Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Mozilla The Internet

New Mozilla-based Mail Client: Minotaur 294

Posted by michael from the feeping-creaturitis dept.
Ant writes "Minotaur is a redesign of the Mozilla mail component. Our goal is to produce a cross platform stand alone mail application using the XUL user interface language. We are modeling ourselves after the Phoenix rewrite of the Mozilla browser. Our intended customer is someone who uses Phoenix (or another non mozilla.exe browser) as their primary browser and wants a mail client based on mozilla that "plays nice" with their browser. Currently, mozilla -mail is not a good option for these users because link clicks and attachments end up going to mozilla browser windows instead of the preferred browser. In addition, by focusing solely on stand alone mail, we believe we can make some dents in the overall footprint and performance of the mail client by removing components and chrome we don't need."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Mozilla-based Mail Client: Minotaur More

New Mozilla-based Mail Client: Minotaur

Comments Filter:

  • Feature request (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nut ( 19435 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:07AM (#5597160)
    I want to be able to put my mail on a shared FAT32 drive, and have access to my email seamlessly whether I boot up in Windows or Linux

    • Re:Feature request (Score:4, Informative)

      by larien ( 5608 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:18AM (#5597184) Homepage Journal
      I started using IMAP for this; I have a PC at home which does my ADSL dialup & acts as router/firewall box using NAT for my other computers. I copied all my mail to the server's IMAP folders and now I can access mail from Windows or linux equally well. Added to this, IMP means I can use mail anywhere with an SSL web browser!

      As for shared FAT32 drive, can't you mount the FAT32 in linux and symlink the mail folders directory in linux to the location on the windows drive? Never tried it, but it should be possible...

      • Re:Feature request (Score:3, Informative)

        by Pembers ( 250842 )

        As for shared FAT32 drive, can't you mount the FAT32 in linux and symlink the mail folders directory in linux to the location on the windows drive?

        I had something like this working for a while with Netscape 4, when I was dual-booting between Red Hat 6 and Windows 98. As long as the mail program doesn't want to do any operations that aren't supported on FAT32 (I doubt it would), everything should be fine.

        One thing that may trip you up is that the mail program creates index files for each of your mail fol

        • If you're the only user on the computer, of course, this is fine. But if you need to be able to set permissions, FAT32 is obviously not going to work.

          OTOH, if it's a multiuser computer, you're not likely to dual boot Windows and Linux anyway. :)

    • Re:Feature request (Score:5, Informative)

      by borgdows ( 599861 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:24AM (#5597192)
      Minotaur has nothing to do with that... even current Mozilla Mail can do that... you only have to specify the email client a directory where to save mail (whatever this directory is : fat32, nfs, floppy, ...)

      I forgotten the command to specify directory, is there a Mozilla guru reading?

      • Re:Feature request (Score:2, Informative)

        by kousik ( 149219 )
        > I forgotten the command to specify directory, is there a Mozilla guru
        > reading?

        I'm not a guru, but it is straightforward:

        Edit -> Mail & News Account Settings -> account_name -> Server Settings -> Local directory.

        I have put in a shared FAT32. Works fantastic. Once in a while I defragment the drive.

    • Re:Feature request (Score:3, Informative)

      by OsCarJ ( 141083 )

      I've been doing exactly that for about a year now with Mozilla's current mail.

      Just move the mail folders (sometimes takes a little digging to find them) over to the shared drive and change the Account settings to point to the new location. (Hint: if you can't find this setting it's at the bottom of the server settings screen) It works pretty well except for occasionally being a little slow to index folders.

      Now I just wish I could figure out how to do the same thing with prefs and bookmarks.

    • Get an IMAP mail account, and your mail will be accesible from your Windows and Linux installations as well as any other computer you may log in to on the internet.

    • Re:Feature request (Score:3, Informative)

      by Phroggy ( 441 )
      I want to be able to put my mail on a shared FAT32 drive, and have access to my email seamlessly whether I boot up in Windows or Linux

      Related Mozilla bugs include 58647 and 66259. Get a Bugzilla account and vote for these bugs, or contribute if you can.
    • I did try setting this up with a version of Mozilla not too long ago (1.2, 1.3beta ?) using symlinks as a lot of people here suggested. It didn't work for me on Windows 2000, something to do with the fact that fact that Windoze needs to append a '.lnk' suffix to all it's symlinks I think... It may be fixed now. If anybody *is* doing exactly this I'd be interested to know exactly what versions of email client and OS's you are using.
    • Is this for real?
      You have been able to do that since netscape 4.7 or even earlier.

