Re: Email client programs
Thorsten Haude wrote: Hi, * Day Brown wrote (2004-01-31 06:00): Well, now thatcha mention it, I am somewhat bemused by the loss of email functionality since I quit using QWKMAIL and the BBS nets, and went on the internet. I had similar thoughts. I used Crosspoint on Fido, and still miss some features from both. QWKMAIL offered me enough colors to keep track of who said what in a thread, but no more than were useful for that purpose. This and other things you said about QWKMAIL can be done with Mutt. Using a Unix tool chain for mail requires some setup but is much more powerful than any single tool can ever be. I dont see the os matters as much as the server/host. If it dont send you the postings with the initials of each poster prepended, it'd be hard for Mutt or anything else to sort it out. While qwkmail.zip was what OFFLINE.EXE used, I'm sure there were unix/linux tools that would process qwkmail packets. In any event the loss of functionality is not a limitation of Linux so much as just the result of the programmers focused on the gui interface and eye candy. Yet another reason I'd like to see the debian user base setup a VPN. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
Hi, * Day Brown wrote (2004-01-31 18:50): Thorsten Haude wrote: * Day Brown wrote (2004-01-31 06:00): Well, now thatcha mention it, I am somewhat bemused by the loss of email functionality since I quit using QWKMAIL and the BBS nets, and went on the internet. I had similar thoughts. I used Crosspoint on Fido, and still miss some features from both. QWKMAIL offered me enough colors to keep track of who said what in a thread, but no more than were useful for that purpose. This and other things you said about QWKMAIL can be done with Mutt. Using a Unix tool chain for mail requires some setup but is much more powerful than any single tool can ever be. I dont see the os matters as much as the server/host. I don't think the mails were modified by the transport hosts. At least with XP (Crosspoint), the initials were inserted by XP itself. If it dont send you the postings with the initials of each poster prepended, it'd be hard for Mutt or anything else to sort it out. The situation is different now. Initials at the start of lines would confuse even 99% of mail systems which work fine in other aspects. In Fido everyone has to use real names, so it is easy to get initials for a name. XP (and other programs probably) had a nifty algorithm to do wraps without destroying the initials. Today it would take a convention to determine the initials and a macro for my editor. Just difficult enough that I won't do it without good reason. Sensible quoting is a good replacement for the initials. While qwkmail.zip was what OFFLINE.EXE used, I'm sure there were unix/linux tools that would process qwkmail packets. In any event the loss of functionality is not a limitation of Linux so much as just the result of the programmers focused on the gui interface and eye candy. Not at all, Mutt is considerably less eyecandish than XP (which had all the bells and whistles you could do with a text mode DOS program). The package format changed with the protocol because the internet assumes hosts which are always connected. Yet another reason I'd like to see the debian user base setup a VPN. Where is the connection? Thorsten -- Don't let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right. - Isaac Asimov pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Email client programs
Well, now thatcha mention it, I am somewhat bemused by the loss of email functionality since I quit using QWKMAIL and the BBS nets, and went on the internet. The BBS posts were 8 bit. You had the entire 256 IBM CMOS bitmaps. The BBS posts offered ANSI color. It's not just mono like this. HTML gives you 64k of colors using font=#ABCDEF and ANSI only offered 16, but with ANSI, you can highlite text by changing the background color, whereas if you try that with HTML, it changes the background of the whole page. HTML also gives you more fonts, whereas ANSI only used the 256 char default VGA ROM set. But I hate HTML posts; sometimes the font is so small I cant read it, and sometimes a twit uses one so large it looks like an obnoxious billboard. However, the 256 char IBM set includes the greek alphabet and lots of other foreign letters. It aint hard to replace those foreign letters for italics bitmaps for english email. Font editors also allow us to alter the original IBM box characters. They were designed to produce invoice or ledger sheet double and single lines. And while they have been charmingly used for artistic purposes, replacing them with a set of geometric shapes would make email doodles more adaptable. I see where people in email now continually complain of being misquoted, how attribution with the system of single, double, triple,.. angle brackets is often misleading. But my QWKMAIL put my words up here in amber, and before citing yours, not only is there the std angle bracket, but also your initials at the start of the line, like below, and that furthermore, yours were in green. A third party blue, a 4th red. But clearly, you dont need 64k colors for this. Which is the point. That HTML offers that many colors, not because it was designed for email and the clearest presentation of text possible, but that it was designed to mimic commercial messages, flyers, and other forms of what we all now know as spam. QWKMAIL offered me enough colors to keep track of who said what in a thread, but no more than were useful for that purpose. HTML, and much of the software we see today, has a lot more options, but its like finding 50 different brands of toothpaste. If there were only 6, I'd find one I could use sooner. QWKMAIL ran in whatever font I had, but whereas this browser takes up about 30-40% of the screen, whereas the text mode ANSI email screen commonly had only the 1 stat bar and 49 lines of your message. The constriction is seen on how often people respond without having read past the 25th or 30th line. And of that, the top 6-12 lines are taken up by the internet address header, whereas the BBS mail commonly used a single line with the name of the author and the host BBS. Has anyone noticed among all the multimedia eye candy that there's been a decrease in the content and functionality of email? Does that not say interesting things about the way people fail to think? I hear some guy on c-span this morning discussing anti-spam legislation. Why- is it up to them? With the BBS nets, it was impossible to post anonymously. The sysop of every BBS was responsible to see that none of his users over grazed the commons with commercial messages. The email lists like this didnt have a spam problem, and neither did the user base. If you found obscene language offensive, you could find a net that didnt permit it. If you tolerated that in your search for divergent opinion, you could find it. The BBS nets were not token ring. email did not circulate on the backbone, but came from a particular user, at a particular BBS and went to designated addresses and email lists. If someone tried to send a copy of a post to 1000 addresses, the software picked up on it and stuffed in an error box. When you subbed to a BBS, you could designate who you would accept mail from. You didnt need legislation to stop spam. You could provide a list of the usergroups you wanted like this, and the interesting posters you knew. We dont need them to pass more phucking law, all we need to do is decide on how we want to run our own network. With QWKMAIL, I could deal with 300 list posts a day. Whereas the browser gives me 6-10 messages and then the displayed message below, OFFLINE.EXE gave me a list of 49 messages, and when I clicked on one, it displayed 49 lines of the message. Since it ran in ANSI color, the flicks were faster than you can drag a mouse to the next icon. The gui kept screens in the background, layering the windows, where you could kind of see them, but the ANSI text mode screen had video pages as well, only you had to be able to see them with your mind's eye. (If you cant do that, dont bother responding to this post. You are too stupid.) Anyway, the BBS mail tools let me tag each message without opening any, and then delete or move them all to be dealt with later. I could sort a newsgroup by author, and tag delete the twits. If someone had a graphic image they wanted me to see, they could attach a .GIF; I used my own
Re: Email client programs
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 09:00:00PM -0800, Day Brown wrote: Perhaps I have not expressed myself well, but the point is, that it is more difficult to use email now than it used to be; given the reputation of the computer business for 'progress', that's odd. So are you looking for a solution? Because their are plenty. Mailers like mutt and a perl script with procmail (or similar) can do all of the image-viewing and quoting you want. I get the quoted text color changed too. No, we don't have all the fancy ANSI terminal colors. HTML is also not the way to get them. But e-mail is a way to communicate information (at least for me) and not dazzle me with terminal escape codes. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Email client programs
On Friday, Jan 30, 2004, at 22:00 America/Denver, Day Brown wrote: I see where people in email now continually complain of being misquoted, how attribution with the system of single, double, triple,.. angle brackets is often misleading. But my QWKMAIL put my words up here in amber, and before citing yours, not only is there the std angle bracket, but also your initials at the start of the line, like below, and that furthermore, yours were in green. A third party blue, a 4th red. But clearly, you dont need 64k colors for this. Which is the point. That HTML offers that many colors, not because it was designed for email and the clearest presentation of text possible, but that it was designed to mimic commercial messages, flyers, and other forms of what we all now know as spam. Kmail from KDE supports multiple color quoting. Nate Duehr, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
