Heh, I knew you would say that. I can't get used to vimperator (tried it several times) and I like mutt's interface better than gmail's (for instance, mutt's threads view is way clearer, imo).
I also found that I could read all new emails much faster in mutt than in gmail -- I just TAB my way around in each label/directory instead of clicking and scrolling. My muscle/finger memory makes me more efficient at using mutt than the web interface, that's all. On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 20:40, Andrei Thorp <gar...@gmail.com> wrote: > For the sake of argument, isn't there an offline mode for gmail, as > well as vimperator for even more keyboard binding goodness? > > -AT > > On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Ricardo Martins <rica...@scarybox.net> > wrote: > > On Mon, 11 May 2009 13:13, Andrei Thorp wrote: > >> sup and offlineimap seem promising. I'll want to look into them more > >> in the future. > >> > >> For the sake of discussion, what is it that you folks prefer about > >> your offline setups vs gmail-in-browser? > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> -AT > > > > I love mutt and had Gmail's web interface discard my emails accidentally > when I > > was composing them. I also like being able to access my email even when > I'm > > offline. > > > > It's mostly habit, though. I prefer avoiding the mouse and using the > keyboard (I > > know about gmail's keyboard shortcuts), so mutt makes sense in my case. > > > > Regards, > > -- > > Ricardo Martins * ricardomartins.cc * GPG key: 0x1308F1B4 > > > Regards, -- Ricardo Martins * scarybox.net * GPG key: 0x1308F1B4