On Sat, 30 Dec 2000 11:31:37 -0800, Mircea Luca said:
> Forrest English wrote:
>
> > i used pronto on a k6-3 400 with 64 megs of ram for about 1/2 a year. just
>don't have it check the mail to often ;)
> >
> > but, i think you're REALLY overstating what it takes to run. i don't even notice
>it's running anymore, k7 550 w/ 320
> > MBs of RAM. i think you'll be fine if you've got over 128 megs of ram. but
>yeah, you can basicaly blame mysql for
> > taking up the resources.
> >
> > oh wait.... were you using CSV? that right there would explain why you thought
>it took an insane machine. because
> > unless you use an sql database with it, it is impossibly slow, and i'd rather use
>_kmail_ than pronto if i can't have
> > my mysql.
> >
> > On Sun, 30 Dec 2000 16:35:48 UTC, Shea Martin said:
> >
> > > Pronto is great if you are running a PIII/Athlon 1.5GHz, w/ 1024MB of
> > > RAM. For those of us with a k6-II 400Mhz, w/ 64MB of RAM may want to
> > > avoid pronto. I admit thatfeaturewise, stability, and threading ability
> > > pronto is hard to beat.
> > >
> > > But Bynari's Tradeclient runs a close second and uses 1/3 the RAM of
> > > Pronto.
> > >
> > > Sylpheed would probably be my fav. if it could multi-thread. Auther
> > > claims it can, but it locks up while sending or recieving. Don't worry,
> > > it unlocks after.
> > >
> > > Shea Martin
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > Duke of Silton
> > > &
> > > Earl of S'toon
> > > ###########
> > >
> >
>
> Hi
>
> Maybe I misunderstood but are you guys talking about a MAIL_CLIENT here ?
> I mean this is insane.Good_old Netscape Gold 3 was runing just fine on my HP Vectra
>-Pentium 75 with 32 MB of RAM under
> Win 3.11 and Win95.A bit slow but Eudora rocked on that machine.
> Now we have here a mail client that wants a 400 MHZ processor and 128 MB of RAM and
>uses a real
> database .
i use it actually, because of it's layout and features. and um, whats wrong with
using a real database? it's very
fast with thousands upon thousands of messages from these damn mailing lists i'm on ;)
and it's not that it wants the cpu or the ram all the time. i think you missed that
part. the only time when it
causes some proc usage, is mail checking. it would work fine on an older computer,
and probably 32 megs of ram, as
long as you weren't planning on doing anything intensive with it at the same time.
course, it would be kinda slow, because pronto was written in perl. however, one of
the project members is currently
finishing up prontoC. which will be the same as pronto, but written in c, and about
10x faster.
> Hmm....I would stay away from that at any cost.I mean if you put it this way then
>with these requirements I would rather
> use Eudora on W2K and be done with it.My work computer is a PII-450 with 128 MB of
>RAM running
> W2K and I reboot the damn thing only in hollidays.
>
> My point-you will never convince somebody to move to Linux if you tell them that
>they need those kind of systems to run
> just a freaking email client.
oh, i don't try and get people to use linux based on pronto. i love pronto, because
it's 99% as good as eudora that we
all loved so much back in windows world. there are lots of other e-mail clients.
most of them work just fine. my
brother uses spruce because it's light on the resources, but, also on the features i
belive. other people i know use
pine, or even freaking emacs to read mail. no one is trying to sell linux with
pronto, the choices alone are what
'sells' it :)
and
>
> This wasn't a flame it was just an observation.Sit back for a while and read the
>thread again.I'm running right
> now a K6/2-450 and really I don't think I have to upgrade for a least another 6
>months.
>
> C'mon there have to be out there an email client that doesn't suck and doesn't need
>an "industrial " database
mysql is industrial?
> to be running(faster than using a regular mailbox!!!!) and a server-like computer.
>,kmail & balsa come to mind,not to
> mention Netscape mail which hadnt't crash on me for a looon time now. :-)
>
> Happy new year
>
anyhow, i don't even know why i'm blabbering about pronto. i like it. it works for
me. and maybe other people. if
you don't like it, please, use somthing else, and tell us about it! obviously there
is never going to be a perfect
e-mail client, or browser, or file manager or, os for that matter that is going to
make everyone involved happy.
everyone has diffferent requirements, different system specs, and different levels of
comfort with linux. so, yeah,
whatever works :)
--
Forrest English
http://truffula.net
"I don't like this air, but that doesn't
mean I'm going to stop breathing."
-Doug Martsch
_______________________________________________
Stormlinux-users-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.stormix.com/community/lists/listinfo/stormlinux-users-list
