2026-04-24 07:16:42
Six Colors wouldn’t work without direct support from our members.
Over the years we’ve added a bunch of new members-only features to the site. Our weekly podcast has proven to be very popular, so much so that it made me realize that a lot of members are perhaps a bit more inclined to consume podcasts than reading what we write with their eyeballs.
As a result, I’ve built a new “Six Colors Audio Newsletter” podcast feed. Using the same logic as our regular members-only email newsletter, it posts an episode any day there’s at least one full story on the site. Any day we’ve got stuff on the site, a new Audio Newsletter episode drops, complete with introduction and chapter markers per story. Here’s a link to a sample episode.
The Audio Newsletter uses a high-quality text-to-speech engine, so it’s not a human reader, but I’m surprised at how good it is. I’ve spent a lot of time tweaking the script to make the output better, including alternating two different high-quality voices, using additional voices for lengthy quotes from other sources, calling out footnotes explicitly, and even switching to a “read every character” mode when stuff is posted in code font, which happens frequently in Help Me, Glenn! columns. And the refining of the script continues!
If you like reading our words with your eyes, thank you. But since I began quietly experimenting with this automated read-it-to-you podcast, I have heard from numerous members who say they just don’t have the time to read everything we write, but are happy to have integrated this podcast into their listening queue. I hope it’s useful for a subset of the audience.
If you’re a member, you can subscribe on your Memberful page.
And if you’re not yet a member, here’s a plug: when you join you don’t just support Six Colors, you get access to a weekly exclusive podcast with Dan and me, John Moltz’s This Week in Apple column, Dan’s monthly Back Page column, a full-content newsletter if you’d prefer to read the site that way, the new full-content Audio Newsletter, and access to a really good Discord community. It’s a lot!
And regardless of your membership status, thank you for reading this site. I can’t believe I’ve been doing this for eleven and a half years, but here we are.
2026-04-24 04:09:04
In recent weeks, when I’ve fired up the ESPN app on my iPhone, an unpleasant sight has greeted me amid all the scores and upcoming games I’m trying to check in on. There, placed prominently in each entry for upcoming games, regardless of the sport, has been a big, ugly-looking block of betting odds.
Outside of friendly card games, I’m not a gambler and certainly not someone who wagers on sports. (If you take nothing else away from this article, “Never bet on anything that can talk” is a good piece of advice for anyone to live by.) I don’t begrudge your gambling fix if that’s where you find some joy in life’s slog, but I don’t want it consuming precious screen real estate when all I want to do is check a baseball score.
At some point, ESPN apparently updated its iPhone app, as the odds block no longer appears in the Scores tab, and there’s no mention of betting in the app’s preferences. If ESPN truly went in and fixed that part of the app, then kudos — but it hasn’t stopped me from exploring other alternatives to following my favorite sports, starting with Apple’s very own Sports app.
Apple released the Sports app a little more than two years ago, launching with the sports in season at the time and steadily adding more leagues and teams over time. These days, you can follow most of the same things in Apple Sports that you can via ESPN. Even better from my perspective, you can banish any betting info should you not wish to see it. In the settings of Apple’s app, there’s a toggle to hide betting odds.
I’ve been spending the past couple of weeks taking a second look at Apple Sports to see if the app’s improved any since its 2024 launch. And rather than kick ESPN to the curb, I’ve kept using this old, familiar score checker, comparing what it offers to Apple’s effort. My goal: find out which app is the better fit for my fandom and make it my permanent app of choice for staying on top of sports from my iPhone.
Both the ESPN and Apple Sports apps place a premium on letting you follow your favorite teams and sports, though they take very different approaches to how those favorites are displayed. In ESPN’s case, your favorite teams appear at the top of the top of Scores tab, followed by the leagues those teams play in. The rest of the Scores tab includes other sports, with ESPN highlighting the biggest news of the day — or at least the news related to sports it has the broadcast rights to — in the app’s Home tab.
In contrast, Apple’s Sports app is all about your favorites. Nothing appears on the Home screen unless you put it there. That goes for teams as well as leagues, which can require a little extra work on your part.
