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). 

3.1 Compatibility? 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.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

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?

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

Great Extension Rated 5 out of 5 stars

It does what it is suppose to do ! Great Add-on

Thanks you Achim

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

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). 

It works if you understand how to use it. 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.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

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.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

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.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

Rated 2 out of 5 stars

The fact that you have to create the signatures as files manually is a big drawback.
I created my signatures as UTF8 files using textedit on the mac, but when i insert them the æøå charectores are encoded incorrectly. Editing the files and saving them in a differet format didn't change the signatures (i pressed the edit button in the extension), picking a different file didn't change it, even on reboot the signature still was the same when i originaly picked the file.
Bottom posting is also a big issue.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.5). 

Rated 3 out of 5 stars

Good tool, would give 5 star if signature would be added below the reply, and not below all previous messages. Needs an option for this at the settings.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.4). 

Rated 2 out of 5 stars

Works fine for adding all types of signatures. However the only reason for me using it is that it is in my case faster to copy paste the signature to the location I want it that to type it in (I'm using a more complex HTML signature).

I am "forced" to use this until me or someone else creates a signature addon that really works well.

It would be a five star review if it would allow you to top post and put the signature below your reply. The fact that this does not work makes it a three star review. And the fact that the author of this very good add-on is so set on the fact that top posting is bad and ugly even though it is the de-facto standard in many countries. In this conviction seems to ignore the major public demand for a signarure add-on that works just makes me annoyed and therefore just the two stars...

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.4). 

With Help Could Be Great Rated 3 out of 5 stars

I agree- it would be more useful if it would insert at the cursor point rather than the end of the email. I stopped using it because it's faster to type than to scroll, cut, paste, etc. My signature needs to be with the most recent part of the email, not at the bottom where the beginning thread is.

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.4). 

Rated 5 out of 5 stars

Very good

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.4). 

Rated 5 out of 5 stars

No mail client can be called "complete" without a random signature feature. Thank you for adding it to TB!

This review is for a previous version of the add-on (1.6.4).