  • Pisses me off (Score:3, Interesting)

    by evilviper ( 135110 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:09AM (#5597166) Journal
    You know what pisses me off... Netscape/Mozilla has been around all this time now, and you STILL can't tell it to lauch an app other than Netscape Mail when you click on an e-mail link! Not just e-mail, but page editing, and the address book as well. That has been my main gripe with Netscape (besides the ever present performance and stability problems) for years.

    • Re:Pisses me off (Score:5, Interesting)

      by byolinux ( 535260 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:19AM (#5597186) Journal
      I use Outlook in the Office with Mozilla and at home use Mozilla and Safari both with Mail.app -- when you install Mozilla, just do a browser only installation, then it will use your existing mail client.

      HTH
      • Hmm... Good to know that it is working on Windows... but I don't use Windows.
      • I use mozilla to read my mail but not to send mail because mozilla does not allow me to use arbitrary from addresses. (Well you can, but you have to create an account for each one, not a great option if you have hundreds of addresses from which you want to send mail.)

        Even though I use Mozilla mail, I still would like to be able to have mailto: links open in something else.

      • put this in your user.js file... (Score:4, Informative)

        by bill_mcgonigle ( 4333 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @10:56AM (#5597591) Homepage Journal
        user_pref("network.protocol-handler.external.mailt o", true);

        (of course take out the space between 'mailt' and
        'o' because Slashdot's lameness filter is designed to prevent information sharing among technical folks) ...and it will use the system-defined mailer. Don't ask me why this isn't the default...

        The user.js file in in your Mozilla profile - it there isn't one, just make a new one. user.js doesn't get whacked by upgrades.
        • Hmm. I'm using Mozilla 1.3. I don't have a user.js file, I have a prefs.js file full of my user_pref settings. When I add the line and restart Mozilla, mailto links still bring up the netscape mail program. I also saved a user.js file with just this line.

          What's worse, is that after I did that, I lost my ctrl+l to get to the address line and my ctrl+f for find on page. And when Mozilla initially started up, I had to click in the address line to start typing. When I took the line out and deleted user.j
    • The converse is true. I use the Mozilla mail client, but Opera 7 as a browser. If I click on a link in an email, then Mozilla launches the its browser component and opens the link in that. Back when I was using OE as a mail client and Moz as a browser OE had no problems launching Moz for html documents (as long as I set up Moz as the default handler for html files and http requests) and Moz had no problems launching OE to send mail, as long as OE was the default mail client (which it will be unless you r

  • IMAP proxy? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by jm91509 ( 161085 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:10AM (#5597169) Homepage
    Feature request I suppose.

    Allow for an IMAP/POP3 proxy to allow access to webmail accounts from inside a firewall without using ssh tunneling stuff.

    • I need the same thing. I stopped using Mozilla mail (and, well, Mozilla in general, in favor of Opera) because my work firewall is closed off to imap ports. I've been wondering if this should be possible with mod_proxy... couldn't I set it up so imap addresses of imap.server.com:80 got routed to my imapd?

  • excellent!! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by garglblaster ( 459708 )
    Actually this is what I've been waiting for some time now!

    In fact I think it's a great idea to get away from the "kitchen sink" type of software packages and move on to more specialized programs that focus on one task and do it right!

    • Remember Mozilla really does have the kitchen sink. =D Hehe [slashdot.org].

    • Apple Plug (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mrpuffypants ( 444598 )
      Well, but this is all about what Apple is doing with their iApps:

      Wanna make a movie? iMovie
      Read your mail? Mail
      Chat? iChat

      I like this approach a lot better than a bloated program that has 50 features I never use. When I just want to read email and look at my calendar I just open up Mail and iCal. Done simply and effectively.

    • Re:excellent!! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by TheRaven64 ( 641858 )
      One of the key features of the *NIX philosophy is that programs should have a few (or ideally one) features which they do really well. Vim / emacs (Please delete as appropriate) is a good text editor, but that's all. gcc is a good C compiler. grep is a good search function. If you want something complicated, then you join multiple simple programs together. If you need to spellcheck a document, then your editor should pipe it through ispell (or equivalent) and parse the results. This amount of modulari

      • This amount of modularity meant that you could build very complicated programs out of shell scripts, and only have the parts you were using in memory at any given time.

