Next Generation Mail Clients Reviewed 743
kreide writes "E-mail is the 'killer app' of the Internet; an enormous number of messages are exchanged every day, and while web-based mail has become very popular in recent years, many people still prefer the added speed and flexibility of a mail client application. In this review I compare the next generation of the most popular e-mail clients, including Evolution, KMail, Opera and Mozilla, and their usability in dealing with large number of messages."
hmmm (Score:4, Interesting)
Next killer app? (Score:5, Interesting)
And what's wrong with Outlook? (Score:1, Interesting)
This just smacks of zealotry.
Evolution mail import? (Score:3, Interesting)
Where's Mail.app (Score:5, Interesting)
From Wired magazine: (Score:4, Interesting)
Gnus/Emacs (Score:5, Interesting)
The biggest missing feauture is... (Score:5, Interesting)
All belly aching aside, I'm planning on employing a white list of valid e-mailers some time this year. For me at least, the promise of 'anybody' communicating via e-mail is dead.
Re:outlook 2k3 (Score:5, Interesting)
I hope that the other mail clients can achieve a similar level of functionality and interface attributes.
Gone are the days where a simple pop client will get the job done for me. I need a more robust package. Outlook certainly fills this position, but it's not cheap and it only runs on Windows.
I'd buy Outlook 2003 if it was available for Linux.
Inclusion Criteria (Score:4, Interesting)
And Outlook is open source and available for UNIX platforms? Yes, I know that Outlook / OE are popular, but it is kind of a shame that Eudora was omitted, given that the review was to cover the Windows environment. Unlike Outlook, it is possible to configure Eudora to avoid some of the security mis-features of Windows. (For example, you can disable Microsoft's HTML rendering engine.) The reviewer missed an opportunity to provide a little education. (BTW, I am sure that there are other good mail clients; I mention Eudora because I'm familiar with it.)
Law of Software Development (Score:2, Interesting)
I'd like to revise this law and phrase it as:
So, the next real "killer" internet application is clearly a mail client which can play MP3 files.
Re:Next killer app? (Score:5, Interesting)
I sent new documentation to a dozen of my coworkers yesterday; same story there.
I'm glad IM works exclusively for you. While IM use is growing rapidly, email use is as well.
I get no spam at work after 8 years. I get plenty at home, of course. If my company had it's own internal IM that didn't require public servers out of our control, it may be feasible, but our information will NOT be stored on MSN or Yahoo servers, PERIOD. There is simply no substitute for email. Yet. It will be the client and not the core concept that gets updated.
Outlook and IMAP (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact that "deleting" does not shield the user from the IMAP concept of marking for deletion. I am unable to move many of my users to an IMAP-based mail implementation because Outlook doesn't correctly use the metaphor!
(Thunderbird, on the other hand, sets up a virtual "trash" folder, which is really just posts that have been marked for deletion-- that's the way it should work!)
Re:Why do we need local clients (Score:3, Interesting)
Mind you, These days some companies block webmail too, at least major sites like hotmail/yahoo/etc.. My system would probably slip under the radar unless they use heuristics.
Actually I used to do my roaming by constantly updating mail redirects on my personal and company mail servers, workable, but error prone and only effective once the redirect was updated. Having access to -all- my email is a definate advantage.
Fantastic KMail Feature ... (Score:5, Interesting)
Kmail Dialog [blackapology.com]
(its KDE3.2 with Aqua Icons, Baghira and clever configuration btw)
nick
The Bat! (Score:4, Interesting)
Thunderbird is almost there and I'm guessing sometime in the next year it'll be good enough for me to move to it.
Re:And what's wrong with Outlook? (Score:2, Interesting)
So the program does something like this:
- check mail and find new messages
- pop up the "unread messages" icon
- check rules and mark messages unread
(thus leaving you with a misleading "unread messages" icon)
What they should do is this:
- check mail and find new messages
- check rules and mark messages unread
- pop up the "unread messages" icon if there are still unread messages
Web based clients not considered? (Score:4, Interesting)
with clients such as Squirrelmail and Horde/IMP, it seems that this would be the path more in line with the current thinking. I use Squirrelmail, and it does (almost) everything I want. What it doesn't do can be added via modules, or via coding of your own modules (which I'm working on now).
