Add-ons
Reviews for Signature Switch
273 reviews for this add-on
Rated 1 out of 5 stars
A great idea. Thanks Achim - But your response in the FAQs to people (like me) who would really like the ability to put a signature ABOVE the quote is a little disconcerting.
If this request is not technically possible this would be fine - but then please say so.
I think we need to keep Thunderbird flexible - otherwise people will migrate back to Outlook.
5 stars for the add-on minus 4 stars for inflexibility meaning that, like others, I can't use this add-on. Sorry.
@mgrey:
What's your problem? You act like I owe you (or the "community") something?!
I develop Mozilla-extensions in my (rare) spare-time... and give them away for free!
I explained in detail why I don't implement that feature (and you obviously have read that). Maybe you agree with it, and maybe you don't. Fine with me.
This is open-source development. You're free to modify things to your liking. But please don't imply that it's my job or duty to fulfill your wishes!
Five stars to you for making a review; minus four stars for just ranting around and being ungrateful.
Rated 1 out of 5 stars
It's useless for me as it's impossible to set up the position of signature if answering (I use signature above quote). Don't understand why it can't be done... Pity.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.6).Rated 4 out of 5 stars
first of all, let me tell you that I love this extension. I use it constantly to automatically switch signature flawlessly when I choose to switch a sending account. used to work perfect in the past, and it still does when composing HTML messages (well, it enters an extra carriage return when inserting the new signature, although I can live with that), but it has recently stopped working for plain-text messages: it just adds the account's signature at the bottom of the message, and if I choose to deactivate signature it only removes the last signature inserted. any ideas why this is happening? is it a TB3.1 issue, or could it be a SS1.6.6 problem?
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.6).Rated 3 out of 5 stars
This add-on would be perfect if it had the option to put the signature ABOVE the quote.
It's also a little buggy when trying to add images (ie. logos) into the signature.
Having said that, this is a very useful add-on despite the issues stated above.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
On 8 July 2010, the developer posted ver. 1.6.6 on his web site and I would expect that it will be available here soon. Said to fix the 3.1 compatibility issues. See Developer Comments above for URL.
Good news, as this extension provides essential functionality for those who use TB for business.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
using the (usb)portable version of thunderbird, is it possible to specify paths to sig files relative to the executable?
if so how?
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
I can confirm that: uninstalling TB 3.1, installing TB 3.05, setting up Signature Switch, installing TB 3.1 again works for me.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.6).Rated 4 out of 5 stars
Getting "chrome registration failed" errors attempting to install in TB 3.1. But on another 3.1 machine that had Sig Switch installed prior to 3.1 upgrade, it continues to work.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Confirming: It doesn't work with TB 3.1! Same symptoms here like Escuincle has it.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 4 out of 5 stars
Big fan of this app - if only it worked with Thunderbird 3.1! As noted, you can't find the icon in the 'customise tool bar' window.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Confirming: It doesn't work with TB 3.1! Same symptoms here like Escuincle has it.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 5 out of 5 stars
... confirming larry54's problem.
I can't use the add-on with TB 3.1 either. Klicking the options button in the add-on window freezes it up. The signature switch icon can't be added to the compose window toolbar because it doesn't show up in the "customize toolbar" window.
I'd be more than happy for any kind of fix/update/workaround.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
This wonderful add-on doesn't work with TB 3.1 :(. The options button in add-ons window just freezes up when you click on it and the toolbar button isn't present in the compose window.
Possible to update it?
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
It does what it is suppose to do ! Great Add-on
Thanks you Achim
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Beautiful, does what its supposed to do.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Excellent. You can add file signatures, such as HTML files. Does the work.
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 5 out of 5 stars
Signatures go at the bottom of the page. Headers go at the top of the page. If you want your stuff at the top of the page, then I'd suggest that you look for a header add on or find a stationery add on.
Please stop criticizing the developer of programs for writing a program that does EXACTLY what it's supposed to do. If your used to the the bug that was in Outlook causing it to put the signature improperly at the top then please use that instead.
If you want a larger font or a line break or any other formatting then learn to use HTML but stop complaining when you don't know how to use a program. It works just as advertised. You just need to learn how to use it if these are your complaints.
Read the authors FAQ if you don't understand something BEFORE you start complaining. You can read it here.
http://mozext.achimonline.de/signatureswitch_faq.php
I'm sure that people will keep complaining about what they don't understand, but I guess there's just no helping people like that.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
wonderful, support html signatures format, switching without problems in single click... essential addon
This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5).Rated 1 out of 5 stars
2 thumbs down
1. Can't figure how to insert line breaks - so signatures are a continuous line of text.
2. Signatures are treated same as Thunderbird's signatures - i.e. in small grey font. So don't see the point for this add-on when TB 3.0 suffers same fault.
3. As others have already mentioned - instead of inserting signature at the cursor point or end of your message, it always places signature at the end of the message.
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
I don't know why everyone is complaining about the developer or the extension. This extension does exactly what it's supposed to do, and that is to comply with the IETF's RFC 1845. It supports text sig blocks and also more complex HTML sig blocks the way I would expect it to support them. In other words, it works.
Regardless of what people think about this extension not supporting top posting, it works as it was intended to work and, for the most part, works well. You shouldn't drop your rating because you don't like bottom posting. After all, bottom posting is still the Internet e-mail standard. Suppose you like interleaved posting. Are you going to rate this extension lower because it doesn't support interleaved posting? Interleaved posting, just like top posting, isn't part of RFC 1845, either.
I'm not sure about this, but I believe top posting was propagated by Outlook and it top posted due to a bug, not by design. Imagine buggy software coming from Micro$oft!
Be that as it may, I think most people top post because that is the way Outlook worked and they got used to it. Plain and simple.
An RFC is not a standard. It's a recommendation. So maybe this developer is a little opinionated. The fact of the matter is that, in Internet e-mail parlance, a signature always appears at the very end of an e-mail and is always preceded by two dashes followed by a new line code. E-mail servers, if configured properly, recognize the double dash followed by a new line code as the beginning of a signature block, or the beginning of the end of an e-mail.
The developer could, if he wanted, support top posting by developing code that would insert a signature block without prepending two dashes followed by a new line code, perhaps prepending only a blank line or some other codes (like a double equal sign or double tilde) that an e-mail server would not interpret as a true signature block. That is how Evolution, the Mac version of Outlook developers chose to implement top posting. He could also support interleaved posting, too, if he were so inclined. It probably wouldn't be too much more difficult to write that logic than the logic to support top posting.
Many of the IETF's RFCs were written in the early-to-mid 1990s when many people used dial-up and people paid their ISPs by the minute. It was more efficient to read e-mails from top-to-bottom because the natural flow was preserved by bottom posting. Corporate America uses top posting partly because of Outlook's bug but also because the most recent and relevant information appears at the top of a business e-mail; if someone needs to know the history of the communication, he or she knows enough to read the e-mail from the bottom up. There's really no big deal.
Not that my opinion means anything, but I think many of the IETF's RFCs that date back to the "beginning" of the general public's use of the Internet need to be revisited, especially those that make recommendations for Internet e-mail.
Maybe Achim will read this review and have second thoughts about his stance... and, then again, maybe he won't.
To create your own collections, you must have a Mozilla Add-ons account.