Hi, * Day Brown wrote (2004-01-31 06:00): Well, now thatcha mention it, I am somewhat bemused by the loss of email functionality since I quit using QWKMAIL and the BBS nets, and went on the internet. I had similar thoughts. I used Crosspoint on Fido, and still miss some features from both. QWKMAIL offered me enough colors to keep track of who said what in a thread, but no more than were useful for that purpose. This and other things you said about QWKMAIL can be done with Mutt. Using a Unix tool chain for mail requires some setup but is much more powerful than any single tool can ever be. Thorsten -- The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for the good men to do nothing. - Edmund Burke pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Email client programs
-Original Message- From: Ben Yau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: Nate Duehr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Neither POP3 nor IMAP nor anything else will fix a problem at the network level. This seems obvious. Either the network works well, or it doesn't. Applications at layer 7 of the OSI model suffer when the lower layers don't operate correctly. However, here's something which may work. Configure your MS OE to Leave a copy of messages on server (this is in the Tools-Accounts-Advanced). This way, it won't delete. What happens is when you download messages, outlook remembers (I don't know how )the last message you downladed so when you go back to download more messages, it won't download anything it has already downloaded. Then you configure the Delete messages on server after [blank] days or Delete messages when moved to Deleted and that is how to clean the messages off the server. To follow up on my own post, I tried this with my outlook and it did work as far as downloading. Have not tried the delete stuff yet. I did the Leave copy of messages on server and then started downloading. I had 220 messages in my inbox . I stopped the download after about 40 messages were downloaded. I then did Send/Receive and the number of messages to download had gone down to 180. The issue then is just the cleanup part of this. (whether you want to do it manually on the server or configure it in outlook. I don't know how well the delete config works on outlook). Hope that helps Ben Yau -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 10:59:15PM -0800, Curtis Vaughan wrote: | | hi ya curtis | | On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Curtis Vaughan wrote: | | But doesn't IMAP have more traffic involved than POP3? I mean each | time you connect, it has to check to see what's on the server and | what's on your computer. What would be best is a solution that just | | w/ imap ... NOTHING is on your pc ... | you can check mail at the office, from home, from the insecure | hotel, from the insecure internet cafe, from the insecure kinkos | and you will only see new emails for you to check and/or save | | I personally only use IMAP and have been encouraging others to use it | as well. But ALAS, people don't understand. | | However, with IMAP you can synchronize so the messages are on your | computer. Otherwise, it would be worthless. It's not IMAP, alone, that provides this. It is the IMAP clients (such as isync or | I don't think everyone is fully appreciating the problem. These are | ships at sea. The connection is often in flux. I get it. One possibility is uuMail. It is a commercial mail tool (and protocol) that does really high compression to minimize the bandwidth needed to transfer messages. It is designed for use over ham radio and other limited connections in remote (ie there is no phone line in the first place) and third world regions. | POP3 seems to not be the answer at all. I think it is more a matter of using the right tools in the right configuration. You need something that can clean up as it goes to avoid redownloading already received messages and something that will automatically retry failed operations. | But I was hoping maybe the way POP3 worked might depend on client | programs. The way -any- protocol works is dependent, in part, on the clients. HTH, -D -- Q: What's the difference between a computer salesman and a used car salesman? A: A used car salesman knows when he's lying. www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Email client programs
On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 05:27:42PM -0500, Derrick 'dman' Hudson wrote: [...] | It's not IMAP, alone, that provides this. It is the IMAP clients | (such as isync or Oops, I forgot to come back and fill this in after the apt-cache search in the other window finished. I meant to say such as isync or offlineimap. The IMAP protocol was designed to leave all data on the server, though some programs, such as those listed, have been created to do other things with the infrastructure. -D -- GUIs normally make it simple to accomplish simple actions and impossible to accomplish complex actions. --Doug Gwyn (22/Jun/91 in comp.unix.wizards) www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Email client programs
Derrick writes: One possibility is uuMail. It is a commercial mail tool (and protocol) that does really high compression to minimize the bandwidth needed to transfer messages. A proprietary version of UUCP. Why not use the real thing? -- John Hasler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, Wisconsin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Email client programs
Hi, On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Ben Yau wrote: True, but you can do your best to workaround the network issue. In this case, a mail client that would actually do something akin to retr 1 del 1 retr 2 del 2 retr 3 del 3 Instead of retrieving all messages _and then_ deleting which is what outlook express seemes to do . I don't know of a mail client that will delete as it downloads. IIRC, Eudora should do the job, if you are so keen on a Windoze client (i deleted the original post, so i don't exactly remember the actual requirements). There should be a free adware version. Don't quite remember the website. -- Soumyadip Modak [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
hi ya curtis On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Curtis Vaughan wrote: But doesn't IMAP have more traffic involved than POP3? I mean each time you connect, it has to check to see what's on the server and what's on your computer. What would be best is a solution that just w/ imap ... NOTHING is on your pc ... you can check mail at the office, from home, from the insecure hotel, from the insecure internet cafe, from the insecure kinkos and you will only see new emails for you to check and/or save I personally only use IMAP and have been encouraging others to use it as well. But ALAS, people don't understand. However, with IMAP you can synchronize so the messages are on your computer. Otherwise, it would be worthless. I don't think everyone is fully appreciating the problem. These are ships at sea. The connection is often in flux. POP3 seems to not be the answer at all. But I was hoping maybe the way POP3 worked might depend on client programs. Thanks for the input everyone. Curtis -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
hi ya curtis On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Curtis Vaughan wrote: I know this is not a windows list and I have never yet asked a question like this on here before, but perhaps there is someone who knows the answer to this question. Because our vessels have to get mail over lines that are rather shaky, we would like them to pull mail in a way whereby once they've received a message it is considered downloaded. Earlier we were using ccMail (Lotus) which did just that. But now we had them switch over to Outlook Express. In the case of Outlook Express, however, let's say they received 3 letters and then the line broke. Well, when they reconnect they would have to get those 3 letters again, prior to going on and getting the rest. Maybe this is just the way POP3 works. Or is there a mail client program that acts otherwise? i.e., Mozilla, etc.? tell your client app to use secure imap instead of pop3 - most client apps support imap vs pop3 c ya alvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
Hi, * Curtis Vaughan wrote (2004-01-28 06:44): I know this is not a windows list and I have never yet asked a question like this on here before, but perhaps there is someone who knows the answer to this question. How about asking Microsoft support about it? Thorsten -- Jede Glorifizierung eines Menschen, der im Krieg getötet worden ist, bedeutet drei Tote im nächsten Krieg. - Kurt Tucholsky pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Email client programs
hi ya curtis On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Curtis Vaughan wrote: But doesn't IMAP have more traffic involved than POP3? I mean each time you connect, it has to check to see what's on the server and what's on your computer. What would be best is a solution that just w/ imap ... NOTHING is on your pc ... you can check mail at the office, from home, from the insecure hotel, from the insecure internet cafe, from the insecure kinkos and you will only see new emails for you to check and/or save you can do the same w/ pop3 .. takes little(lot) more work w/ procmail before using pop3 and if you dont want the 150K file, you never need to get it just delete on the pop server ... you do need to at least see the subject line that there is a pending 150K email you didnt read/check yet c ya alvin says, I don't care what you have or don't have, here are some new messages. Take them. And once the client has received a message it is marked as received on the server. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 09:44:47PM -0800, Curtis Vaughan wrote: Because our vessels have to get mail over lines that are rather shaky, we would like them to pull mail in a way whereby once they've received a message it is considered downloaded. Earlier we were using ccMail (Lotus) which did just that. But now we had them switch over to Outlook Express. In the case of Outlook Express, however, let's say they received 3 letters and then the line broke. Well, when they reconnect they would have to get those 3 letters again, prior to going on and getting the rest. Maybe this is just the way POP3 works. Or is there a mail client program that acts otherwise? i.e., Mozilla, etc.? kmail sounds like it might be your speed. - -- .''`. Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] : :' : `. `'` proud Debian admin and user `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAF2l6UzgNqloQMwcRAnSqAKCGlAJgJhozXpkKQGt9wRmH+MAjawCgw1gr stAgpRZCnDen8rhyU3suXZA= =PG4i -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
