
  No, you're an idiot that doesn't understand how my system works. But that's okay, it's pretty much above your level in the first place because it all happens in pure hardware logic.
  
  --
  Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
27. Re: Apple Build Quality by coinreturn · 2013-10-28 00:38 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, because this one incident that got reported to slashdot and made the front page for some reason ...
  Reason: Apple haters cruise the firehose and up-vote anything that makes Apple look bad.
28. Re: Apple Build Quality by dwightk · 2013-10-28 00:41 · Score: 1
  
  your budget is less than $500?
  
  --
  Like anyone can even know that
29. Re: Apple Build Quality by Shirley+Marquez · 2013-10-28 01:46 · Score: 1
  
  But Macs and OS X are essential to Apple's core business because they are the development tool for iOS apps.
30. Re: Apple Build Quality by BasilBrush · 2013-10-28 07:49 · Score: 1
  
  You'd better believe the stuff that ships with my food production systems is FLAWLESS.
  I don't believe it for a moment. Send it to me and I'd certainly find flaws in it.
  I believe you have a big ego though.
31. Re: Apple Build Quality by mattack2 · 2013-10-28 07:51 · Score: 2
  
  Definitely write a bug report at bugreport.apple.com with relevant crash logs in ~/Library/Logs/DiagnosticReports and /Library/Logs/DiagnosticReports.
32. Re: Apple Build Quality by mattack2 · 2013-10-28 07:54 · Score: 2
  
  So you wrote a bug right?
  bugreport.apple.com
33. Re: Apple Build Quality by BasilBrush · 2013-10-28 07:55 · Score: 1
  
  It's certainly not flawless. It's major flaw is that it lacks a way to finish it, and thus requires external termination, every time.
  Yes that's right. A 2 line program that you don't think has a flaw does indeed have one. That's how much of a truism the meme "All software has flaws" is.
  If you reduced the line count by 50%, it'd remove that flaw. But it would have no worthwhile functionality.
34. Re: Apple Build Quality by BasilBrush · 2013-10-28 07:59 · Score: 1
  
  How do you quit it, without externally killing it?
  It's actually the classic illustration of a fundamental flaw. The infinite loop. The loop with no way out.
  So no it's certainly not perfect. It's actually a demo of a bug.
35. Re: Apple Build Quality by Curate · 2013-10-28 10:44 · Score: 1
  
  You can't call it a bug unless you know what the design intends. What if this program is supposed to continually print "Hello world" over and over forever? Then it is working as intended, by design.
36. Re: Apple Build Quality by hobarrera · 2013-10-28 13:38 · Score: 1
  
  Why would you want to exit if it's flawless?
  Also, plenty of things are unstoppable withough killing them, notably, many deamons.
37. Re: Apple Build Quality by AmiMoJo · 2013-10-29 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  You are assuming it needs to finish. Infinite loops are common in embedded and control systems. They run until they are decommissioned and powered off. Stopping might be considered a bug, e.g. there should be no way to disable or stop the safety monitoring process in an industrial control system.
  Software can be mathematically perfect, just not complex software written by human beings.
  
  --
  const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
  SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
38. Re: Apple Build Quality by BasilBrush · 2013-10-29 05:44 · Score: 1
  
  You can't call it a bug unless you know what the design intends.
  Then neither can you claim it's flawless. Either way it's an assumption.
39. Re: Apple Build Quality by BasilBrush · 2013-10-29 05:48 · Score: 1
  
  deamons create their own thread. Or have one created for them. This program blocks the launching thread (the thread running the BASIC CLI).
  Nor does it do anything useful with the loop. Once there is a screen full of "Hello World", all the loop does is cause flicker.
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:19 · Score: 0

Nobody is advocating an approach to fighting spam here.
Re:You are a fucking wanker. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:19 · Score: 0

Cool troll.
http://i.imgur.com/KOoBDaK.gif
One infinity drive. by MRe_nl · 2013-10-26 11:22 · Score: 4, Funny

Not just an address anymore.

--
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
1. Re:One infinity drive. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:48 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  If you're making a joke about the address of Apple's corporate HQ, you got it wrong:
  1 INFINITE LOOP
  CUPERTINO CA 95014-2083
2. Re:One infinity drive. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 12:00 · Score: 0
  
  Be gentle, this is their first attempt at the Big Data.
3. Re:One infinity drive. by ArcadeMan · 2013-10-26 12:02 · Score: 2
  
  Maybe he just needs to drink a cup of very hot tea.
  