Say your favorite team is the Detroit Tigers — and why not? Thomas Magnum rooted for them. Once you mark the Tigers as a favorite, all their games will wind up in your Sports feed… but if you want other Major League Baseball scores to show up, you’re going to have to designate MLB as a favorite, too. It seems like that should be self-evident — who follows a team in a vacuum? — but as far as hoops to jump through, it’s a relatively minimal one.
I’m torn as to which approach I prefer, though there’s a lot to be said for the stripped-back style of Apple Sports. If I’m just interested in finding out what the teams I follow are up to, Apple provides me with that. I think that gives Sports the edge over ESPN, even if it’s a slight one.
That said, sometimes it’s good to be aware of what’s happening beyond your silo of interest. If an NBA game broke out in my kitchen, I’d want to know why LeBron James wasn’t chipping in his share of the mortgage, but that doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate seeing the NBA playoff results in the ESPN app, if for no other reason than to feel slightly more informed about the wider world. I can find those results in Apple Sports — just swipe right from the Home screen, tap on NBA and voila — but as with setting up favorites, it’s an extra step or two compared to ESPN.
I should also note that ESPN’s list of sports and leagues to track is a little more extensive than what Apple offers, even after two years of expansion on Apple’s part. I’m a fan of the Oakland Roots, a soccer team that plies its trade in the second-tier USL. I can include the Roots among my favorites in ESPN’s app, but not Apple’s. Similarly, the US Women’s National Team is MIA from Apple Sports, though presumably that changes when the 2027 World Cup gets closer. All of this is more of a Me Problem, but I’m the guy trying to find a sports app that best suits his needs.
Sometimes I want to know more than just the score — I want some sense of how the game went. Both ESPN and Apple Sports let you tap on a particular game to get the who, what and how much, though that information gets displayed in different ways.
Let’s look at an in-progress event using a Tigers-Brewers game as our point of comparison. Both apps give you the basics — the score, the inning, who’s pitching and who’s batting, plus an inning-by-inning line score. But even that info comes across in different ways.
Apple Sports seems to take a backward approach, putting the name of the batter and pitcher above the logos for their respective teams; in ESPN’s view, the logo appears next to the scores, making it much easier to see who’s winning and losing at a glance.
ESPN also offers a more expansive view when presenting a lot of the same information you see in Apple’s app. The pitcher and batter appear, but you also get images, including a pitch-by-pitch breakdown of balls and strikes in ESPN’s default view. You can also see who’s on base in the ESPN app.
Weirdly, Apple believes that team stats showing the number of hits, strikeouts, walks and more should be the key data you see first. If you want team box scores, you’ve got to scroll down. That information is easier to access with ESPN.
Apple’s approach to including details about baseball games makes no sense to me as someone who’s followed the sport for most of my life. It gives the impression that no one employed by Apple has spent much time poring over box scores in the morning paper, and that Apple decided to shoehorn baseball into a template designed for a different sport.
Apple continues to shortchange fans once the game ends, at least when it comes to baseball finals. If you want to find out who the winning and losing pitchers were, you’ll have to scroll down to the box scores in the Sports app. That information appears prominently in ESPN’s end-of-game report.
In fairness to Apple Sports, other end-of-game reports are a little better organized. A soccer box score at least shows me who scored, whether I’m looking in Apple’s app or on ESPN. With ESPN, I do get a written match report, though.
As you might expect, ESPN’s app offers a lot more than just scores, with news articles, video highlights and direct access to anything streaming through ESPN. That’s simply a non-starter for Apple, just as you wouldn’t be able to buy an iPhone or a MacBook Neo directly from Stephen A. Smith.
ESPN does a better job listing the channels where you can find broadcasts of games. Checking ESPN’s Premier League scoreboard, for example, I can see which matches are streaming on Peacock compared to which ones are on cable TV. If you want to find that info on Apple’s Sports app, you’ve got to drill down into the actual entry for the game.
However, in Apple Sports, you can jump to other apps that are streaming those games — something ESPN doesn’t offer for non-ESPN telecasts. So with Apple Sports, it’s ultimately easier to tune in on the action — unless, of course, we’re talking about the live sports Netflix is starting to feature more prominently.