Hello Curtis, I don't think everyone is fully appreciating the problem. That makes 2 of us ;) What comes to my mind: a. (has been mentioned) use fetchmail to download the messages. Example listing here: # fetchmail -d0 -a -f /etc/fetchmailrc 4 messages for myname at my.provider.com (45939 octets). reading message [EMAIL PROTECTED]:1 of 4 (3771 octets) ... flushed reading message [EMAIL PROTECTED]:2 of 4 (4358 octets) flushed reading message [EMAIL PROTECTED]:3 of 4 (3989 octets) ... flushed reading message [EMAIL PROTECTED]:4 of 4 (33821 octets) . flushed So yes, messages are being marked for deletion (=flushed) immediately after download. Since I don't have a shaky line, I cannot really test things like killing the line in the middle of a transfer and retry. But it seems to me worth a try. b. From old messaging days I remember that sendmail (and almost certainly any other mail-transfer-agent) will of course retransmit the message if the line is broken during transmit. But this means that the vessel system has an ip address and messages are delivered to a local MTA there. Probably not the right direction. With IMAP I have not much experience. Cheers, Erich -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
Curtis Vaughan wrote: I know this is not a windows list and I have never yet asked a question like this on here before, but perhaps there is someone who knows the answer to this question. Netscape and Mozilla support offline modes where a user can sync themselves to the server and then be offline. This would minimize traffic to only specific times (perhaps there are times where your network is noticibly better than other times?). Neither POP3 nor IMAP nor anything else will fix a problem at the network level. This seems obvious. Either the network works well, or it doesn't. Applications at layer 7 of the OSI model suffer when the lower layers don't operate correctly. You could also do things to cover up the network problem like putting a mail server on board the vessel and letting that server take the errors and hits between the main server and itself, where they'll only be seen by the administrators in the server logs. End-users get mail once it's fully transferred to the mail server on-board the vessel. A cheap older machine with a couple of redundant hard disks, at least RAID 1 (if there's no admin on-board) and fetchmail could do this job and it could be built in just a few days including test time in port where the network is good. Tests while the network is bad could be simulated. Spend the energy fixing the network. Tell people it's broken. Don't just cover it up right away and pretend that problem is not there. It's the only thing that will help long-term. Anything else is just an unprofessional hack. If e-mail is a *requirement* for the vessels (bosses say it HAS to work), then so is a good network connection. Making a bad network just work by futzing around with the mail client just dooms you to failure again someday in the future when people think things are working and they start using the network for other things besides mail. Nate Duehr, [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Email client programs
-Original Message- From: Nate Duehr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 8:00 AM To: Curtis Vaughan Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Email client programs Neither POP3 nor IMAP nor anything else will fix a problem at the network level. This seems obvious. Either the network works well, or it doesn't. Applications at layer 7 of the OSI model suffer when the lower layers don't operate correctly. True, but you can do your best to workaround the network issue. In this case, a mail client that would actually do something akin to retr 1 del 1 retr 2 del 2 retr 3 del 3 Instead of retrieving all messages _and then_ deleting which is what outlook express seemes to do . I don't know of a mail client that will delete as it downloads. However, here's something which may work. Configure your MS OE to Leave a copy of messages on server (this is in the Tools-Accounts-Advanced). This way, it won't delete. What happens is when you download messages, outlook remembers (I don't know how )the last message you downladed so when you go back to download more messages, it won't download anything it has already downloaded. Then you configure the Delete messages on server after [blank] days or Delete messages when moved to Deleted and that is how to clean the messages off the server. I have never played with this, don't know if it will work, but it's worth a shot. This may work in your case depending on when MS OE marks the message as being downloaded. If it marks each message as it downloads, you're in good shape. If it only marks all the messages after downloading all the messages, then you're back to square one. Good luck with that. Ben Yau -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
Incoming from Erich Waelde: I don't think everyone is fully appreciating the problem. That makes 2 of us ;) What comes to my mind: a. (has been mentioned) use fetchmail to download the messages. Example listing here: # fetchmail -d0 -a -f /etc/fetchmailrc 4 messages for myname at my.provider.com (45939 octets). reading message [EMAIL PROTECTED]:1 of 4 (3771 octets) ... flushed And, if the network drops out, fetchmail will notice and the next time you go to get mail, that mail may be re-transmitted. Feature! If that's a problem, tell procmail to watch for duplicates (very simple to do) and drop them into a =Duplicates mail folder. Between fetchmail and procmail and any barely usable mail client, bad lines don't have to be a problem. They just keep on trying until it's done. -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling - - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Email client programs
-Original Message- From: Alvin Oga [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 10:50 AM To: Ben Yau Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Email client programs On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Ben Yau wrote: True, but you can do your best to workaround the network issue. In this case, a mail client that would actually do something akin to retr 1 del 1 retr 2 del 2 retr 3 del 3 Instead of retrieving all messages _and then_ deleting which is what outlook express seemes to do . I don't know of a mail client that will delete as it downloads. the messages is does NOT need to be retrieved unless you hit CR to read it, but you do see the subject line, date, who-from... NOT the message itself unless you hit CR Yes. Thanks for the clarification. Actually after typing that message I knew I had gotten the commands wrong. I'm hoping that the OP understood my meaning though. using different email clients will do different things... use what works better for -you- or -them- Which is always one of the top considerations when doing these kinds of things. Good point again. avoiding ms outlook ( any version ) is a good thing :) although with the previous point, that is why I do use MS Outlook. Thanks for the reply Ben Yau -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Email client programs
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Ben Yau wrote: True, but you can do your best to workaround the network issue. In this case, a mail client that would actually do something akin to retr 1 del 1 retr 2 del 2 retr 3 del 3 Instead of retrieving all messages _and then_ deleting which is what outlook express seemes to do . I don't know of a mail client that will delete as it downloads. the messages is does NOT need to be retrieved unless you hit CR to read it, but you do see the subject line, date, who-from... NOT the message itself unless you hit CR simply hitting d would delete it and is never sent to your local pc that you're using to read it - i use pine/mutt/elm ... from anywhere from any legit machine using different email clients will do different things... use what works better for -you- or -them- avoiding ms outlook ( any version ) is a good thing c ya alvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 09:44:47PM -0800, Curtis Vaughan wrote: I know this is not a windows list and I have never yet asked a question like this on here before, but perhaps there is someone who knows the answer to this question. Because our vessels have to get mail over lines that are rather shaky, we would like them to pull mail in a way whereby once they've received a message it is considered downloaded. Earlier we were using ccMail (Lotus) which did just that. But now we had them switch over to Outlook Express. In the case of Outlook Express, however, let's say they received 3 letters and then the line broke. Well, when they reconnect they would have to get those 3 letters again, prior to going on and getting the rest. Maybe this is just the way POP3 works. Or is there a mail client program that acts otherwise? i.e., Mozilla, etc. I finally cured myself of kitchen-sink email clients. Now I do this: pop3-getmail-procmail-Maildir type mailboxes-mutt-nullmailer-smtp The kitchen-sink email clients do all of the above and try to make your life simple (they're really making you think less). If you are on a ship with unreliable links (satellite?) then you don't qualify for the simple way. You need the full control email model. Start with: pop3-getmail-Maildir type mailboxes You can control the deletion of the message at the POP3 server with the delete=1 control in the ~/.getmail/getmailrc file. Each email is deleted as it is retrieved (same as fetchmail). Good luck. Google is your friend. Every tool listed above has its own email list and then there's good-ole debian-user. Be sure to work hard reading manuals, googling, and experimenting before posting questions and you'll get outstanding help. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Email client programs
I know this is not a windows list and I have never yet asked a question like this on here before, but perhaps there is someone who knows the answer to this question. Because our vessels have to get mail over lines that are rather shaky, we would like them to pull mail in a way whereby once they've received a message it is considered downloaded. Earlier we were using ccMail (Lotus) which did just that. But now we had them switch over to Outlook Express. In the case of Outlook Express, however, let's say they received 3 letters and then the line broke. Well, when they reconnect they would have to get those 3 letters again, prior to going on and getting the rest. Maybe this is just the way POP3 works. Or is there a mail client program that acts otherwise? i.e., Mozilla, etc.? Curtis Vaughan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
But doesn't IMAP have more traffic involved than POP3? I mean each time you connect, it has to check to see what's on the server and what's on your computer. What would be best is a solution that just says, I don't care what you have or don't have, here are some new messages. Take them. And once the client has received a message it is marked as received on the server. Curtis Vaughan On 27 Jan, 2004, at 22:13, Alvin Oga wrote: hi ya curtis On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Curtis Vaughan wrote: I know this is not a windows list and I have never yet asked a question like this on here before, but perhaps there is someone who knows the answer to this question. Because our vessels have to get mail over lines that are rather shaky, we would like them to pull mail in a way whereby once they've received a message it is considered downloaded. Earlier we were using ccMail (Lotus) which did just that. But now we had them switch over to Outlook Express. In the case of Outlook Express, however, let's say they received 3 letters and then the line broke. Well, when they reconnect they would have to get those 3 letters again, prior to going on and getting the rest. Maybe this is just the way POP3 works. Or is there a mail client program that acts otherwise? i.e., Mozilla, etc.? tell your client app to use secure imap instead of pop3 - most client apps support imap vs pop3 c ya alvin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Email client programs
On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 10:16:20PM -0800, Curtis Vaughan wrote: But doesn't IMAP have more traffic involved than POP3? I mean each time you connect, it has to check to see what's on the server and what's on your computer. What would be best is a solution that just says, I don't care what you have or don't have, here are some new messages. Take them. And once the client has received a message it is marked as received on the server. Maybe this is not what you want, but you could use fetchmail to get email across your bad link and then run a local smpt and pop server. fetchmail has an expunge setting where you can specify the number of messages to fetch before expunging those marked for deletion. I doubt that outlook express gives you that fine control on what it does with pop servers - but you never know ;) dc -- David Purton [EMAIL PROTECTED] For the eyes of the LORD range throughout the earth to strengthen those whose hearts are fully committed to him. 2 Chronicles 16:9a signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Email client programs
On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 09:11:48AM -0600, Drew Raines wrote: You can with mutt. Set pager_index_lines to a number greater than 0. Nice feature. How does one switch between the panes? -- Sridhar M.A. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Don't look now, but there is a multi-legged creature on your shoulder.
Re: Email client programs
on Fri, 28 Dec 2001 01:40:09PM +0530, Sridhar M.A. insinuated: On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 09:11:48AM -0600, Drew Raines wrote: You can with mutt. Set pager_index_lines to a number greater than 0. Nice feature. How does one switch between the panes? not sure what you mean by panes ... though you can scroll through the current message with up and down arrows, and switch messages by hitting tab, for 'next new message', or just 'k' (up) or 'j' (down). all of course keybindable as you like, e.g.: ~/.mutt/rc.keybindings bindpager n next-entry bindpager p previous-entry (not sure if those are defaults) /nori [EMAIL PROTECTED]-- -http://www.sccs.swarthmore.edu/~nori/jnl/daily.html
Re: Email client programs
Craig Dickson wrote: Erik Steffl wrote: Also, with fetchmail, you don't have to bother telling your mail client about your POP or IMAP server -- it's one less thing to configure if you provided that you want to download emails from IMAP which is not a very good way to use IMAP. I guess it's desirable in some situations... but often you might want to use it straight as it is or, if the network connection is not good enough, use it in off-line mode. Unless you want to consolidate all you accounts in one, then it makes sense to download even IMAP mail. That's exactly what I do. My personal mail accounts, work mail, everything ends up in my home mail folders, thanks to fetchmail. Meanwhile, mutt is configured to know what to put in my From: headers according to what folder I'm in when I send a mail. it would be basically the same using IMAP, maybe an overkill but very elegant and flexible (you'd just replace 'home mail folders' by 'IMAP' - fetchmail delivers to IMAP, mutt shows you IMAP folders). not 100% sure how would that work in practice, I have it set up that way so it works but I don't use mutt much so I don't know about various little quirks of this set-up. but then it makes sense to run local IMAP server (for similar reasons that it's desirable to use fetchmail to fetch email). That's a matter of taste, I think. If you have an email client that has really solid IMAP support, then that's reasonable. I think that even not so good IMAP support is better that almost perfect file storage - the reason being that if IMAP support screws up you are unlikely to loose email, but if file storage screws up it, well, screws up. of course, in both cases you need to back up! so both problems would be recoverable (you did back up, didn't you? :-). but of course, in the end it's about what you like, how much you want to spend on tinkering with system set-up (IMO cyrus is one of the most annoying programs to set-up) etc. erik
Re: Email client programs
Craig Dickson wrote: ... If good IMAP support was common in mail clients, I'd probably be more inclined to explore it, but in my experience many clients either don't support IMAP, or the support is limited and/or buggy. it's getting better, IMO it's a lot simler than file storage support (mbox, maildir) because you don't have to worry about file locking (which never really works) and similar issues (file corruption when error occurs during moment file is in bad state for an error to occur:-) in netscape the IMAP folders have basically same functionality as native folders (even more, depending on IMAP server), in mutt it looks similar (almost as good as native folders (maybe even the same, I am not sure)), the other ones I haven't tried for few month, evolution certainly looked good, mozilla is somewhat better netscape (good IMAP support, IIRC)... and no, I am not paid by IMAP lobby, I am just extatic about how it works (together with fetchmail, postfix and cyrus sieve and deliver). all fairly simple programs, each focused on one thing, forming extremely flexible system... erik
Re: Email client programs
Erik Steffl [EMAIL PROTECTED]: the problem with text based MUAs is that you cannot see folders/index/message at the same time... (AFAIK, haven't found it in mutt or pine) You can with mutt. Set pager_index_lines to a number greater than 0. -- Drew
Email client programs
I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client program. First, let me state the needs of our company. We are currently very MS based at present. The goal has been set to slowly move over to Linux. Debian has been chosen, as it is the most stable that I am aware of. Of course, I dont know a hell of a lot yet. First, I will have to settle many issues before moving any clients over, although I actually have 1 client on a Linux box and I too try to use Linux most of the time. People here are, of course, used to Outlook. And I have to say that I find that it works very well. I dont think we have ever had any problems with it. We have Exchange server problems, but no client problems. Therefore, clients will be expecting the same quality no problems. I have tried out a number of email client programs, but am not satisfied by any one of them. I have tried out, KMail, Evolution, Netscape and Mozilla, oh and the email client program with StarOffice. Each one has something good about it, but none of them are as good as Outlook. One of the big problems might be the fact that I dont know how to configure them, of course. One of the big problems is that people will need to read and send mail in English and Russian. Im trying to recall, but I dont think I could get StarOffice and KMail to permit Russian. Actually I could write in Russian in KMail provided I opened a letter that was already in Russian and composed my letter in that letter. Understand? Evolution and Mozilla basically crash all the time on me. Is there really any difference between Mozilla and Netscape? I liked the fact however that I was able to convert all of my Outlook folders to Mozilla. This will be of critical importance as well. Finally, I couldnt figure out how to get any of the programs to encrypt passwords for logging in to our Exchange server perhaps this is impossible consider different technologies? Eventually, however, I would like to shut the Exchange server down, but thats not in the planning yet. So, Im what other programs people use and find to be very good. I havent tried Pine, but I dont think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI program. Thanks. Curtis
Email client programs (w/o html formatting - sorry)
I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client program. First, let me state the needs of our company. We are currently very MS based at present. The goal has been set to slowly move over to Linux. Debian has been chosen, as it is the most stable that I am aware of. Of course, I don't know a hell of a lot yet. First, I will have to settle many issues before moving any clients over, although I actually have 1 client on a Linux box and I too try to use Linux most of the time. People here are, of course, used to Outlook. And I have to say that I find that it works very well. I don't think we have ever had any problems with it. We have Exchange server problems, but no client problems. Therefore, clients will be expecting the same quality - no problems. I have tried out a number of email client programs, but am not satisfied by any one of them. I have tried out, KMail, Evolution, Netscape and Mozilla, oh and the email client program with StarOffice. Each one has something good about it, but none of them are as good as Outlook. One of the big problems might be the fact that I don't know how to configure them, of course. One of the big problems is that people will need to read and send mail in English and Russian. I'm trying to recall, but I don't think I could get StarOffice and KMail to permit Russian. Actually I could write in Russian in KMail provided I opened a letter that was already in Russian and composed my letter in that letter. Understand? Evolution and Mozilla basically crash all the time on me. Is there really any difference between Mozilla and Netscape? I liked the fact however that I was able to convert all of my Outlook folders to Mozilla. This will be of critical importance as well. Finally, I couldn't figure out how to get any of the programs to encrypt passwords for logging in to our Exchange server - perhaps this is impossible consider different technologies? Eventually, however, I would like to shut the Exchange server down, but that's not in the planning yet. So, I'm what other programs people use and find to be very good. I haven't tried Pine, but I don't think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI program. Thanks. Curtis application/ms-tnef
Re: Email client programs (w/o html formatting - sorry)
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Vaughan, Curtis wrote: I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client program. First, let me state the needs of our company. We are currently very MS based at present. The goal has been set to slowly move over to Linux. Debian has been chosen, as it is the most stable that I am aware of. Of course, I don't know a hell of a lot yet. what's the goal of the change over? money? a general MS disliking? if it's a money issue, have you looked into MS's terminal server? You can use this in conjunction with linux boxes (do a search on freshmeat for rdesktop). That way all the software that you haven't foudn replacements for runs on the terminal server. I have tried out a number of email client programs, but am not satisfied by any one of them. I have tried out, KMail, Evolution, Netscape and Mozilla, oh and the email client program with StarOffice. Each one has something good about it, but none of them are as good as Outlook. One of the big problems might be the fact that I don't know how to configure them, of course. Evolution is close to being rolled out the door, though it doesn't offer the same kind of group-centric functions as Outlook, it's on its way...Mozilla is in fact differnt from Netscape - it is the next generation browser from [some] of the same authors as Netscape. It has it's own problems, and I generall prefer to use stand-alone applications vs. all-in-one. One of the big problems is that people will need to read and send mail in English and Russian. I'm trying to recall, but I don't think I could get StarOffice and KMail to permit Russian. Actually I could write in Russian in KMail provided I opened a letter that was already in Russian and composed my letter in that letter. Understand? have you tried this with Evolution? So, I'm what other programs people use and find to be very good. I haven't tried Pine, but I don't think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI program. I use pine for all of my mail, but for regular users, there is quite a learning curve, and it doesn't offer any of the shceduling properties of Outlook. Your best bet right now is probably Evolution, though, having personally tried it, it doesn't play nice with all of Outlook/Exchanges features... again...the main question is why?. -lev
RE: Email client programs (w/o html formatting - sorry)
One of the reasons is monetary. Why pay MS for what is already out there, and works just as well? The other reason is example. We know of another company that is totally Linux-based and has no problems. They can work not just at work, but also from home or from any computer anywhere through a web browser. Actually we are using Terminal Services. The 1 user who is on a Linux box is only on it because he is using rdesktop. I use it as well. About email clients: practically no one uses scheduling in our office, so that's not an issue. Something happened with my Evolution install that left me very dissatisfied. I think it just crashed often. The email client that we adopt certainly does not have to offer the all-in-one possibilities of Outlook. But it does have to be stable. Curtis application/ms-tnef
Re: Email client programs
Vaughan, Curtis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client program. Ooooh, I like a flamewar. First, let me state the needs of our company. We are currently very MS based at present. The goal has been set to slowly move over to Linux. Debian has been chosen, as it is the most stable that I am aware of. Of course, I don't know a hell of a lot yet. First, I will have to settle many issues before moving any clients over, although I actually have 1 client on a Linux box and I too try to use Linux most of the time. People here are, of course, used to Outlook. And I have to say that I find that it works very well. I don't think we have ever had any problems with it. We have Exchange server problems, but no client problems. Therefore, clients will be expecting the same quality - no problems. Assuming you do slay that horrible beast that is Exchange server and use a standards compliant servers, you *will* have problems with your Outlook clients. For example, bugs like http://bugs.debian.org/108719 are an Outlook problem. Outlook sucks. It's buggy and crashes constantly if it can't use an Exchange server. It's another attempt by MS to force you to exclusively use their products since their software won't work with other products. Nice of them, isn't it? I have tried out a number of email client programs, but am not satisfied by any one of them. I have tried out, KMail, Evolution, Netscape and Mozilla, oh and the email client program with StarOffice. Each one has something good about it, but none of them are as good as Outlook. *Cough* *wretch* *gag* *vomit* One of the big problems might be the fact that I don't know how to configure them, of course. Partially, but the ones you've listed aren't exactly top of their class. One of the big problems is that people will need to read and send mail in English and Russian. I'm trying to recall, but I don't think I could get StarOffice and KMail to permit Russian. Actually I could write in Russian in KMail provided I opened a letter that was already in Russian and composed my letter in that letter. Understand? Evolution and Mozilla basically crash all the time on me. Is there really any difference between Mozilla and Netscape? Mozilla is a rewrite of the Netscape mail client, I believe. It's still awfully buggy, AFAIK. I liked the fact however that I was able to convert all of my Outlook folders to Mozilla. This will be of critical importance as well. I believe Mozilla uses the standard mbox format for storage, which every single mail client in Unix should support. If it works in Mozilla, it will work for all the others. Finally, I couldn't figure out how to get any of the programs to encrypt passwords for logging in to our Exchange server - perhaps this is impossible consider different technologies? I don't know and don't care about Exchange, but any mail-fetching program (like fetchmail) or a half-way decent IMAP client will support SSL encryption. If Exchange doesn't support SSL, it's because it's a worthless piece of shit. Eventually, however, I would like to shut the Exchange server down, but that's not in the planning yet. Better sooner than later. So, I'm what other programs people use and find to be very good. I haven't tried Pine, but I don't think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI program. Why is that? Because they've bought into the marketing pitch that pretty graphics == better software? That's bullshit. There's no good reason any user couldn't become more proficient with a text-mode client. Pine and mutt are both nice text-mode clients with IMAP support, though Pine can't be packaged for Debian because of its brain-damaged license. Sylpheed is supposed to be a nice GUI mailer, though I haven't tried it. Evolution is supposedly out of beta, though I wouldn't be surprised if it crashed a lot, as you mentioned. KMail has weak IMAP support. Mozilla Mail is still too buggy, as is Balsa. Netscape 4.anything sucks. So, you have plenty of choices, but no clear winner. Unfortunately, the very best mailers (mutt, gnus) take time to learn and aren't known to be newbie friendly. A safe choice may be KMail, since a lot of development effort is going into it, and it's improved a lot lately. I can't say anything for Russian support in any of these, however. -- Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bignachos.com
RE: Email client programs (w/o html formatting - sorry)
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Vaughan, Curtis wrote: One of the reasons is monetary. Why pay MS for what is already out there, and works just as well? The other reason is example. We know of another company that is totally Linux-based and has no problems. They can work not just at work, but also from home or from any computer anywhere through a web browser. Actually we are using Terminal Services. The 1 user who is on a Linux box is only on it because he is using rdesktop. I use it as well. About email clients: practically no one uses scheduling in our office, so that's not an issue. Something happened with my Evolution install that left me very dissatisfied. I think it just crashed often. The email client that we adopt certainly does not have to offer the all-in-one possibilities of Outlook. But it does have to be stable. in that case, I would go for evolution. start with a clean install, and make sure you have EVERYTHING necessary for evolution to work (use their .debs + depends). -lev
Re: Email client programs
imo it's very useful to have the eamil deliverystorage separate from email clients. from this point of view the ideal situation is to use IMAP, server side filtering (like sieve with cyrus) and let them use any clients they want... not sure how to get there from exchange, does exchange offer imap access? erik Brian Nelson wrote: Vaughan, Curtis [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client program. ...