  --
  Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
4. Re:One infinity drive. by MRe_nl · 2013-10-26 13:38 · Score: 1
  
  "You can never get a cup of tea large enough or a book long enough to suit me." - C.S. Lewis
  http://www.booksatoz.com/witsend/tea/orwell.htm
  
  --
  "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
5. Re:One infinity drive. by H0p313ss · 2013-10-26 15:36 · Score: 1
  
  Maybe he just needs to drink a cup of very hot tea.
  And something to stick in it.
  
  --
  XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
6. Re:One infinity drive. by styrotech · 2013-10-26 16:14 · Score: 1
  
  Improbable.
7. Re:One infinity drive. by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 17:57 · Score: 0
  
  Only until the inifinigon is built.
All hail Apple's new storage technology! by chrism238 · 2013-10-26 11:24 · Score: 2, Funny

"The actual emails added up to about 2MB of actual disk usage," So the 1,2, or 3 million emails occupied just 2MB of storage? Wow, Apple should be widely lauded for being able to store each email, including its header, in just one byte!
1. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:34 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  From the summary: "The actual emails added up to about 2MB of actual disk usage, but the bug generated an additional 2GB of data on top of that." Which I assume means that it was really only 2MB of emails, but the duplication (ie millions of emails) used up 2GB.
2. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by tftp · 2013-10-26 11:38 · Score: 2
  
  Wow, Apple should be widely lauded for being able to store each email, including its header, in just one byte!
  Even that is awfully wasteful. To store spam wisely you use a counter. If the size of the counter is 64 bits, each individual spam message occupies 64/2^64 bits, or 3.5e-18 bits.
  Naturally, all spam will look alike to you, but doesn't it already?
3. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by arkhan_jg · 2013-10-26 12:09 · Score: 1
  
  They de-dupe disk storage, so 2 million copies of 71 emails take up no more room than the original 71. The index metafile *about* those duplicate messages, on the other hand...
  
  --
  Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
4. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 12:45 · Score: 0
  
  It is right in the summary you just quoted. I guess you skipped a line or two and only read what you copy-pasted:
  
  It then expunges the old copies of the messages
5. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by Bronster · 2013-10-26 13:03 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  We de-duplicate on COPY, so there was only one copy of each email on disk. We don't de-dulplicate metadata though, because it's usually so small, and generally in the cache file of a different folder, where de-duplication isn't possible.
6. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by Bongo · 2013-10-26 13:53 · Score: 1
  
  i've noticed weirdness when moving messages between mailboxes. drag and drop to move, then later i notice it is still there. gmail account.
7. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by maccodemonkey · 2013-10-26 15:18 · Score: 1
  
  "The actual emails added up to about 2MB of actual disk usage,"
  So the 1,2, or 3 million emails occupied just 2MB of storage?
  Wow, Apple should be widely lauded for being able to store each email, including its header, in just one byte!
  It's 71 messages. The 1, 2, 3 million being mentioned is the UID being incremented, not more space being eaten.
8. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by immaterial · 2013-10-26 15:19 · Score: 2
  
  This is one of the bugs I reported months ago that got marked 'closed.' :/
  
  Enable the "all mail" folder to be visible in IMAP, and remove [Gmail] as your IMAP path prefix. That fixed it for me.
9. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by frisket · 2013-10-27 00:56 · Score: 1
  
  Wow, Apple should be widely lauded for being able to store each email, including its header, in just one byte!
  Even that is awfully wasteful. To store spam wisely you use a counter.
  Store spam? I recommend a 1-bit counter set to zero.
10. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by hobarrera · 2013-10-27 03:45 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, there is no COPY in this scenario; Mail.App sends a command to save a new message to the server, with the same content as the other one.
11. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by Bronster · 2013-10-27 16:06 · Score: 3, Informative
  