        This philosophy works in some situations, but not all. A few months ago I helped my wife convert a shell script she was trying to use into Perl, and as a result it ran orders of magnitude faster. The original shell script was repeatedly reading a 1.5 GB file but my Perl program was able to read it only once.

        The Mozilla/Phoenix/Minotaur

      • You mean you haven't tried


        gcc -O2 -Wall -Read_Email foo.cpp


        yet?


        Rich

      • Re:excellent!! (Score:3, Funny)

        by ianezz ( 31449 )
        Vim / emacs (Please delete as appropriate) is a good text editor, but that's all.

        Emacs? You know, if people used to say "Emacs is a nice OS, but I prefer UNIX", there is a reason. :-)

        GNU Emacs / XEmacs is to text editors what Mozilla is to web browsers (well, to "mere HTML renderers with some buttons attached" would be more appropriate). I'd go further and say that Mozilla is definitively the 21st century Emacs (a proof? Komodo [activestate.com]).

  • It's made for the users, isn't it? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by termos ( 634980 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:20AM (#5597188) Homepage
    we believe we can make some dents in the overall footprint and performance of the mail client by removing components and chrome we don't need
    We don't need? Is it the developer who decide what the end-users needs are?

  • Another wheel to re-invent? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by varjag ( 415848 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:30AM (#5597207)
    Currently, mozilla -mail is not a good option for these users because link clicks and attachments end up going to mozilla browser windows instead of the preferred browser.

    And that's it?

    Wouldn't it be easier to add an option to specify preferred browser into Mozilla Mail preferences? I am not ranting - everyone is free to do whatever they want - but right now, when Mozilla Mail is finally stable and packed with some really good features, and at the same time many FS/OSS projects starve from lack of developers, what is the point of writing yet another MUA?
    • So what other FS/OSS project would you expect Netscape employees to work on? Even if these were independent spare-timers, it'd still be their choice what FS/OSS project they work on. Flaming them for choosing to develop a bloat-free stand-alone mail client is simply bad form.
      • My take is that the post was not flaming for bloat... it proposed an alternate solution - and a technically much simpler one - to potentially achieve the same end, and inquired as to why that path wasn't being taken. So far (at the time I write this) nobody has actually answered this question; that doesn't mean there isn't a cogent answer to be had, but it remains to be seen.
      • So what other FS/OSS project would you expect Netscape employees to work on?

        Let me try... Perhaps E17?

    • Yay for people who *dont read the link in the article*. This is not reinventing the wheel. Its taking two of the wheels from an SUV, and using them on a bicycle.

      Minotaur is Mozilla Mail, just without the rest of Mozilla. And as I curently use Mozilla Mail for its spam filters, but have to use IE for work reasons, this will be something I will use.
    • at the same time many FS/OSS projects starve from lack of developers, what is the point of writing yet another MUA?

      Because they've got an itch that they want to scratch. It's there itch. They can scratch it however they like. As soon as you put them on your payroll then you can complain about misappropriated effort. As it is, they don't work for you. Until they do, it's really rather intrusive of you to complain about what they do with their own time.

      $.02

  • All we need now is some sort of news client. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Gannoc ( 210256 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @08:41AM (#5597220)
    We'll call it "Hydra" or something because of some obscure reference to heads/threads.


    Then, after several thousand man-hours of work, we'll finally have the feature set of mozilla available to us.... BUT IN THREE SEPARATE BINARIES.


    Sweet!!!

    • Re:All we need now is some sort of news client. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Telex4 ( 265980 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @09:29AM (#5597305) Homepage
      You miss the point. Mozilla isn't meant to be an end-user browser, at least not in the long term. It's a platform from which people can develop their own Internet applications (web primarily, also email, IRC, web design). Mozilla provides a really nice HTML renderer (Gecko), a really nice GUI standard (XUL), and lots of other code, to let people go out and make their own applications.

      If you try out Phoenix/Galeon/etc. you'll notice they all have many features that Mozilla doesn't, and have all chosen to specialise in oe particular area. GNOME users will love Galeon, users of slow machines will love Phoenix, and so on.

