PostBox (Windows/MAC Email Client - Forked from Thunderbird) - $4.95 (Used to be $19.95).

Related Stores

Postbox

• 

  mickeyjuiceman on 10/07/2012 - 18:53

  Great value, I've been using it for months.

• 

  [Deactivated] on 10/07/2012 - 19:05

  +2

  So they have just taken product that is Open Source, made a few enhancements, and then sold it on.

  Do they contribute anything back to the Thunderbird product that has given them their code base? No.
  Are they volunteering to help manage Thunderbird as an open source project? No.
  Will Thunderbird just live on as a community project with all the add-ons that you know and love (including all the same functionality as this product) without the help from Mozilla or Postbox? Yes.

  I will neg this not because I don't think the enhancements are not worthy, not because I don't think that they deserve money for their work, or think that all software should be free and open source, but because the vast majority of the codebase was lifted from an open source project and they are not giving anything back in return.

  • 

    slowmo on 10/07/2012 - 19:09

    +1

    up next, a product "netbrowser" codebase from firefox, selling at $5.99. :P

  • 

    mickeyjuiceman on 10/07/2012 - 19:13

    -2

    So have you ever used it?

  • 

    Moderator[Deactivated] on 10/07/2012 - 22:11

    TLOS

    Admirable words and well pointed out opinion.

    But not a valid negative vote.

    Like I point out to others voting a deal down hides the deal AND your opinion. So rather than have people see the issues you raise about the morality of the product you are also editing your comments. Sorta like cutting off your nose etc.

    Comment like you have, but leave the neg vote for what its meant to be.

    Plus more can see your point of view and decide for themselves.

    Vote Revoked

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 10/07/2012 - 23:24

    +1

    I also want to point out that if you look at their blog, they are being very underhanded by suggesting that Thunderbird is no longer, and out of their own generosity, they are offering their product on 'sale' (their words: "Almost free") as to 'help' people who are 'stranded' with Thunderbird.

    A real moneygrab, playing a classic FUD tactic.

    What a way to show appreciation for the project you took most of your code from.

    It would be like selling people your new drink "New Cola" (Which is made from Coca-Cola with a slice of lemon added in) while telling everyone how terrible Coca-cola is, that it's not going to be around much longer, your drink is even better, and as a goodwill gesture, you will sell "New Cola" at 5x the price instead of 10x the price of Coca-Cola to help them get used to the difference.

    • 

      mickeyjuiceman on 11/07/2012 - 05:10

      -1

      The question remains: have you ever used it? Or are you just doing a JV?

    • 

      Moderator[Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 07:58

      Point it out all you like, and I am not saying you are wrong. Just dont misuse the negative vote.

      As I pointed out, it just hides your own point of view, which I understand you are quite passionate about, so why do that.

      Now to retrospectively make another point which you didn't cover when you made the negative vote (or at least before it was removed) isn't going to change things. Your original point was based mainly on "ripping" off an open source product.

      Now on negative vote.

      Its not meant to be an indicator of popularity. That occurs when people dont vote for a deal. Great deals dont get a couple of votes they are in the hundreds.

      The negative votes tell you is not a good DEAL, and as such it is to be hidden from general view, the board moderating spam when a moderator isnt around.

      We saw enough of that bull with the Android/Apple Fanboys where they were sabotaging deals for the opposite platform based on personal dislikes.

      Its a great tool, but misused sends out the wrong message AND it undermines its power as people will ignore its warning if its not properly used.

      Thats all I am saying to you.

      • 

        [Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 10:05

        I do not dispute your moderation Pete, there is no issue with it, just making further comment without any relation to votes.

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 09:20

    What a bunch of rubbish. Do you believe the same for Apple? Did you know most of Mac OS X's backend code is taken from Open-source projects like BSD, Unix and Linux? Do you boycott Apple Products too?

    Postbox is much better than Thunderbird will ever be. Thunderbird is trash and Mozilla rarely ever releases new features for it. Although Firefox is great, Thunderbird is on the other end of the scale.

    • 

      retiredfeline on 11/07/2012 - 10:05

      OS/X cannot take Linux code because of incompatible licenses. They however can write their own implementations of ideas.

      • 

        [Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 10:26

        -1

        Please do a bit of research. There isn't only one form of GNU licenses. There are plenty of Linux distros out their that are sold (And no, the pay isn't for support)

      • 

        retiredfeline on 11/07/2012 - 11:06

        No you're are the one who need to do research. When you say OS/X you mean the kernel. The Linux kernel is is under the GPL and code from it cannot be adopted under a different license. Some people use a loose definition of OS here to include the programs that come with it, but this is not the definition I mean.

        Individual programs however may have other licenses and also aggregating these programs without mixing with non-GPL code under the distribution, e.g. the OS/X toolchain doesn't violate the license. That's why gcc, Apache and PHP are and can be distributed with OS/X.

        GPL has no restriction on whether money can be charged for the software. You can charge as much as you like, but because the source code is open, others can "undercut" you, so there is a limit to how much you can charge. So your bringing up the fact that some Linux distros are sold is neither here nor there re the issue of whether OS/X can copy Linux kernel code.

        And then we haven't talked about the LGPL, the license usually used for libraries.

      • 

        [Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 11:26

        I still don't get where you are trying to go with this. OS/X has code from Linux, UNIX and BSD. whether it be the kernel, dependancy, piece of software or whatever, they are doing exactly what Postbox is doing, using Open-source as a base to develop a better product.

        I still don't see your argument. And when did I say that you can change licenses? Each part of the OS has a separate license. Where are you getting at here? And how does defining how licenses work even help whatever argument you're trying to put forward, actually, I don't even know what you are trying to say. OS X has BSD code in it, how hard is that to understand?