  Sorry, I'm not quite sure where you're getting your information about what Mail.App does. I'm getting mine from the server telemetry logs where the client first identifies itself as:
  "name" "Mac OS X Mail" "version" "7.0 (1816)"
  And then proceeds to issue a COPY command:
  UID COPY 3360991:3361069 "INBOX.Junk Mail"
  See the "COPY" in there. I am the author of the blog post, and I think my credentials in this particular case trump yours, even if you're the author of Mail.App.
12. Re:All hail Apple's new storage technology! by Bongo · 2013-10-28 19:12 · Score: 1
  
  Thanks
Buggiest Mail by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 11:25 · Score: 0

This version of mail has numerous glitches. The support for Gmail is totally ruined, and it also ends up using more resources than the previous version.
Should have thought twice before upgrading!
1. Re:Buggiest Mail by 93+Escort+Wagon · 2013-10-26 11:38 · Score: 2
  
  Actually part of the problem is they made Mail.app work better with Gmail, but all the hacks that used to be necessary really screw things up. Apple should've posted a FAQ about the changes rather than quietly make them.
  One big change... you need to enable "All Mail" in IMAP now, since the latest Mail.app wants that as the Archive folder (which makes sense). But everyone has it disabled in IMAP since, up until now, it was problematic to do otherwise.
  I found https://tidbits.com/article/14219 to be helpful.
  
  --
  #DeleteChrome
2. Re:Buggiest Mail by arkhan_jg · 2013-10-26 12:21 · Score: 2
  
  Even enabling All Mail doesn't do the trick - from that tidbits article: (which has been doing the rounds quite a bit)
  That is, I can read, move, delete, reply to, or otherwise operate on messages in my Inbox on the Gmail Web site, on my iPhone or iPad, or in another IMAP client, and they all sync up perfectly with each other — but even after several hours, my Inbox in the Mavericks version of Mail doesn’t reflect those changes. It seems not to matter how frequently I tell Mail to check for new messages. I also tried quitting and restarting Mail, rebuilding the Inbox, and forcing a synchronization — several times — but my Inbox stubbornly refused to reflect reality. Occasionally I’ll glance at Mail after having ignored it for hours and notice that the Inbox is closer to being up to date than it used to be, but I can’t figure out when, why, or how this happens. This is the behavior that makes me truly crazy — if I have to keep Gmail open in a Web browser to make sure I’m getting all my messages, I might as well not be running Mail at all.
  My boss is a) an Apple fan, and b) a Mail fan. I've had to instruct him and a couple of other senior management not to go to Mavericks for the time being. Because we use Google Apps, and having mail notifications delayed for hours is going to be a problem. Switching to a decent email client would of course solve the problem, but he loves Mail to death, and he'd rather switch the whole company to another mail provider than give it up (seriously - he suggested it because of this). Not that having Mail cause problems is anything new; my personal favourite is the way Mail does embedded attachments, causing most other mail clients to struggle to handle his messages - usually, they end up with half an email, the attachment, and a second (and sometimes 3rd and 4th) set of attachments with the rest of the email message piecemeal. And then he complains that people can't read his bloody mail.
  Showing that it's not just Gmail getting f***** up the IMAP by Maverick Mail will be quite useful to argue the real problem, as usual, is Mail.
  
  --
  Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
3. Re:Buggiest Mail by immaterial · 2013-10-26 12:33 · Score: 1
  
  If you're using [Gmail] as the IMAP path prefix, try getting rid of that, too. That solved all my problems.
4. Re:Buggiest Mail by real+gumby · 2013-10-26 13:10 · Score: 1
  
  Not to comment on the rest of of your note (I don't use GMail so have no idea what its support is like, on either end) but on your other complaint I have a hard time agreeing:
  
  Not that having Mail cause problems is anything new; my personal favourite is the way Mail does embedded attachments, causing most other mail clients to struggle to handle his messages - usually, they end up with half an email, the attachment, and a second (and sometimes 3rd and 4th) set of attachments with the rest of the email message piecemeal. And then he complains that people can't read his bloody mail.
  I have seen this but the garble I've experienced has only been with users with Outlook. (There may be other clients with problems reading them -- I don't know.) I've looked at those Apple Mail.app-generated messages and they appear to me to be completely RFC compliant. Very strictly so.
  Now Apple Mail may or may not suck, but in this case they appear to me to be blameless.
Gave up on Mail.app years ago by kwerle · 2013-10-26 11:35 · Score: 1