      That there is now a fork in the mail project is a testament to the great success of Mozilla. It will have really suceeded when we have several different mail clients, web browsers, chat clients and web designers all branched from Mozilla, all filling a different niche, all compatable with one another, and all sharing excellent new features and ideas.
      • users of slow machines will love Phoenix, and so on.

        No, not just slow machines... aside from being lightweight, Phoenix has features that Moz just don't have, such as user-customizable toolbars, the ability to open a whole folder of bookmarks in separate tabs in one click, a cleaner user interface, and pop-ups disabled by default
        • Phoenix has features that Moz just don't have... the ability to open a whole folder of bookmarks in separate tabs in one click

          Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying, but Mozilla does, in fact, have this feature. I use it every day to open all of the web comics I want to read.

          One thing I don't like about Mozilla's tabbed browsing is that there is only one close widget. I prefer Galeon's take, where I can have a close widget on each tab.

          With pop-up blocking, Mozilla 1.3 grants finer control, with th
          • Perhaps I misunderstand what you're saying, but Mozilla does, in fact, have this feature. I use it every day to open all of the web comics I want to read.

            The last Moz build I used that wasn't phoenix was 1.2a... so I may be a bit behind here... ;)

            One thing I don't like about Mozilla's tabbed browsing is that there is only one close widget. I prefer Galeon's take, where I can have a close widget on each tab.

            I both agree and disagree...I like having individual close widgets on each tab because it's conv

  • Stability (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Malc ( 1751 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @09:13AM (#5597272)
    I can't believe they didn't mention the feature that I find most important: separation of the mail and browser in to separate processes. This improves stability and reliability. I don't want some misbehaving browser plugin causing a browser crash that also brings down the email client and message I've been editing for the last 30 minutes. I see process separation is on the Mozilla team's TODO list, but I suspect this will achieve that goal *long* before they do.
    • Yepp. Dito for me.

      Especially when you launch the lean browser (Phoenix) *and* the lean e-mail client (Minotaur) the savings in RAM and startup time compared to the great big beast Mozilla won't be that big. (I haven't verified my claims so far).

      Bye egghat.

  • I don't know (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lewp ( 95638 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @09:26AM (#5597301) Journal
    A mail client is one thing I never find myself wanting for on any platform. Even if you don't like Mozilla's bundled client (I don't), Windows users have The Bat!, Eudora, and Mulberry. I even heard Microsoft makes a mail client or two. Mac users have Eudora and Mulberry plus Mail.app and another Microsoft client. UNIX/Linux users get the always-fabulous mutt as well as Evolution and KMail. Oh, and Mulberry :D. It seems somewhere in that mess you could find one or two that meet your needs. I know I did, one for each platform. And I'm really picky about my e-mail...

    That said, I did just switch to Phoenix from Mozilla because I like its interface slightly better. It may load a little faster too, but with my main client machines all being 1.1ghz or better and the same browser instance being open most of the day I don't really notice.

    I don't use Mozilla's mail client, so I suppose there could be features missing or a stand-aloneness that some people want. In that case, go for it.

    I just hope this doesn't take someone's time who would be working on GNOME, KDE, OO.org, or a decent replacement for Macromedia Freehand/Adobe Illustrator :).

    • Re:I don't know (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bogie ( 31020 )
      All your points make sense but this one

      "I just hope this doesn't take someone's time who would be working on GNOME, KDE, OO.org, or a decent replacement for Macromedia Freehand/Adobe Illustrator :)."

      Remember that's not the way open source works and is actually a huge stereotype. People work on what interests them and just because they work on project doesn't mean they'd be interested in working on another project even if it were similar. Open Source developers are not just one big pool of resources that
      • Remember that's not the way open source works and is actually a huge stereotype. People work on what interests them and just because they work on project doesn't mean they'd be interested in working on another project even if it were similar. Open Source developers are not just one big pool of resources that can be pushed around where popular opinion thinks they should go.

        Good point, unless you want to pay me. If you want to pay me, I'd be happy to hack on OO or a Freehand/Illustrator clone for you. I k
    • A mail client is one thing I never find myself wanting for on any platform

      Wish I could say that.

      if you don't like Mozilla's bundled client

      What if you just don't want to use Mozilla, but would like to use the mail part? Oh... you can't...

      Windows users have The Bat!, Eudora, and Mulberry

      All of which are commercial and/or ad-ware, or (in the case of Eudora) repeatedly associated with allegations of malware.