P
Synchronization with Exchange Server (Score:3, Interesting)
I am responsible for 3 sites throughout the metropolitan area, and have some users who have to do work from home. Before me, they would connect through the VPN and either use Windows Offline Files or Terminal Services to access their work. Their Outlook 2000 client (2002/XP is no better) would read every message from the server every time it even thought you might want to see that message. The whole thing was horribly slow.
I quickly replaced this situation with Unison [upenn.edu] to synchronize their My Documents folders, including a
When we opened up our third site in the city, we got new computers that came with Office 2003. I asked myself, "Self, why did Microsoft bring us a new version of Office just a year after the last version was new, with no new features other than the bubblegum interface?" In setting up their e-mail access, however, I stumbled across Outlook 2003's ability to synchronize per-message, and the question then was "Self, why did Microsoft screw me for so many months with previous versions of Outlook, when this is so easy?"
I don't have a lot of pro-Microsoft testimonials to give, and Outlook 2003 has a few really obnoxious features, too, but for its ability to synchronize with an Exchange server, I say "Thank you, Microsoft."
A couple more points about clients (Score:5, Interesting)
2) Outlook XPs version of 'threading' is kind of crappy, in my opinion.
3) Why do all the open source email clients look exactly like Outlook? I've never particularily liked that view of email. Can't anyone think of anything better?
4) I use mutt, Mail.app (OSX) and Opera as my main mail clients. Mutt is still the most feature-rich mail client that I've ever used, inability to display HTML and images inline notwithstanding (and most of the time, I like it better that way.) Mail.app under OSX is quite nice too, though I don't like the way that it won't check IMAP servers automatically when it checks your main Inbox. I always have to syncronize my folders. Also, it should display the number of new messages that you have in total in all of your folders (excluding the spam folder) if you want it to.
5) I haven't used Outlook 2003 yet, but Outlook XP is excessively annoying. It doesn't do anything the standard way, as near as I can tell. Threading, quoting, replying - it's all terrible. I hate the fact that text email isn't default.
Re:Where's Mail.app (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:How can we fix the problem (Score:3, Interesting)
In other words, for each person who has an e.mail account with us, they would get a message saying "such and such wants to send you e.mail, about this topic. Do you accept?"
If so, the e.mail goes through and the person can be authenticated in the future. If not, they can be blocked, either once, or permanently.
It could serve as an in-between system until something better is thought out, or it might function on a permanent basis. Still doing a small test run of it.
What I want is ... (Score:3, Interesting)
I also wish somebody would embbed vim in Web browser. Editing in those damn HTML textarea is a fscking pain !
Re:MH? (Score:3, Interesting)
I use mh as well as sylpheed-claws. Any graphical client I use at home has to support mh-style folders, because I often read mail remotely via ssh.
I used to use mutt, but I found that between it and the graphical application I was using, they kept stepping on each others toes. With mh, there are no lock files and no toes to step on.
Re:Synchronization with Exchange Server (Score:3, Interesting)
"Self, what is Offline storage files (.ost) and why didn't I use them wit Outlook 2K2?"
Seriously though, we have users with laptops who do a lot of travelling which may involve connecting over phone (with Encryption) or satellite and not necessarily from the nicest locations with conditioned phone lines (think Middle East (I mean really middle!) Connecting up to their mailbox can be dog slow. Using OST though dramatically improves the speed since all of their read email is stored on the local machine.
It is better than using a PST as at least on the Exchange server their data is being backed up. If they have all their mail going to a PST on their local drive, chances are it isn't getting backed up.
Just some observations.
EMail Client Review (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, Outlook Express is full of problems, and isn't that great at protecting the end user from viruses, BUT, Outlook is used probably more than any of email client.