Seems like Mail.app has been getting worse since about 2003. I finally gave up on it about 5 years ago - in favor of gmail's web interface. At first I was a little disgusted with myself - but I've never regretted it.
I still use mail on my iOS devices, though. Have not yet seen a better UI for those.
1. Re:Gave up on Mail.app years ago by ryanw · 2013-10-26 11:59 · Score: 1
  
  Seems like Mail.app has been getting worse since about 2003. I finally gave up on it about 5 years ago - in favor of gmail's web interface. At first I was a little disgusted with myself - but I've never regretted it.
  I still use mail on my iOS devices, though. Have not yet seen a better UI for those.
  I agree. I find myself using too many machines, in too many places to really care about a desktop version of the mail program, especially now that my mail storage is using about 15GB of data. The only "mail app" I use is the built in app on my iPhone, otherwise all web portals for me.
2. Re: Gave up on Mail.app years ago by laffer1 · 2013-10-26 12:07 · Score: 1
  
  I use mail on iOS and google gmail client for work mail. Both are decent but I think gmail is slightly better. You should try it. I don't actually like Gmail all that much but the iOS app is good.
  As for desktop, mail.app is buggy but not as bad as trying to use thunderbird. All mail clients suck
  
  --
  MidnightBSD: The BSD for Everyone
3. Re:Gave up on Mail.app years ago by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 18:03 · Score: 0
  
  I was in the same boat until my workplace switched over to outlook. The outlook web client is quite possibly the worst mail client I've ever used. The desktop version of Outlook for Mac would lose its ActiveSync connection after about 5 minutes and I'd stop getting mail until I quit and restarted it. So, in desperation, I've switched back to Mail.app and it's actually not as bad as I would have feared. It doesn't work well with Gmail, though, since Gmail's tags are somewhat different than IMAP folders, but I put that mostly on Google trying to pretend that what they have is IMAP compatible.
  All that said, I miss the Gmail web interface.
4. Re:Gave up on Mail.app years ago by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 19:39 · Score: 0
  
  I use the gmail notifier, it sits in my menu bar and notifies me of new gmail messages, and integrates the gmail web-app into the system as the default mail program. Its quite handy to click an e-mail link or address in a program and have a web browser pop up, logged into gmail and show me the appropriate compose message screen.
But I thought it just worked! by AuMatar · 2013-10-26 11:36 · Score: 1, Troll

Apple can't have bugs like this- it just works. Maybe they're sending it wrong?

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Whar is wrong with programmers? by cpotoso · 2013-10-26 11:53 · Score: 2, Insightful

I mean, it is a MAIL program, not a revolutionary new product. The protocols have been out there for years (esp. IMAP). Why is it still buggy? Even worse: why is it buggier than the previous version? If it worked before THERE IS NO F*ING EXCUSE FOR IT NOT TO WORK NOW. Very very very lame.
1. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by ryanw · 2013-10-26 12:04 · Score: 1
  
  I mean, it is a MAIL program, not a revolutionary new product. The protocols have been out there for years (esp. IMAP). Why is it still buggy? Even worse: why is it buggier than the previous version? If it worked before THERE IS NO F*ING EXCUSE FOR IT NOT TO WORK NOW. Very very very lame.
  I would imagine they have uplifted the app and re-written a large portion of the application to work with new interfaces like outlook or whatever. Also perhaps they're trying to do something new with spam in specific to help reduce spam as a whole when using various services. This is a bad bug, and could cause a lot of problems for service providers if it's legitimate and not a "single case", but bugs happen. I'm surprised nobody caught it with the beta versions. Apple has been surprisingly good lately about getting developers the beta versions of the OS before the release. Due to the intense secrecy of apple, in the past, developers didn't get access to the later versions of OSX until the same time as the consumers. This used to be a nightmare when dealing with professional software and drivers for anything beyond what came with the mac.
2. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 12:25 · Score: 0
  
  I mean, it is a MAIL program, not a revolutionary new product.
  
  It IS revolutionary. It is not just a new version of an existing product, it is a new version of an existing APPLE product.
3. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by immaterial · 2013-10-26 12:44 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  I filed some bugs on Mavericks' Mail right after the first developer preview came out (all ended up being marked as duplicates, so others were having the same issue). All were closed the week before the GM was released. And all are still present in the GM; they're MailGmail specific. However, enabling "All Mail" and removing [Gmail] from my IMAP path prefix made everything work.
  
