On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Sebastien Roy <Sebastien.Roy at sun.com> wrote: > Shawn Walker wrote: > > That has always flabbergasted me as well. > > > > Most users are going to be more familiar with Evolution (since it is > > "like MS Outlook") than Thunderbird. > > > > Though I suppose that depends on whether you are talking about Linux > > users or users from other platforms. > > Speaking for myself only, I used Evolution for years on Solaris, and I > dropped it in favor Thunderbird due to stability issues. Evolution was > at the time simply too slow (I have a huge number of nested IMAP folders > with a huge number of messages), and had too many important bugs related > to both stability and usability that no-one was willing to fix. I > haven't used it since (it has been a few years), so maybe that has > changed since then. I just did a quick tour again just now, and it > doesn't look like much has changed. It took over 45 seconds to load a > single small ascii-only message buried in a large IMAP folder, and four > minutes for the frozen Evolution main window to disappear after I did > File->Quit.
Bugs should be fixed; not used as a reason to choose other software. Evolution is well-integrated into GNOME; Thunderbird is not. See my previous reply to Glen. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben
