it works, and it's *safe*
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| gus3 Sep 14, 2010 1:24 AM EDT |
The text-based Mail User Agents from the 90's made no assumptions about what to do with a message, beyond what you (and your sysadmin, where applicable) specified in your ~/.mailcap file. Assuming your sysadmin was trustworthy, you could have an empty .mailcap, precious few attachments would be trusted, and you had the opportunity to inspect anything before actually opening/launching it under your UID. Mutt, Pine (now Alpine), and even simply "mail" could be trusted not to open an attachment blindly without your explicit (blanket or particular) permission. Unfortunately, "convenience before security" thinking has crept into modern MUA development. |
| tracyanne Sep 14, 2010 1:56 AM EDT |
Quoting: It's hard to remember the last time that Evolution or Thunderbird shipped something really interesting that enhanced the way we work with email. They both work perfectly fine for me. I haven't seen anything about GMail, for example, that improves in anyway, on what Evolution and Thunderbird do for me. It's all there on my computer, I can search it, delete any or all of it, back it up, restore it. I don't want for anything else. |
| phsolide Sep 14, 2010 9:59 AM EDT |
You forgot "fast" - I use Alpine, the Apache licensed successor to "pine" (http://www.washington.edu/alpine/). It's substantially faster to use than "Outlook". This article totally ignores the real fact, which is that "Outlook" and other GUI email clients have bent the spine of email since 1995. I've used several GUI email clients (including "Outlook" at employers), and I don't feel any great need to move off Alpine in my own email. It does way better than "Outlook" at almost everything. I have to conclude that GUI email clients are the aberration, not text-based email clients. Not "stuck in the 90s", but "Retaining True Mojo". |
| caitlyn Sep 14, 2010 2:02 PM EDT |
I sure wouldn't use GMail as an example of a good mail client. I can't even sort things off into folders. I can make what amounts to a link in a folder but that isn't the same. I'm also not that sold on Priority Inbox. Give me the mail clients Joe Brockmeier is complaining about, like Claws-Mail or Thunderbird. I much prefer them to GMail's client. Also, what is it with Joe Brockmeier doing all these Linux desktop is deficient articles. He just did one disputing my claim that 1% desktop market share is a myth and he depended entirely on web counters and ignored all the sales data I and others threw at him. He insisted Linux desktop market share is "tiny" when it clearly is not. This is also not the first time I've seen him touting the deficiencies in the Linux desktop experience. Here is someone who has worked on the GNOME project and for Novell/SUSE. He is not a Microsoft shill by any means. He generally knows his stuff. I have no idea where he is coming from and don't agree with any of it. |
| bigg Sep 14, 2010 3:35 PM EDT |
> Also, what is it with Joe Brockmeier doing all these Linux desktop is deficient articles. > Here is someone who has worked on the GNOME project and for Novell/SUSE. You answered your own question. It's not that he works for Microsoft, it's that working in that type of position makes you stupid. I mean that seriously. Those guys are out of touch, then they start writing down things that sounded good inside their head, with no attempt to see if the facts support their position. |
| tuxchick Sep 14, 2010 4:41 PM EDT |
Dear me, this sure looks like nobody read past the part that got them riled up. Joe didn't hold up Gmail as an example of a great mail client to be copied, his point is that while everything else in Linux-land is improving by leaps and bounds, email clients have stagnated. FTA:Quoting: It's tempting to think that email has peaked, there's nothing to improve it. Email has been around a long, long time -- so there's not much room for innovation or improving the user experience, right? But if you look at Gmail, that's obviously not the case. Quoting: The point here isn't that the teams working on Thunderbird, Evolution, Kmail, etc. should copy Gmail blindly. It's that these applications really aren't keeping up with the times. Most of us are hip-deep in email every day, and need better tools to manage it -- but the open source stuff is stuck in the 90s. So what's the problem? Attacking Joe's character is not necessary. |
| gus3 Sep 14, 2010 4:59 PM EDT |
Quoting:It's tempting to think that email has peaked, there's nothing to improve it.When it comes to managing email on my system, I'll stick to the "NASA approach": prefer the older technologies whose shortcomings and failure modes are well-known. I have little to no use for bloat-monsters with much shorter histories, whose security implications are less well-understood. |
| bigg Sep 14, 2010 5:28 PM EDT |
> Attacking Joe's character is not necessary. I don't know if your comment is directed at me, but I certainly didn't attack his character. I read this part Quoting:Why aren't open source mailers keeping up with the rest of the Linux desktop, and being blown away by Gmail? and that was enough for me. I have a Gmail account. I don't see it as any sort of gold standard. I don't see programs like Thunderbird as stuck in the 90's. I used email in the 90's, and what we have today is a whole lot better. |