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Erik Steffl wrote: imo it's very useful to have the eamil deliverystorage separate from email clients. from this point of view the ideal situation is to use IMAP, server side filtering (like sieve with cyrus) and let them use any clients they want... from a management side, letting users use whatever they like can be problematic. unification makes problem solving a lot simpler. not sure how to get there from exchange, does exchange offer imap access? yes it does. as well as pop3 (plus an MS one I believe..) -lev
Re: Email client programs
Erik Steffl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: imo it's very useful to have the eamil deliverystorage separate from email clients. from this point of view the ideal situation is to use IMAP, server side filtering (like sieve with cyrus) and let them use any clients they want... not sure how to get there from exchange, does exchange offer imap access? In its typical broken way, it does... -- Brian Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://bignachos.com
Re: Email client programs
Brian Nelson wrote: ... Sylpheed is supposed to be a nice GUI mailer, though I haven't tried it. Evolution is supposedly out of beta, though I wouldn't be surprised if it crashed a lot, as you mentioned. KMail has weak IMAP support. Mozilla Mail is still too buggy, as is Balsa. Netscape 4.anything sucks. what's this netscpae 4.x bashing I see repeatedly? IMO it's a fairly good email client, stable (well, as stable as browser and it's really only stable when you disable java), has the main MUA features... I use it as my main MUA and the only problem I can see is that it does not check all the IMAP folders for new eamil (it only checks INBOX). It has one huge advantage over outlook though - it can open a URL in new window which seems impossible in outlook. netscape is pretty basic as far as functionality goes but we're talking about outlook replacement, not mutt replacement... I have tried most of other main MUAs available that support IMAP (evolution, kmail, mozilla, mutt etc.) and still find netscape 4.x most useful - most other are fairly unstable (most gui based ones), not likeable (pine, but that's just personal preference) or have other important problems... about the only one I haven't tried is gnus... erik
Re: Email client programs
Lev Lvovsky wrote: On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Erik Steffl wrote: imo it's very useful to have the eamil deliverystorage separate from email clients. from this point of view the ideal situation is to use IMAP, server side filtering (like sieve with cyrus) and let them use any clients they want... from a management side, letting users use whatever they like can be problematic. unification makes problem solving a lot simpler. support the standard (one or two email clients), the rest is unsupported but allowed... (most of them are free so there's no licencing issue). then again, it's of course up to them to set up the policy. my point was that when using IMAP to store email they can easily change email clients, offer secure email access from anywhere (within LAN or from outside). the flexibility is there, they don't necessarily have to use all of it at once... not sure how to get there from exchange, does exchange offer imap access? yes it does. as well as pop3 (plus an MS one I believe..) then it should be nobrainer - switch to imap, run some imap server alongside with exchange (to test it), over time convert everything to imap... that way the question of which email client to use is not that crucial... erik
Re: Email client programs
Vaughan, Curtis wrote: I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client program. First, let me state the needs of our company. We are currently very MS based at present. The goal has been set to slowly move over to Linux. Debian has been chosen, as it is the most stable that I am aware of. Of course, I don't know a hell of a lot yet. [...] I have tried out a number of email client programs, but am not satisfied by any one of them. I have tried out, KMail, Evolution, Netscape and Mozilla, oh and the email client program with StarOffice. Each one has something good about it, but none of them are as good as Outlook. One of the big problems might be the fact that I don't know how to configure them, of course. Take a look at Sylpheed. Its main window is quite similar to Outlook Express, and I have found that Outlook/OE users find it an easy transition. One of the big problems is that people will need to read and send mail in English and Russian. I'm trying to recall, but I don't think I could get StarOffice and KMail to permit Russian. Actually I could write in Russian in KMail provided I opened a letter that was already in Russian and composed my letter in that letter. Understand? Hmm. I have never needed to use a different language, but as Sylpheed's principal developer is Japanese, I suspect it handles language issues better than most. Craig
Re: Email client programs
Brian Nelson wrote: ... but I don't think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI program. Why is that? Because they've bought into the marketing pitch that pretty graphics == better software? That's bullshit. There's no good reason any user couldn't become more proficient with a text-mode client. What I've found in trying to get GUI-dependent people to use mutt is that they resist having to memorize a bunch of keystroke commands (no matter how easy, and despite the fact that the most common ones are listed at the top of the screen!). They'd rather point and click; they know how to do that already, and they don't see why they should go to the (minimal) bother of learning a keyboard-based UI. This isn't an intelligence problem, either; some of these people are quite bright, but they don't see learning mutt as worth their bother when good GUI alternatives exist. And Sylpheed is actually pretty good; if I didn't need a text-based interface (for accessing my mail in an ssh session across the internet, on a slow enough connection that X forwarding is out of the question), I might use it myself. But since I need a text-mode MUA, I use mutt. Craig
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Craig Dickson wrote: Brian Nelson wrote: ... but I don't think I could get our users to go over to a non-GUI program. Why is that? Because they've bought into the marketing pitch that pretty graphics == better software? That's bullshit. There's no good reason any user couldn't become more proficient with a text-mode client. What I've found in trying to get GUI-dependent people to use mutt is that they resist having to memorize a bunch of keystroke commands (no matter how easy, and despite the fact that the most common ones are listed at the top of the screen!). They'd rather point and click; they know how to do that already, and they don't see why they should go to the (minimal) bother of learning a keyboard-based UI. This isn't an intelligence problem, either; some of these people are quite bright, but they don't see learning mutt as worth their bother when good GUI alternatives exist. And Sylpheed is actually pretty good; if I didn't need a text-based interface (for accessing my mail in an ssh session across the internet, on a slow enough connection that X forwarding is out of the question), I might use it myself. But since I need a text-mode MUA, I use mutt. agreed. pretty graphics have nothing to do with better software. same thing with text-based interfaces - neither is a clencher in the argument, the underlying design is. that being said, there are people that *gasp* don't want to learn anything new in order to use a computer. some people don't delve nearly as far into it as we do, and use a computer merely as a tool. same can be said with me, and tax forms vs. an accountant. -lev
Re: Email client programs
Erik Steffl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ES what's this netscpae 4.x bashing I see repeatedly? IMO it's a fairly ES good email client, stable (well, as stable as browser and it's really ES only stable when you disable java), has the main MUA features... Issues with netscape mail at MIT: -- It has that (in)famous Netscape stability, particularly if you have Java(script) enabled. -- Hard to migrate to other mail formats[1]. -- Bad, bad issues (e.g. eats your mailbox in an unrecoverable way) if you try to incorporate mail and you run over your account quota. (Less of an issue if you use IMAP, though.) -- Likes to send HTML mail. The student group I was part of that did unofficial support generally felt pity for people trying to use Netscape mail, especially when it hurt them. The best combination between blessed and pretty seems to be exmh; pine's IMAP support seems to be very good, though, and recent versions of it seem to have some of the features (e.g. mail filtering) that other reputable MUAs have. However, pine isn't included in Debian for licensing reasons (you can't redistribute binaries built from modified source). [1] The supported mail tool here is MH, though, so the really important thing is it's hard to turn your mail from whatever format Netscape uses into an MH folder. For all I know Netscape might very well use the standard mbox format for its mail, which would actually work reasonably well for most other purposes. -- David Maze [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/ Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal. -- Abra Mitchell