The ESPN vs. Apple Sports debate may be one of those instances where you wish you could pick and choose the best elements from either app to produce the ultimate score checker. Take the depth of ESPN’s information and the more sensible box scores and combine that with Apple’s customization features, and you’d really be on to something.
After giving both apps a try, I’m not sure I’m ready to abandon the Worldwide Leader in Sports, especially now that the ill-considered betting features that had me ready to dump ESPN seem to have been scrapped. But I’m keeping Apple Sports on my iPhone just in case, because in an age where sports gambling is everywhere, I know the value of hedging my bets.
2026-04-23 03:10:23
Our app launchers of choice, the software makers we love and those we’ve lost faith in, our browser preferences, and forgotten automations causing inexplicable behaviors.
2026-04-22 23:53:34
As a part of the process of reviewing macOS Tahoe, I stopped using my longtime launcher LaunchBar and forced myself to use Apple’s new and improved version of Spotlight.
The surprising thing is, I never went back to LaunchBar. Spotlight in Tahoe was responsive, well integrated, and finally supplied me with the OS-native clipboard history feature I’ve wanted for years. While there were a few features from LaunchBar I missed—most notably, the ability to bring up an app in the launcher window and then drag a file onto it from the Finder—I was able to adapt quickly.
My friend Dr. Drang gave Spotlight in Tahoe a go recently and had a much worse experience, most notably reporting that it was terribly slow. He quickly retreated to LaunchBar (and, for clipboard history, Keyboard Maestro).
I have to agree with Dr. Drang here: I don’t know when, and I don’t know why, but over the last few months, as macOS Tahoe has gone from 26.3 to 26.4 to 26.5 beta, Spotlight has gotten progressively worse. It’s sometimes incredibly slow, making me wait to launch an app. Sometimes it misses entire categories of items. (I frequently launch items saved in my Safari favorites, and on several occasions, Spotlight just refused to show any of them.)
Also, my months of using Spotlight revealed another weakness: It’s just not as good as LaunchBar is at intuiting which items are more important to me. In Spotlight, if I type home and accidentally select an app like HomeControl or HomeBot instead of the regular old Home app, I am then prompted to launch that other app, seemingly forever. In LaunchBar, not only does it seem to recognize that the app I’ve launched hundreds of times is more likely to be my choice than the app I’ve launched once or twice, but LaunchBar will also let the user define a text shortcut that is hardwired to a particular item.
Spotlight in Tahoe will let you define text shortcuts, which it calls “Quick Keys”—but only for Actions, one particular class of item. Why that functionality isn’t available for all items is completely beyond me. But the result is that I end up launching the wrong thing, and I have no real recourse except to try to remember to launch the right thing again and again until it figures it out.
(A sad admission: On several occasions, I have renamed bookmarks and even deleted some installed apps just to stop Spotlight from recommending the wrong thing.)
In any event, Dr. Drang reminded me that there’s an easy solution to my quibbles about Spotlight: Just go back to LaunchBar.
One reason I had been willing to stop using LaunchBar was that it had been increasingly unstable for me, indexing files slowly after startup, failing to find recent changes, and throwing indexing errors. It also hadn’t been updated very much recently, making me wonder if the developer was more interested in its app Little Snitch and had put LaunchBar in maintenance mode. Fortunately, there was a substantial update in March, so maybe there’s life left in the ol’ girl after all.
So, for now, my dalliance with Spotlight is over, and I’ve returned to the familiar floating launcher window of LaunchBar. However, I’m going to keep an eye on Spotlight. If Apple can make it faster, more reliable, and a bit more customizable in macOS 27, it might be on to something.
2026-04-22 22:00:00
Guy English joins Lex and Moltz to discuss Tim Cook movin’ on up and his legacy as CEO (Tim’s not Guy’s) before we start telling John Ternus how to do the job he doesn’t even have yet.