      I considered using The Bat! at one point... even downloaded it to try. And then my computer's
    • Windows users have The Bat!, Eudora, and Mulberry. I even heard Microsoft makes a mail client or two.

      None of which are free, with the exception of Outlook Express. (If you want Eudora's free version, you have the choice of limited features or banner ads.)

      As someone who switched to Phoenix because I couldn't stand Mozilla's bloat, I'm definitely looking forward to seeing what Minotaur has to offer.
    • The Bat! is the best email client I have ever used on any platform, and I've tried many. I would LOVE for Minotaur to be a Bat clone. The closest thing under Linux I've found is Sylpheed-claws. I currently use Evolution but I don't rate it very highly for mail (why doesn't it use a separate inbox for each account instead of mixing up all my mail? Where is the backup/restore feature? etc). There is definately space for another email client.

      Phillip.

    • Let me guess... you use... Mulberry?

  • Why? Oh Why? WHY?! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @09:28AM (#5597304)
    What the fuck is wrong with these people? Why can't these developers just work on the fucking project and improve it and make it better without having to rewrite into yet another application?

    I had the exact same feeling when I saw the Phoenix announcement: WHY?!

    I used to work for Netscape and I know what I am talking about. Mozilla was designed as a modular app. That's what XPCOM in there is for. So the right thing to do when you start bloating is refactor: take a big component, break it into nice modules and then let the USER decide which modules to install on his machine.

    This way, it's like the user composes the app out of modules, so he can install there a Mozilla, a Phoenix or a Minotaur.

    I use Mozilla Mail and I know COUNTLESS bugs and problems that need to be fixed and addressed. The only reason they are not is that there are not enough engineers to do that work.

    So why is engineering effort spent on these spin-offs instead of spending it on the mail product and providing the needed requirements THERE?

    Hey Minotaur Team, why? Hey Scott McGregor, is the ego trip more important than your contribution to Mozilla? Does it feel better to have your own pet-project than to add your (anonymous) contribution to the mail codebase?

    That was always the problem at Netscape/Mozilla: EGO. Look at JWZ, RickG, KippH, Adreesen. Big mouths, big plans, but falling short on delivery.

    I don't even KNOW who works in the IE dept. at MS and they kicked Netscape's ass all the way to AOL.

    Shame on you!

    • Thank you (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Ars-Fartsica ( 166957 )
      I'll tell you why, because downloading some source and changing a file menu is how these guys want to get notariety. Phoenix and Minotaur are pointless forks designed to get someone free cred points on the back of anothers' work.

      • Re:Thank you (Score:3, Insightful)

        by supercargo ( 254607 )
        Your post and its parent are barely worth commenting on, but I'll give it shot: Mozilla is a whole lot more than I want or will ever use (integrated IRC? Composer?), Phoenix is small and fast, which is a beautiful thing. Have you ever used Lotus Notes? That's another do-it-all app that seeks to replace your operating system with components half as good as those developed for a specific task.

        Phoenix and Minotaur are pointless forks designed to get someone free cred points on the back of anothers' work.

    • I had the exact same feeling when I saw the Phoenix announcement: WHY?!

      I think you've just destroyed all your own arguments. Phoenix rocks.

      Hey Minotaur Team, why? Hey Scott McGregor, is the ego trip more important than your contribution to Mozilla? Does it feel better to have your own pet-project than to add your (anonymous) contribution to the mail codebase?

      wtf? You can't *make* someone work on Mozilla if they don't want to. And if he thinks he has a good idea, and actually has the time and energy to

    • Re:Why? Oh Why? WHY?! (Score:4, Informative)

      by spinlocked ( 462072 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @12:15PM (#5597884)
      I had the exact same feeling when I saw the Phoenix announcement: WHY?!

      Not affiliated with this project at all, but I thought I might comment on this. I compiled mozilla 1.3 on a fairly well spec-ed, 2-way SPARC/Solaris box a few weeks ago. Once the source was unpacked and about 4 hours later the source had almost finished building - it ran out of disk space. I was surprised.

      At that point 'du' reported ~/mozilla (containing source and object files) as 1.6GB. Now that's bloated.

      Personally, I don't like having the mail client integrated with the browser. I don't want HTML mail support (reading or composition). I certainly don't want any scripting support. I don't want a newsreader built in (I use pan/nget for that). I want smarter filtering capabilities, or no filtering capabilities and lastly I don't want any of the offline reading support. I'm not even sure I want the address book.