Re: Email client programs
David Z Maze wrote: Erik Steffl [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: ES what's this netscpae 4.x bashing I see repeatedly? IMO it's a fairly ES good email client, stable (well, as stable as browser and it's really ES only stable when you disable java), has the main MUA features... Issues with netscape mail at MIT: -- It has that (in)famous Netscape stability, particularly if you have Java(script) enabled. yes, compared to other gui MUAs it's pretty stable though. -- Hard to migrate to other mail formats[1]. yes (to [1]), it's mbox, but directories are handled in special way (in netscape it appears you can put both mails and subfolders in folder but in reality the mails are in file myfolder and subfolders are in directory myfolder.sbd) - still works when using MUA that supports mbox format just the illusion of folder having emails and subfolders goes away. IMO the MUA should not handle storage of email, so this is a non an issue:-) [the real causality goes in the other way] -- Bad, bad issues (e.g. eats your mailbox in an unrecoverable way) if you try to incorporate mail and you run over your account quota. (Less of an issue if you use IMAP, though.) never seen this but don't have quotas either. ran out of space few times and nothing terrible happened (that was before I started to use IMAP). do other programs handle this situation better? I imagine that when program is writing a file and suddenly cannot write anymore it can leave the file in funny state... -- Likes to send HTML mail. can be set up, as a default and for each recipient (in address book) separately. you're right that the default should be plain text (IIRC it's html). The student group I was part of that did unofficial support generally felt pity for people trying to use Netscape mail, especially when it hurt them. The best combination between blessed and pretty seems to be exmh; pine's IMAP support seems to be very good, though, and recent versions of it seem to have some of the features (e.g. mail filtering) that other reputable MUAs have. However, pine isn't included in Debian for licensing reasons (you can't redistribute binaries built from modified source). the problem with text based MUAs is that you cannot see folders/index/message at the same time... (AFAIK, haven't found it in mutt or pine) erik
Re: Email client programs
Erik Steffl wrote: IMO the MUA should not handle storage of email, so this is a non an issue:-) [the real causality goes in the other way] Well, the MUA should not have to worry about retrieval from POP servers. That's fetchmail's job. But certainly the MUA is the thing for interactively moving mails from one folder to another. the problem with text based MUAs is that you cannot see folders/index/message at the same time... (AFAIK, haven't found it in mutt or pine) Right, AFAIK you can't do that in mutt. On the other hand, I don't find that essential. GKrellM shows me the number of new messages in each folder (if I'm working in X), and anyway moving back and forth between the folder index, message index, and message pager isn't so awful. Mutt shows messages at the bottom of the screen if new mail arrives in any folder, which helps. Craig
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Craig Dickson wrote: Well, the MUA should not have to worry about retrieval from POP servers. That's fetchmail's job. But certainly the MUA is the thing for interactively moving mails from one folder to another. why the insistence on fetchmail? -lev
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Craig Dickson wrote: the problem with text based MUAs is that you cannot see folders/index/message at the same time... (AFAIK, haven't found it in mutt or pine) Right, AFAIK you can't do that in mutt. On the other hand, I don't find that essential. GKrellM shows me the number of new messages in each folder (if I'm working in X), and anyway moving back and forth between the folder index, message index, and message pager isn't so awful. Mutt shows messages at the bottom of the screen if new mail arrives in any folder, which helps. Not to mention the fact that one can have as many instances of mutt open as one wishes, to view/read multiple folders at the same time. And it will still work fine over ssh links, which is a damn good thing for many people :) -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh
Re: Email client programs
also sprach Lev Lvovsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2001.12.27.0144 +0100]: Well, the MUA should not have to worry about retrieval from POP servers. That's fetchmail's job. But certainly the MUA is the thing for interactively moving mails from one folder to another. why the insistence on fetchmail? it's the unix philosophy -- let one program do its job and do it well, let other programs use that... -- martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \ echo mailto: !#^.*|tr * mailto:; [EMAIL PROTECTED] core error - bus dumped pgpJzt3vMQcQV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Email client programs
Lev Lvovsky wrote: why the insistence on fetchmail? Without fetchmail or something like it, if your network is down when you decide to run your mail client, you can't check your mail server for new messages. Even if the network is up, you have to wait while the client connects to the server and downloads all your new mail (which may take a while). With fetchmail, mail retrieval, filtering, and sorting is a background task that the system can do whenever the network is up. When you start your mail client, your mail is already there for you to read. Even if the network is currently down, you'll have all your mail up to the point that it went down. Also, with fetchmail, you don't have to bother telling your mail client about your POP or IMAP server -- it's one less thing to configure if you happen to switch mail clients. Most of us don't do this very often, so it's a minor point, but still nice. I also like to run a local SMTP server, because then I can even send mail when the network is down (though of course the local SMTP server will have to queue outgoing mail until the network comes back up). With both fetchmail and a local SMTP server, your MUA doesn't need to know about any servers other than localhost, and doesn't have to be running for your mail to come and go. Craig
Re: Email client programs
Craig Dickson wrote: Erik Steffl wrote: IMO the MUA should not handle storage of email, so this is a non an issue:-) [the real causality goes in the other way] Well, the MUA should not have to worry about retrieval from POP servers. That's fetchmail's job. But certainly the MUA is the thing for interactively moving mails from one folder to another. mail retrieval is indeed separate issue (and it can be both job of fetchamil (active retrieval) and MTA (accepting delivery)) then there's mail storage - IMO the task for IMAP server only then the MUA comes in - in between user and IMAP, the actual email manipulation is doen by IMAP, MUA is only proxy between user and IMAP. this kind of setup has number of important advantages (I definitely wouldn't go back), you can access email remotely, from different MUAs etc. the problem with text based MUAs is that you cannot see folders/index/message at the same time... (AFAIK, haven't found it in mutt or pine) Right, AFAIK you can't do that in mutt. On the other hand, I don't find that essential. GKrellM shows me the number of new messages in each folder (if I'm working in X), and anyway moving back and forth between the folder index, message index, and message pager isn't so awful. Mutt shows messages at the bottom of the screen if new mail arrives in any folder, which helps. I guess, I still like to see it all at once... I guess I can open few windows, each with it's own view:-) BTW the other annoying thing is that it requires password to IMAP everytime I start it - is there a way to have passwordless access to IMAP from mutt? erik
Re: Email client programs
On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, martin f krafft wrote: why the insistence on fetchmail? it's the unix philosophy -- let one program do its job and do it well, let other programs use that... hehe, really? I guess you can count mozilla out ;) while I like the concept of modularity, I can't imagine that actually fetching the mail can be very hard and/or killer-app-able. hehe, I like me my pine :) -lev -- personal site :: www.sonous.com rave site :: raves.sonous.com I'm a DJ! site :: djkgb.sonous.com Progess is the direct result of dissatisfaction. -Mark Rudholm