  Clearly, whoever rewrote Mail to "better" support Gmail decided that as long as it worked okay with just the right settings, any deviation from that wasn't a bug but just user error. Despite the fact that those settings were both perfectly valid and *incredibly* common.
  
  I think moving OS X to a yearly release schedule results in them pushing things out too fast. It's bad enough with iOS, and OS X is a more complex beast.
4. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by dbIII · 2013-10-26 13:08 · Score: 2
  
  Whar is wrong with programmers?
  There's a long list of answers to that - but the real question here is what is wrong with the testers that let something stupid from a rookie or slapdash programmer out into the wild. The answer to that is probably that they are at home looking though the job ads because proper testing was not considered important enough.
  Email problems are fun when they happen to somebody else because of how much they can snowball into ridiculously huge numbers of messages. I've worked with an idiot that decided he wanted to get an email notification every time there was a problem with a mail server - you get one guess as to how the thing ran out of disk, memory, crashed and why he's not allowed on production systems any more. That's right, every error message generated a few more.
5. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by gl4ss · 2013-10-26 18:07 · Score: 1
  
  ..what? it works fine with "vanilla" settings but not on their specific hacks??
  
  --
  world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
6. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by immaterial · 2013-10-26 20:06 · Score: 1
  
  Whose hacks? (What hacks?) I'm not clear on what you're asking.
7. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 23:56 · Score: 0
  
  How dare you?
  All Apple things are not only revolutionary, but actually magical!!
8. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by Bogtha · 2013-10-27 02:52 · Score: 1
  
  Compare it to writing a book and making a grammatical error. The rules of grammar are nothing new, people have been writing books for centuries, and there are even tools that can automatically check a lot of it for you. How on earth could anybody publish a book with a grammatical error!? THERE IS NO FUCKING EXCUSE FOR IT!
  A bug like this is the equivalent of a grammatical error when writing a book. The simple fact of the matter is when you've got humans writing millions of lines of code, some of them are going to make mistakes, and some of those mistakes are going to end up in the final product, even assuming the best intentions from everybody involved. NASA puts more work into writing bug-free code than any other organisation, they make it their highest priority and even they can't write bug-free code. Software development is intrinsically flawed when it comes to bugs because people aren't infallible.
  
  --
  Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
9. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by cpotoso · 2013-10-27 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  The comparison is absolutely nonsense. When you write a book you almost always start from scratch, so yes... errors can creep in on book 10^9 at the same rate as on book 10^0. When you write code that is an update to an old software, you re-use a lot of the old code. So, there is no excuse for that.
10. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by Bogtha · 2013-10-28 00:26 · Score: 1
  
  When you write a book you almost always start from scratch
  
  It's incredibly common to update a book. Haven't you ever heard of different editions?
  
  When you write code that is an update to an old software, you re-use a lot of the old code.
  
  Yes, and then you make changes to it. By definition, that's what updating software is. Those changes can introduce new problems, just as rewriting a chapter of a book can introduce grammatical errors.
  
  So, there is no excuse for that.
  
  You are literally demanding perfection. Exactly how many professions are there where people don't make mistakes?
  
  --
  Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
11. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by cpotoso · 2013-10-28 01:15 · Score: 1
  
  You are literally demanding perfection. Exactly how many professions are there where people don't make mistakes?
  Well... programmers seems to be among the worst...
12. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-28 01:38 · Score: 0
  
  I mean, it is a MAIL program, not a revolutionary new product. The protocols have been out there for years (esp. IMAP). Why is it still buggy? Even worse: why is it buggier than the previous version?
  Mail clients have to work with Microsoft's Exchange/Outlook evolving pseudo-standards (which are, arguably, fundamentally incompatible with real email) as well as with Google's incomplete IMAP implementation and of course whatever shiny Apple is shipping.
  This is because end-users and managers insist that these products must be used, no matter how broken they are, so you have to interoperate with them. And Outlook, in particular, has always been broken. Mail addresses are supposed to be separated by commas, not semicolons (as per 30 year old standards) and addresses are not supposed to be munged by the client by default, hell, you could go on about the way outlook trains end-users to be less competent for hours.
  Mail client programmers are stuck between their intolerant users and the big three 900-lb gorillas of the Internet, and it's actually pretty damn hard to satisfy both.
13. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by konohitowa · 2013-10-28 03:32 · Score: 1
  