By reviewing OE, you can show users (of Windows) the faults of OE, that there are better email clients, and they do exist on Linux, which may give the user 1 more reason to end up ditching Windows.
Personally this is my problem from switching completely over to Linux, I don't feel like spending all of my time finding and testing out programs that are comparable to what I use on Windows.
Re:Incomplete review (Score:4, Interesting)
That said, Eudora seems to run just fine on my Mach kernal, BSD-based system.
It is misleading though: In this review I compare the next generation of the most popular e-mail clients, including Evolution, KMail, Opera and Mozilla...
As I understand it, the most popular email clients are Outlook, Lotus, and Eudora. He means "the most popular e-mail clients for Linux... oh, and an old version of Outlook for comparison".
What about blocking attachments? (Score:2, Interesting)
He left out a BIG feature to compare: blocking attachments. I'm a Thunderbird user, and this is one thing that T'bird lacks unfortunately.
Scott in NC
Email storage format (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a ton of old email I like to keep and so far resides on IMAP server. The trouble is that is approaching my 100MB limit and that's all text emails - no big attachments. Most is standard encoding, but a few use alterantive encodings, though no 2bit characters.
What I don't like about Outlook 2k2 (Score:3, Interesting)
1. PST support: The interface for setting up the location of your PST file was more intuitive and straightforward in Outlook 2000. They "softened" the interface up too much making more unecessary steps in saying where you want your PST file to be located if it is stored in a nondefault location.
2. Rules not flexible enough: The biggest annoyance with setting up Rules was that I would set specific rules from specific domains to go to specific folders (i.e delete the files (spam is an example)) but the New Message flag which I like to have for normal messages would not disappear. Without getting into VBA this wasn't possible. I think they need to become more flexible in what you can do with rules.
Now SpamAssasin is the shiznit for identifying Spam but all it would do is mark the email as Spam at that point I would have to use a rule to get rid of it. (Is this better in Outlook 2k3?)
Mozilla Mail (Score:3, Interesting)
Mozilla mail seems to be a good default choice for modern email clients. The integrated spam filter catches most of the spam. Another great thing compared to other Free applications is the way it can handle non standard ports and logins for mail accounts. I have found that many programs don't support authentication for outgoing email, for instance. Couple of issues that I have found pretty annoying though.
E-mail is very productive for me (Score:3, Interesting)
Evolution effectively deals with my massive Inbox. I love the quick-filter feature right above the message list.
I can't sympathize with those who have unmanageable e-mail problems due to spam and viruses. Get a different ISP.
Note that my "ISP" is actually the Computer Science department. They handle over 10,000 accounts (lots of guest accounts), > 2 terrabytes of data, and manage about 500 machines (if not more due to clusters). This is all with less than 6 full-time staff and some part-time students.
Wish? (Score:3, Interesting)
If it's already been done, then after you flame me, tell me where to look for it
Re:And what's wrong with Outlook? (Score:3, Interesting)
Research? M2 is here already. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Configuration Issues (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not sure if it's a config design issue as much as it is a familiarity issue. I dumped Outlook because of the unease I had with its security, and Outlook 2002's spotty compatibility with Windows XP. Thunderbird is better in some ways, but it definitely has its downsides, not the least of which is the painful configuration of multiple accounts and general preferences.
Re:Next killer app? (Score:5, Interesting)
webmail .... or pine (Score:3, Interesting)
I have tried a few mail programs, and I am forced to use Outlook at work. It is actually handy there, simply because of the scheduling aspect.
But at home, it is pine all the way. I am about speed and function. I can ssh into the box from anywhere and run the mail client locally. I don't have to wait to download any messages. The only caveat is attachments. But if I need to view them, I can save them off and download them. I would rather choose when to download something than wait for everything to download.