        My conclusion is that you're trolling.

      • 

        retiredfeline on 11/07/2012 - 11:37

        I think you don't understand the GPL. You cannot take a part of the Linux kernel code and put it in the OS/X kernel. That's not allowed by the GPL, because it would require the rest of the OS/X kernel to be put under the GPL. OS/X certainly has BSD code, that's where it descended from, but you claimed that it took code from Linux.

        If you used a loose definition of OS/X to include the user space programs, then yes, it does have many programs that are also included in Linux distros. But as I said, my definition of OS/X is the kernel.

        This has nothing to do with Postbox. AFAICT what Postbox did is legal and I have no problems with that. I was simply responding to your assertion that OS/X has copied from Linux. They haven't and they can't.

        Don't accuse people of trolling just because you don't understand what they are writing to correct a misapprehension on your part. That's a cheap shot. I'm just pointing out a factual error in your claim that OS/X took Linux code. I have no argument re Postbox to push. I don't use Postbox so what people do with it is no concern of mine.

        This is getting off-topic for OzB, but if you are still unclear about the relationships between open software licenses, feel free to PM me.

  • 

    Tardvark on 11/07/2012 - 09:47

    While Thunderbird is free, it's not like they just do it out of the goodness of their own hearts. They're get like $100+ million in funding from places like Google. If someone was giving me hundreds of millions of dollars over the years, I could probably give away software for free too…

    • 

      retiredfeline on 11/07/2012 - 10:03

      That's not a very apt simile. It's like saying that if you got the same funding as say Vinnies, you would also run charity events, ignoring any question of motivation. Sure the core developers have regular jobs, and presumably they also enjoy what they do, but your comparison neglects the contributions of scores of people in the community who contribute patches and write add-ons.

      Anyway good luck to Postbox. AFAICT it's based on an old version of TB, there is very little community around it and TB add-ons won't work with it. On the other hand they appear to have integrated many features that would require add-ons.

• 

  maxixix on 10/07/2012 - 19:41

  Does it suffer like mac mail loosing yahoo password every now and then

• 

  jong on 10/07/2012 - 20:25

  +5

  Feels a bit odd, paying for it. It's like they've taken tens of thousands of hours of other people's work, added a bit of gloss to it, and then are charging $20 per copy - with none of it going back to the original authors.

  I'm not sure I want to encourage that kind of behaviour, no matter what the price.

  • 

    Moderator[Deactivated] on 10/07/2012 - 22:12

    Jong

    See comment to TLOS above as it applies here as well

    Vote revoked

• 

  qingyu on 10/07/2012 - 23:02

  +1

  selling something which already free (with free add-ons).
  really can't say bargain.

  • 

    [Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 01:10

    Yet we aren't allowed to give it a neg based upon that.

• 

  ozzie on 11/07/2012 - 05:47

  +1

  Just out of curiosity, I thought I'd go through the motions of appearing to purchase it…….I regret there is nowhere on the "BUY" page that allows the input of any "COUPON"…..the price is US$9.95.

  So how did you manage to acquire it for $4.95?? Something smells fishy!!!

  • 

    ESEMCE on 11/07/2012 - 08:45

    +1

    I found the coupon page, (Tried "paying" by Paypal) but the coupon doesn't work.
    "jupb1210 is not a valid coupon"
    Screenshot here
    https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B0aUz6NLmHP6TXp0cEFzWFBJVms

    I also partially support the sentiments of others above, although I agree that FOSS does not restrict the sale of addons or the sale of support services, in some ways it's kinda akin to Fedora, RedHat or SUSE Enterprise Editions of Linux.
    However, those vendors are not proclaiming the death of their Open Source codebase to help them sell licences.

    I think in the event that the coupon is non functional, neg votes must be valid.

    • 

      Moderator[Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 09:08

      I think the issue for many people, when we revoke a vote, is that they assume we as mods are pro the deal.

      This is unfortunate and unfair. We are just applying the standards under which we all work. That way there is no misunderstanding.

      If someone votes according to the guidelines the vote stays, unless of course the community votes down that vote. But that's not a moderation issue, its a community one.

      Now do sometimes mods get it wrong. Yes and we are willing to admit that.

      But this is why we want a negative vote explained. and why comments like "fail" etc aren't valid, as they don't explain why it failed.

      Your comment

      I think in the event that the coupon is non functional, neg votes must be valid.

      Is wrong, in that if you said

      I think in the event that the coupon is non functional, neg votes made on this basis would valid.

      You would be correct, and votes revoked above would have stood, and they can make other points as well. BTW even when the votes were revoked, the comments stood for everyone to read and assess their position on this deal.

      It is NOT for mods or the community to read into a negative vote an explanation which isnt there.

      Moderation means that as mods we have to detach ourselves from the deal, and our own personal beliefs on the issue. Even though often we might agree with the voters opinion.

      But problem is that some people believe is a personal thing and if we have moderated them in the past we have some preconceived bias towards that person.

      BTW if the code doesnt work, REPORT it to us and we will mark the deal as expired.

      • 

        ESEMCE on 11/07/2012 - 09:16

        +1

        I agree OzPete, that was the intention of my wording, although your version is much clearer!

        I haven't negged yet awaiting another confirmation that the coupon is indeed invalid (internet here at work is incredibly dodgy and has caused issues in the past).

      • 

        Moderator[Deactivated] on 11/07/2012 - 09:18

        Sorry I just added the last para as you were replying. Just send in a report if you determine the code doesnt work

        Thanks