  There was a time when the posters here knew the answer to that question because they were actually programmers.
14. Re:Whar is wrong with programmers? by mattack2 · 2013-10-28 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  If the bugs were called duplicates, and the bugs are still open.. then clearly they weren't duplicates.
  PLEASE write new bugs, with enough detail about the settings necessary, at bugreport.apple.com.
  (I've been writing up VLC bugs for example, even though *they* close the bugs on us, and don't let the originator close the bug.. I wish all companies had public ways to officially file bugs, even though yes, products should have many many many fewer bugs when released. Zero is unfortunately probably impossible.)
I'm sure by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 12:06 · Score: 0

Apple's response will be their usual, "Our shit doesn't stink".
what did you expect by LodCrappo · 2013-10-26 13:40 · Score: 1, Flamebait

This is the company that can't correctly implement daylight savings time in an alarm application. You expect them to handle something as complex as implementing an ages old industry standard correctly?
Apple is known for selling lots of shiny bobbles, not for writing solid code.

--
-Lod
Vicious cycle of bugs by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 13:50 · Score: 0

I'm seriously considering switching back to Windows just for some stability in my computing life. I know Windows 8 is crap, but I don't care- because I know Windows 7 will probably be supported in some fashion for the next 10 years.
Ever since Apple switched to this yearly release cycle bullshit, things have gone steadily downhill. Features are almost never completed and only half baked, and you're lucky if they bother fixing any of it with the minor updates. More often then not you have to wait for the next major point release (ugh), which may or may not fix your issue and will probably introduce a dozen other stupid bugs that should have never gotten past Q/A.
Since Apple doesn't do backwards compatibility anymore, you're basically forced into the current version of the OS, which means you're forced into this never ending loop of bugs and crappy release cycles. It's a bit of a software nightmare, actually- especially if all you want is a reliable tool that is there for you that you can depend on NOT changing unless you want to change it.
Nothing new by Taantric · 2013-10-26 13:56 · Score: 1, Troll

Apple has always been better at marketing than software engineering. The iSheep hipsters don't care. It's more important to be seen at the coffee shop using a Macbook than actual productivity.
iMail has a history of infinate recursion by maas15 · 2013-10-26 14:14 · Score: 4, Interesting

This isn't the first infinate recursion iMail bug. Around five years ago I worked for a webhost at which we had customers complaining about there being nothing in their INBOX. When we checked, we'd find a giant tree of INBOX folders - for some reason iMail would create a new subirectory called INBOX every time it logged in, and then make the *new* INBOX folder the default INBOX. All the mail would still be delivered to the original inbox...
1. Re:iMail has a history of infinate recursion by halexists · 2013-10-26 14:35 · Score: 1
  
  And by iMail I assume you mean the program called "Mail" that ships with Mac OS X?
2. Re:iMail has a history of infinate recursion by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 16:49 · Score: 0
  
  TFA actually mentioned the "INBOX.INBOX.INBOX.INBOX.INBOX.INBOX" problem. Apparently they now block attempts to create additional INBOXes.
  dom
3. Re:iMail has a history of infinate recursion by frisket · 2013-10-27 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  Huh? Instead of fixing the original bug, they added a post-op trap to defeat it? Way to go, Apple.
4. Re:iMail has a history of infinate recursion by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 13:15 · Score: 0
  
  Try reading TFA so you don't sound like such an idiot.
5. Re:iMail has a history of infinate recursion by maas15 · 2013-10-28 04:51 · Score: 1
  
  Mac Mail, iMail, something like that... :)
6. Re:iMail has a history of infinate recursion by mattack2 · 2013-10-28 08:00 · Score: 1
  
  Neither of those is the correct name. There is an app called "Mail.app" (with the extension) in OS X (previously known as Mac OS X).
As someone once said... by feranick · 2013-10-26 15:29 · Score: 4, Funny

... it's not a bug. You're holding it wrong.
1. Re:As someone once said... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 02:53 · Score: 0
  