2026-04-22 07:10:37
I don’t have a dog for the same reason it’s hard for me to get excited about email apps: the short, sweet lifespans make you love them so intensely and miss them forever when they’re gone. You’re never sure whether you’ll spend several years with a favorite pup or mail client, or get lucky and have 15 or more. Eventually, in my experience with dogs and email clients, they grow old, fade, and are no more. This is the cycle of life and the software business cycle for many apps.1
While I love dogs and seek permission to pet from the owner of nearly every dog I encounter, I have gone cold on new email apps after decades of losing my greatest loves.
I can’t remember which horrible mainframe program I used first, in the 1980s, but pine—developed at nearby University of Washington—was a standby in my early Unix-plus-Internet days. I adopted Eudora as soon as I found it and used it for many, many years because it only offered text-based email—no HTML! When it petered out around 2002, Mailsmith arose from Bare Bones, with the same text-only front end. Despite friend Rich Siegel and other developers keeping it alive long after its commercial utility had ended, I eventually shifted to Postbox in 2019. Guess what happened in 2024.2
Thus did I approach the relatively newly released MailMaven version 1 with some fear, even as I smoothed its fur, patted its back, and said, “Good mail app! Good mail app!” I’m happy to say that MailMaven gave me the puppy experience: I’m so excited to meet it and get to know it, and I’ll be even more so as it calms down and matures, and I get to live alongside it for what I hope is a long time.
MailMaven can be a good pal to a casual user, someone who wants something better than a Web app, like Gmail, and might have multiple email accounts. It’s friendlier and easier in its default setup than Apple’s Mail—less frustrating and more customizable, but you don’t have to make any substantial tweaks to start using it.
For the true mail nerd, of which I number myself, MailMaven could become your best friend. It has a cornucopia of options that let you wrap MailMaven around your particular needs. And we’re only at version 1.0.
It’s here I should note that I have no financial interest in MailMaven’s success, but I did edit the Take Control of MailMaven book, written by publisher Joe Kissell, who has advised SmallCubed, the developer, and also wrote the regular user manual.3 This was in my paid capacity as executive editor at Take Control Books.
During the late development process and early 1.0 bug-fixing release schedule, I worked with the app quite a lot, reported a number of issues (which were fixed), and had planned to transition to MailMaven last fall. I wound up holding off—part of that was on me, and part on them. I’m glad I waited, because I can give the app a clean look after solving my problems and after the developers have given themselves a good shake and reached release 1.0.14.
MailMaven emerged, like V’ger in Star Trek: The Motion Picture, from what was originally SmallCubed’s MailSuite, a series of components to improve Apple’s Mail for macOS.4 When Apple changed its plug-in architecture, the folks at Small Cubed set out to build the mail client they were trying to tweak Mail to be.
You can tell! So many of the frustrations and non-configurable parts of Mail are easily dealt with in MailMaven. And they’ve added sophisticated rule-based processing and a host of other features that came over in part or in whole from their previous add-ons.
This isn’t a copy of Mail, though—neither for copyright nor look-and-feel purposes. MailMaven has its own nature, which I would describe as colorful. It’s not garish, but you wouldn’t accuse the developers of working with a bland palette. They use color as ably and extensively as they do interface design elements. You can change nearly everything related to color, so you’re not limited to the defaults. This is true in many ways throughout the interface.
Like nearly all email clients, MailMaven structures itself around accounts, mailboxes, messages, and threads. Since this is how you set up, store, and read email, that makes sense. By default, the accounts sidebar shows your email accounts, with mailboxes organized beneath each. With a mailbox selected, you see messages in the main view. It uses some elaborate arcs to show you the connections among threaded messages, a step up (if not a step too far for some potential users) from the low-key or hard-to-follow threading in many other apps.
From there, however, I feel like we move into new territory. That account/mailbox view is just one option. The sidebar has four others:
Tags deserve even more explanation, even though I haven’t started using them yet! A number of non-email apps offer forms of tagging that let you cut across other kinds of organization. MailMaven might have the most sophisticated version available. Tags aren’t just metadata—they’re almost supradata? Data that sits above metadata as an organizational scheme.