      I'm all for splitting the applications. I seldom use the composer (but it's nice to have there, when I need it). The IRC client is installed but has never been used, it's just wasting space. I usually run the mail client on one machine and the browser on another so that they're on different screens.

      Mozilla mail is the certainly the nicest IMAP client that I've come across, but I want the smallest possible RSS (especially on SunRay servers). A fresh start is often a good way of clearing out the cruft in a application. It's now at the point where it's almost unusable on a 5 year old machine.
    • I used to work for Netscape and I know what I am talking about. Mozilla was designed as a modular app. That's what XPCOM in there is for.

      Except that currently it is not possible to install Mozilla without including the web browser component. This is theoretically supposed to be possible, so inability to do so is considered a bug, but not a high priority one. Hopefully Minotaur will contribute their fixes back to the Mozilla tree, and will result in the main Mozilla project offering the same capability a
  • OutLook on Windows and iCal on Mac use WebDAV to store public calender information. i have yet to see something on linux/unix.
    • Mozilla Calendar [mozilla.org] supports WebDAV to store public calendar information, and it uses .ics files so it plays nice with iCal. Also, if you're getting into the whole shared calendar thing you might want to check out PHP iCalendar [sourceforge.net] which will give you a web interface to peer into that .ics file Mozilla just uploaded.

  • 2nd rule of software (Score:4, Funny)

    by tomk ( 20364 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @11:13AM (#5597655)
    I thought the first rule of software was: "No software is truly complete until it can read email".

    I guess we need a second rule: "Once software reads email, it must be split into pieces."

    I'm waiting for a third rule: "Each piece must then evolve until it can read email again."

    It's the circle of life.

  • I've been wanting a standalone Mozilla-based mail client for a while. Kudos to the Minotaur team! I'm looking forward to trying it out. =)

  • Am I the only one who likes Mozilla? I switched from Outlook Depress on my Windows 2000 laptop to Mozilla 1.3 for my browser and email and I love it!

    The tabbed browsing is excellent. The fact that from Mozilla Mail I can control-click on a link and it shows up in a new tab without messing up my previously viewed pages is worth the (low) price of admission.

    The email spam filters are working well, at least till I get around to a better server-based solution.

    I just started looking at the Mozilla calendar.
  • First we have Phoenix, a browser, now we have Minotaur, an e.mail client.

    What next Elfix as an OS?

    The developers sound more like D&D players every new release.
  • According to their changes page:

    Renamed the executable to thunderbird instead of minotaur. We may switch this back though.


    So it looks as if they're changing the name. Sort of.

    Speaking of which, Phoenix still has no new name.
  • I'd like to use the Mozilla Mail-News client and Konqueror as the browser. (Sometimes I've preferred Mozilla, but right not not... however). KMail is nice in many ways, but nothing that come close to the Mozilla Mail Junk filter. And KDE has never had a news reader that worked as nicely (for me) as the Mozilla news-reader.

  • I expected it to be called like that, and then I checked the recent changes [mozilla.org]:

    March 18th

    Renamed the executable to thunderbird instead of minotaur. We may switch this back though.

    Is this yet another trademark problem, as with Phoenix?

  • Argh... links! (Score:2, Interesting)

    by mivok ( 621790 )
    link clicks and attachments end up going to mozilla browser windows instead of the preferred browser.

    This has been my major gripe with much of the KDE tools (and pretty much any integrated system which simply assumes you must be running all of their tools because you happen to like one). I run phoenix, and getting knewsticker or kmerlin (msn client) to open links in phoenix is pretty much impossible (yes yes.. I know.. use the source luke and all that, but thats time I dont have at the moment - too busy p

  • Hopefully non-sucking IMAP support (Score:3, Informative)

    by cras ( 91254 ) on Wednesday March 26, 2003 @02:10PM (#5598679) Homepage
    I can't believe how bad the IMAP code is for pretty much all of the IMAP clients. Authors haven't probably even bothered to read the whole RFC and assume way too much how servers behave. I haven't found a single usable IMAP client for X that plays nicely with other IMAP clients modifying the mailbox.

    Here's something to read for IMAP client authors: IMAP Client Coding HOWTO [procontrol.fi].

Slashdot Top Deals

2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League

Close