| tuxchick Sep 14, 2010 6:16 PM EDT |
Yes you did attack Joe's character, bigg. Read your own comment. Then you got stuck on one sentence, just like everyone else in this thread. I also think that mail clients are stuck in the past, which is a nasty combination of imitating Outlook and not really trying to figure out something better. I like Kmail 3.5; it has a wonderful tool for easily creating complex filters, it manages multiple accounts and multiple identities, it has a bunch of good keyboard shortcuts, it's very customizable, and sorting and finding things isn't too too bad. But there are still features that could be improved- like saving a message in different formats like text or pdf, its import tool hasn't been improved in years so you still can't do selective imports of messages, directory structure, and contacts, or control where they are imported to, and you can't file->open a directory of messages; you have to use the import tool. Evolution, IMO, is just plain gawdawful. It drags in gobs of dependencies including a server and a database. Neither KMail nor Evolution have an option for a simple text flat-file address book, but drag in PIMs and databases. I've tested most Linux email clients, and they are stuck in pretty much the same feature set they've had for years. If it's a good feature set that works for some users, fine, but I wouldn't mind seeing at least one of the herd try for something newer and better. Some other things I'd like are more flexible and easy archiving, like being able to save a particular mail folder (for example, my "Mom" or "Boss" folders) wherever I want just like any other directory, and more flexible ways to save contacts, such as printable plain text. I think imitating Firefox extensions would be an awesome thing to try-- start out with a barebones mailer with just the features you want, and then install extensions from inside the mailer as you want. "Unified communications" and "collaboration" have been the big unholy buzzwords for years. Why not get ahead of the herd and make this user-configurable? Maybe you like IM, IRC, VoIP, filesharing, RSS, mailing lists, and email all separate. Maybe you like them all mooshed together in a single interface. Why be stuck in the Outlook model of 'our way is the only way'? |
| Steven_Rosenber Sep 14, 2010 6:51 PM EDT |
I use Gmail as my main "client" and one of the big reasons is the use of tags as opposed to folders. With this feature I can give a given message more than one tag and have a much more nuanced and useful way of sorting/categorizing my mail. I also like the way attachments can be viewed in the browser or in Google Docs. Sure I've sold my soul, but it's just so damn convenient. That said, I've been using Claws Mail for a couple of IMAP accounts, and I'm very happy with it. I used to use Thunderbird and did spend a bit of time with Evolution. I like the speed of Claws, and it does the job. But for my main accounts, I can't do them entirely in IMAP, or POP them down to a single machine. I need access from a number of different machines in different places. And for me that means Gmail. |
| Scott_Ruecker Sep 14, 2010 7:03 PM EDT |
If you've sold your soul Steven then Google must own mine.. I use G-mail, Docs, Calendar (I have my own schedule and my band's synced), Reader, News, Finance etc..and have for a while now. They make to it darn easy, I open up Chrome or FF and I have everything I need to access and want to know up in just a few tabs. I can surf, find articles, get the news, my e-mail etc..add in Facebook and Twitter and..well you get the idea. No matter what I am not getting a Google tattoo though..;-) |
| caitlyn Sep 14, 2010 7:03 PM EDT |
@tuxchick: He does hold up GMail as an example of innovation in mail clients. I don't see GMail's innovations as particularly good or useful, which is what I was trying to say. Quoting:I don't see programs like Thunderbird as stuck in the 90's. I used email in the 90's, and what we have today is a whole lot better. I agree with bigg on this. I don't see the stagnation that Joe Brockmeier claims to see. Quoting:I think imitating Firefox extensions would be an awesome thing to try-- start out with a barebones mailer with just the features you want, and then install extensions from inside the mailer as you want. Claws-Mail does this and that is a good example of innovation. Claws-Mail feature set has definitely not been stuck in the past. Evolution: Don't like it, never have liked it, but it works with Outlook (actually the OWA) and nothing else really does. |
| Bob_Robertson Sep 15, 2010 9:19 AM EDT |
> I sure wouldn't use GMail as an example of a good mail client. I enjoy it when Caitlyn and I agree. Gmail is a rudimentary email client at best. That doesn't make it a bad client, I just don't expect to get the same functionality from it as I do from my favorite so far, Kmail. Of course, Kmail (as I configure it) shows a clear heritage from Eudora, which I guess makes it fall into the same category of 'stuck in the 90s' that the author bemoans. Maybe the author didn't notice that Outlook's historic default setting of automatically opening AND RUNNING attachments is also something which came to its fruition in the 90s, and I don't know ANY Linux mail client that does THAT. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!