Re: Email client programs
Craig Dickson wrote: Lev Lvovsky wrote: why the insistence on fetchmail? ... Also, with fetchmail, you don't have to bother telling your mail client about your POP or IMAP server -- it's one less thing to configure if you provided that you want to download emails from IMAP which is not a very good way to use IMAP. I guess it's desirable in some situations... but often you might want to use it straight as it is or, if the network connection is not good enough, use it in off-line mode. Unless you want to consolidate all you accounts in one, then it makes sense to download even IMAP mail. but then it makes sense to run local IMAP server (for similar reasons that it's desirable to use fetchmail to fetch email). erik
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Craig Dickson wrote: Lev Lvovsky wrote: why the insistence on fetchmail? Without fetchmail or something like it, if your network is down when you decide to run your mail client, you can't check your mail server for new messages. Even if the network is up, you have to wait while the client connects to the server and downloads all your new mail (which may take a while). hmm... since i run my mail srver on the same box as I run pine from, it's never really been an issue...I guess though, that for a bigger setup, this would indeed be a good idea... -lev
Re: Email client programs
Erik Steffl wrote: mail retrieval is indeed separate issue (and it can be both job of fetchamil (active retrieval) and MTA (accepting delivery)) then there's mail storage - IMO the task for IMAP server only then the MUA comes in - in between user and IMAP, the actual email manipulation is doen by IMAP, MUA is only proxy between user and IMAP. Ah, so that's what you meant. Yes, true. I haven't used IMAP very much; I had a local server running for a while as a means of porting old Outlook Express archives to Linux, and my current employer's site is IMAP-only, but other than that most places I've had email accounts have been POP3-only. If good IMAP support was common in mail clients, I'd probably be more inclined to explore it, but in my experience many clients either don't support IMAP, or the support is limited and/or buggy. BTW the other annoying thing is that it requires password to IMAP everytime I start it - is there a way to have passwordless access to IMAP from mutt? There must be, I'm sure, but since fetchmail takes care of that for me, I haven't needed to find out. Craig
Re: Email client programs
Erik Steffl wrote: Also, with fetchmail, you don't have to bother telling your mail client about your POP or IMAP server -- it's one less thing to configure if you provided that you want to download emails from IMAP which is not a very good way to use IMAP. I guess it's desirable in some situations... but often you might want to use it straight as it is or, if the network connection is not good enough, use it in off-line mode. Unless you want to consolidate all you accounts in one, then it makes sense to download even IMAP mail. That's exactly what I do. My personal mail accounts, work mail, everything ends up in my home mail folders, thanks to fetchmail. Meanwhile, mutt is configured to know what to put in my From: headers according to what folder I'm in when I send a mail. but then it makes sense to run local IMAP server (for similar reasons that it's desirable to use fetchmail to fetch email). That's a matter of taste, I think. If you have an email client that has really solid IMAP support, then that's reasonable. Craig
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 05:36:15PM -0800, Lev Lvovsky wrote: | On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, martin f krafft wrote: | | why the insistence on fetchmail? | | it's the unix philosophy -- let one program do its job and do it well, | let other programs use that... | | hehe, really? I guess you can count mozilla out ;) Right. | while I like the concept of modularity, I can't imagine that actually | fetching the mail can be very hard and/or killer-app-able. It's not that amazing, but fetchmail does support a wide array of protocols. I even heard about some people (fed up with exchange's brokenness of IMAP) reverse engineered the exchange protocol and patched fetchmail to support it. If you've done any development you know that error handling code can easily outweigh the amount of normal logic code in a program. I think that, at the very least, a library should be made that all programs can share. That way it can be known to be rock-solid, or that when an error is found and corrected, all clients benefit from it. That is what is nice about fetchmail. It is also nice to know that you can retrieve your mail independent from the viewer when you are trying out many viewers to find the best one. -D -- If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? Mark 8:34-37
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 11:46:44AM -0800, Vaughan, Curtis wrote: | I am wondering what other Debian Users recommend for an email client | program. I like mutt the best. It is good, makes good use of screen real-estate, has good threading and list support, and is light, fast, and stable. The one downside is that many people don't like console based apps. | One of the big problems is that people will need to read and send mail in | English and Russian. I'm trying to recall, but I don't think I could get | StarOffice and KMail to permit Russian. Actually I could write in Russian | in KMail provided I opened a letter that was already in Russian and composed | my letter in that letter. Understand? I haven't tried to use mutt with any other language, but the Korean and Japanese (spam) messages I've seen looked messed up. Of course, they still looked messed up with 'cat' and 'less' too. I don't think the version of gnome-terminal that I have can handle multi-byte fonts. I use 'vim' as my editor with mutt, but one could just as easily use 'gvim'. With gvim I have correctly viewed files in other languages and it supports XIM. I expect that with any (decent) mailer you will be able to specify an external editor to use and in that case you can make use of gvim's language support. As for other mailers, Balsa is decent and lightweight. Mahogany is ok, but I'm not sure of its stability. I've heard good things about Sylpheed and KMail (though not the current kmail package). | Finally, I couldn't figure out how to get any of the programs to encrypt | passwords for logging in to our Exchange server - perhaps this is impossible | consider different technologies? Eventually, however, I would like to shut | the Exchange server down, but that's not in the planning yet. If you don't have IMAP or POP enaled on the exchange server you will definitely have trouble with it. That's the problem with proprietary protocols and interfaces. I did hear something about some people reverse engineering it and patching fetchmail to be able to retrieve from an exchange server. -D -- If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup.
Re: Email client programs
On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 05:32:31PM -0800, Erik Steffl wrote: Craig Dickson wrote: ... I guess, I still like to see it all at once... I guess I can open few windows, each with it's own view:-) BTW the other annoying thing is that it requires password to IMAP everytime I start it - is there a way to have passwordless access to IMAP from mutt? whilst in mutt try hitting F1 and read to your heart delight, otherwise try in ~/.muttrc: set imap_user=your imap user name set imap_pass=your imap password and better do: chmod 500 ~/.muttrc -- groetjes, carel
Re: Email client programs
Carel Fellinger wrote: On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 05:32:31PM -0800, Erik Steffl wrote: Craig Dickson wrote: ... I guess, I still like to see it all at once... I guess I can open few windows, each with it's own view:-) BTW the other annoying thing is that it requires password to IMAP everytime I start it - is there a way to have passwordless access to IMAP from mutt? whilst in mutt try hitting F1 and read to your heart delight, otherwise try in ~/.muttrc: set imap_user=your imap user name set imap_pass=your imap password and better do: chmod 500 ~/.muttrc thanks a lot. in the heat of the moment I also tried the certificates files again (which I've found in docs but didn't work last time I tried) and now I have no-bump road to IMAP folder (almost, it's still slightly weird). so now, thanks to IMAP, I read debian-user in netscape and INBOX in mutt:-) maybe I'll get used to it (mutt) because it has some interesting features (scoring, proper reply to lists etc.). erik