Without turning this review into a book, I’ll note three important aspects about tags:
Note just above that I mentioned a rule for your outbox: that’s right—you can trigger rules before and after sending messages. You can write a rule that prompts you to make sure you attached a file promised in the email! Or ones that file outgone messages in folders corresponding to the same topics in which you file inbound ones—or that delete certain messages after sending.
You can see that MailMaven has a lot of automation, processing, grouping, and review concepts at its heart. I would argue that if none of that sounds appealing, like you had an “oh, thank goodness!” reaction to the above, I’m not sure MailMaven’s general functionality will overwhelm you enough compared to email apps already out on the market—not Mail, particularly, but others.
However, you might still give it a spin just because it’s fun and easy to use.
Apparently, I have 700,000 stored emails. Do I need all these? Certainly not. Am I going to spend a sizable amount of time pruning these by hand? Can an algorithm help? It already did, dropping 100,000s of duplicates and old automated messages of no value.
When I first attempted to switchover to MailMaven, I was stymied. I don’t need that much email actively online, but I don’t want to lose access to it or the ability to search my archives. MailMaven offers effective import options, so it wasn’t hard to start importing mailboxes. The app can import the standard mbox format, as well as individual email messages in the also standard eml and emlx formats. But it looked like we might be talking several days, if not weeks, of uninterrupted import action. Seemed apt to fail due to entropy, and then I’d have to figure out what was left to do.
So I put this off for a while.5 A couple of weeks ago, I strategized: what if I dumped old email into a searchable database that wasn’t part of an email app? With a little heavy lifting, I imported everything, with a lot of parsing, from the early 1990s to the present.6 I have this database update nightly with the last 24 hours of filed email.
I then trimmed the email to import into MailMaven to just a year’s worth and imported only the folder structure from that period—about 18,000 emails—which was ready to go in minutes. MailMaven can’t import folders of mailboxes, but it can import the contents of multiple mailboxes at once. I re-created folders, then imported the mailboxes for them.7
Because I’d either used a series of modestly featured email apps or I’d used a modicum of features in more heavily built-out programs, the rest of my migration involved just two things:
With only a few dozen mailboxes organized thematically, I quickly figured out which dozen or so I had manually filed emails into. I am absolutely sure I could make better use over time of keystrokes and keystroke rules. The former requires learning and training my muscle memory; the latter means figuring out what I do repetitively, writing a rule, and then assigning a keystroke. Am I reading an email from Jason Snell, then always filing it in my Six Colors mailbox? I could assign a keystroke! Rules can be just as complex as those for incoming and outgoing email.
I like MailMaven quite a lot. And each day I use it, I tweak something that makes me like it more. The developers fixed a synchronization bug that seemed entirely to affect my workflow just after I installed 1.0.12. They suggested I get on the beta track—which you can enable in the app—and the next release, 1.0.13, solved the problem. (In brief: I read email on two Macs, but only filed on one. An automated rule, mentioned above, redirects book receipts. However, it failed to mark messages as synchronized, so my “reading” Mac removed them from its inbox after retrieval. Receipts would still pile up even though they had already been deleted from the server inbox. It works great now.)
SmallCubed offers MailMaven for a flat fee of $75 for perpetual use of the version you purchase, including a year of updates and tech support. After a year, you can pay $75 (at current pricing) to renew the license to receive further updates and support, or you can continue indefinitely to use the latest version included in your original year of updates.
Is $75 a year too much? (Or $75 for the first year, and then when you are annoyed enough to pay for another year?) Given how much I use email, and how much of an improvement MailMaven is over Mail, not to me.8 You can try MailMaven free for 15 days.
The bigger question is the issue I mentioned at the outset. How long will MailMaven abide? It’s a small, scrappy company that persisted past Apple pulling the rug out from under plug-ins. It’s not a startup, and they invested years to get to this point.
But the market is cruel. Will MailMaven be around in six months, a year, five years—dare I hope for 10 or 20? Having developed a better pathway for migration for my archives, it might be that I have to think of MailMaven as a foster dog, rather than me providing a forever home.
Nonetheless, I open my heart as I do to all household animals, and recommend MailMaven as something you try to see if it fits you now, and hope that it grows with us all.