So my emails exist in two places - on my ISPs mail server, and on my home machine. If for some reason I can't access pine, I have webmail via my ISP. I not only have one interface, I have the same interface, and I know that there aren't various copies of my emails floating around. If I have net access, I can get PuTTY very quickly and be into my server in minutes. From anywhere. It is sweeeet.
People have laughed at me for still using Pine, but email is email. HTML in email is evil. Viruses don't harm me, I don't get flashing banners and crap. I haven't seen anything in another email client to cause me to even think about switching.
I'm a happy dinosaur: I use MH (Score:5, Interesting)
George Santayana keeps invading my consciousness. Most of today's mail readers are blindly taking the road that I abandoned 25 years ago. I don't want to read my mail using a database system. I want my mail to be a full-fledged member of UNIX society, not locked up inside a single application.
At RAND, we had a homebrew mail system that worked about like today's readers: mail was kept in a file, with a sidebar index file for quickly locating individual messages. It fell out of sync regularly, but on those dog-slow machines, rebuilding the index file was a coffee-break operation.
Norm Shapiro should be credited with the insight that UNIX already provided the cleanest solution to mail storage: messages are files, folders are directories. He and Bruce Borden hammered things out over about six months of conversations, then Bruce wrote the first version of the MH system over a weekend.
MH is ancient. There is no doubt about this. The original MH is as dead as T. Rex; people use NMH now. It's almost all text-only. It does have a MIME wart on the side, but just barely. If you want to use mice, scroll wheels, and other "modern" goodies you need to use a front end like EXMH.
BUT: 99.95% of all the legit email I get is text-only. "showproc" can deal with MIME mail that just asks for a different font, and EXMH does understand basic HTML. You can create MIME attachments if you need to.
And it's the skip-loader of email systems. It doesn't care if there are 8,000 messages in a folder. It just works. And it's fast.
On the Mac I use Mail.app. It does work (mostly, except when Apple is having one of its periodic days where WebDAV doesn't work, and they're in denial [nothing wrong here, move along please]). It has nice filtering features. It has threading.
It also feels like a toy. I get the feeling that if I pointed it at an 8,000-message inbox, it'd fold like a cheap suit. Certainly it'd be tough to deal with that many messages through that interface.
For the big time mail flows, I'm sticking with MH. Thanks again, Norm and Bruce.
Re:Next killer app? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:outlook 2k3 (Score:3, Interesting)
Mozilla Thunderbird is nice, but I wouldn't mind seeing a calendar, scheduler, daily weather reports, and news also appearing when I start it up. I haven't seen a free e-mail client on Windows that does this aside from Outlook.
Re:hmmm (Score:3, Interesting)
Ilohamaill (Score:3, Interesting)
I still use Outlook at work because everyone else does and I need to share calendars, public folders, etc. but I use Ilohamail everywhere else. With technology like PHP look to see some webmail apps begin to close the gap in functionality.
Re:Next killer app? (Score:3, Interesting)
AIM is for short, quick conversations. Analagous to running into a friend in the hallway or such. Very informal.
E-mail is for long, formal communications. If I need to ask a professor a question this is the format I'd use. Much like a letter except free, fast, and well... just plain better in almost every way. I wouldn't send an e-mail to someone unless it was a more formal situation or a longer letter. As can probably be discerned e-mail is almost totally unused for daily personal communications.
ICQ though I use like an alphanumeric pager or a note on a whiteboard. It's short and temporary, but they'll get it if they're not in. Messages are stored in the past so if it's something I might want to keep logged it holds on to it.
Now, while it all depends on the people who use any particular form of messaging I've found that this works very well and manages to handle almost all my conversations perfectly. If I had to keep up with distant friends through e-mail alone... well, I'm not in nearly as good contact with those friends and speak to them only rarely. Friends on AIM, however, I speak to more often than many people I see IRL.
Re:hmmm (Score:3, Interesting)
And where do you get G5 motherboards? I can't find a place that sells them. Even if they do, they are most likely Apple-refurb parts, and carry the same insane prices the G4 refurb parts did.