  Seriously, Flamebait? Don't readers have the sense of humor? (and that BTW, was a quote from Jobs himself).
No more mail apps from Apple by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 15:56 · Score: 0

Seriously, how many times are people going to let Apple drop the ball and release a crappy e-mail client. Over-looping and high server utilization are the hallmarks of every other OSX or iOS Mail app version. Wasn't it earlier this year that iOS was knocking Exchange servers offline. Take a look at an Exchange or other e-mail server log file and compare per client entries for iOS / OSX (any version) versus any other client software. It's around 10:1 in access entries.
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by Paradise+Pete · 2013-10-26 16:35 · Score: 0

Low ID's don't mean anything any more. They're obviously selling them or giving them to "friends" now.
Damn. If I knew they were worth money I'd have signed up sooner. And more often.
It's a defense against the NSA by dutchwhizzman · 2013-10-26 18:35 · Score: 4, Funny

By generating so much metadata, the NSA will overflow and your real messages' metadata will be overwritten!!!1!.

--
I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by trackedvehicle · 2013-10-26 19:03 · Score: 0

Lame.
Tell that Google by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 19:24 · Score: 0

Gmail isn't IMAP, it emulates IMAP, badly. And there are true IMAP servers out there that aren't much better. IMAP is a complex protocol and many details aren't really cast in stone.
Believe it or not, but Mail.app is actually one of the better clients out there.
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-26 21:27 · Score: 1

Well, if you're interested, I'm looking to sell mine. Mind you, as you can see in this post's header, my ID is so low, it's not even listed. Wrap your head around that one: It's so low, it does not need numbers!
Of course, I've been posting regularly here on /. (almost on every article ever, in fact - usually multiple times). So, in order to protect my reputation, if we can agree upon a price, I will have to reset my karma so that you don't get that benefit.
If that's acceptable to you, then please contact me. I'll leave no contact details - as a long-time poster here, I'm one of those arrogant folks who feel that if you don't have the skills to find me, you don't get to buy my account.
Good luck,
A.C.
Blame Google. by bensyverson · 2013-10-27 01:00 · Score: 2

Gmail uses a highly non-standard implementation of IMAP, which never worked quite right in the previous versions of Mail.app. Mail is expecting a more or less standards-compliant IMAP server. Well, people complained, so Apple modified Mail.app to special case Gmail. Unfortunately the fix looks a bit buggy at the moment.
Good job Oracle by Murdoch5 · 2013-10-27 02:01 · Score: 1

What I mean by that is they called Open Source software the issue! Another proprietary bug in plan sight, maybe Oracle should recant what they said.
1. Re:Good job Oracle by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 09:44 · Score: 0
  
  Well maybe if there were any decent open source mail clients people would use them instead of proprietary ones.
Well, obviously, if your Apple joke fails... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 04:27 · Score: 0

You're telling it wrong!
PS: It was funny for first thousand times or so. You're late to the party.
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 10:32 · Score: 0

buying seemed like too much work, so I just took it instead. Thanks! Don't worry, I don't need exclusivity ;)
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 10:32 · Score: 0

AC has UID of 666.
windows 8 keys online store by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-27 20:34 · Score: 0

windows 8 anytime upgrade key for home basic , activation key for mcafee antivirus plus, windows 7 product key sale , product key windows 7 professional 64 bit free , windows 7 product keys , windows 7 profeessional key , windows 7 license keys, window 7 professionalupgrade key free
win 7 home premium key sale
win 8 professional key sale
win 8 anytime upgrade key sale
iOS 7 does suck, but give 10.9 a go by Anonymous Coward · 2013-10-28 08:41 · Score: 0

I would avoid iWorks altogether. Believe it or not, I embrace the Microsoft solution here. Office 2011 for Mac works wonders and has Outlook, so fuck the Mail app.
As for versioning and autosaving, kill 'em.
What I like about 10.9 are the tabs in finder (multiple windows can still be used alongside) and the iBooks app. Over the years I had bought a number of books for my iPhone, but never bothered to read them. Now I find I am.
Re:Blunders Ahoy! by rot26 · 2013-10-28 09:57 · Score: 1

The truth hurts, newbie?

--

To ensure perfect aim, shoot first and call whatever you hit the target