Why Desktop Email Still Trumps Webmail 340
p3net writes "Shortly before the release of Thunderbird 2.0 RC1, Wired held an interesting interview with Scott MacGregor, the lead developer of Thunderbird. He presents some views as to why desktop email clients still triumph, even in this much-dominated web age. 'Some users want to have their data local for privacy and control. Furthermore, you can integrate data from different applications on the desktop in ways that you can't do with web-based solutions, unless you stick to web solutions from a single provider. For example, you can use your Outlook address book with Thunderbird. We'd like to continue to expand the kinds of data you can share between Thunderbird and other apps (both web and desktop applications).'"
Outlook Competitor (finally) (Score:5, Informative)
I haven't tried it yet - I've been using Sunbird - but the additional features that lightning provides will help Thunderbird on the road to becoming a more complete Microsoft Outlook competitor. If only we could convince someone to write the Exchange competitor on an open database...
From the Sunbird / Lightning page http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightnin
You may prefer Mozilla Sunbird if...
you prefer your calendar to be separate from your email client
you don't currently use Mozilla Thunderbird for your email
you don't like adding add-ons [such as extensions or themes] to your applications
You may prefer Lightning if...
you send or receive meeting invitations via email
you already use Mozilla Thunderbird for email
you customize your applications with add-ons [such as extensions or themes]
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It rocks. At this point the only reason I prefer my Outlook calendar setup comes down to integration with other apps and over the air synch with my mobile.
Specifically
1) Outlook has a button to "Create a new page in onenote" which opens up a new page, and puts all the meeting info in, then links the two so I can go back and forth... great feature for me.
2) Over th
I don't want an Exchange competitor (Score:2)
A client which integrates a directory, calendaring, todo, email and nntp with SyncML using open and standardised protocols sure. But we can do all that already with existing server systems.
Sorry, not even close (Score:5, Insightful)
I was forced to give up using Thunderbird at work, because some people I started working with elsewhere in the organisation relied on Exchange+Outlook calendaring facilities. In other words, I ought to be a prime target for Lightning. I'm also a geek who understands more than a pretty UI about what's involved with actually doing this.
What do I see at the top of the lightning page?
Do you know how many of those I care about at work? Exactly none. And neither does pretty much anyone else in the target market for this product.
What I do care about is how well it integrates with Exchange Server, and whether its notifications for meetings and such are compatible with the business standard Exchange+Outlook combination. However, the word "Exchange" does not appear anywhere on the product home page; nor does "Outlook".
In other words, either their web page is terrible, or this isn't even close to making Thunderbird into a serious Outlook competitor. Given that the current version of Lightning is 0.3.1 (as in, starting with "0.") I'm going to go with the not-even-close version, and so it just about everyone else.
I'm afraid TFA was much the same: yet more of the popular "many eyes make secure software myth" (seriously, are we still peddling that nonsense?) and more cries about the greatness of Thunderbird due to its extensibility (does anyone reading this actually use Thunderbird with any extensions, never mind the natural way they are routinely used by Firefox users?).
Sorry to be so negative. I'm grateful to those who spend their time writing Thunderbird and giving it away to others, I really am. But it's starting to suffer from the two major diseases of the OSS world: a mistaken belief that users care more about philosophy than functionality, and a mistaken belief that OSS is somehow immune to the normal problems with software development just because some of its popular applications haven't (yet) been compromised as badly as the mainstream commercial players. I like the product, but until its marketing stops talking crap, I'm going to criticise the marketing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, I'll address a few things in your response...
Do you know how many of those I care about at work? Exactly none. And neither does pretty much anyone else in the target market for this product.
Apparently you believe that there is room for exactly one collaboration tool in the universe. You seem to be oblivious to the market that exists outside the Windows space. Exchange integration isn't an option for people who regularly use MacOS*, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, linux, OS/2, etc. My doctor uses a Macintosh computers in his office, I have an Ultra 80 at my desk, and support engineers running Blade's at theirs.
Re:Sorry, not even close (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe there are some spam filters and some other rather useful tools available, but I have not really taken the time to get and install them. Granted, it doesn't look small compared to the 5 or 6 extensions I have installed for FF, but there are so many extra things to get.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You've got to be kidding me.
Outlook has usability problems, but Lotus Notes is a usability nightmare.
Outlook:
Options buried 23409823 clicks deep. Parts of the interface aren't very intuitive. Search utilities suck horribly.
Mail and calendar work beautifully, especially scheduling meetings for when 20 people and the conference room are free.
Cons of Lotus Notes:
Exposes the user to the fact that its a
Don't kid yourself. (Score:3, Interesting)
There is *no* open source exchange alternative that is worth bothering with, certainly none that have the level of finish as Microsoft exchange.
Almost all Open Source exchange alternatives shoot themselves in the foot by either pricing the Outlook connectors above or close to the cost of Exchange or pay the outlook element lip service and not include all features and hope that everyone uses their crumm
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'll bite, first the four things you mention:
* Open source
* Open standards
* Cross-platform
* Extensible
Open standards are kind of important in the world of software. As for "many eyes make secure software myth" (seriously, are we still peddling that nonsense?), we'll be peddling this 'nonsense' for a long time because it's important. Security through secrecy doesn't work.
Just because Cross-platform and Extensible are things you do not care about doesn't make them useless features that are not imp
Re:Sorry, not even close (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
http://www.scalix.com/ [scalix.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"Scalix Community Edition is a product we've packaged and made available for free so every organization can try out and use our robust messaging solution. It includes Scalix Collaboration Platform - which serves as the foundation for all our product editions - and 25 Premium User mailboxes. As such, Community Edition is a field-proven, commercial grade email platform. As with all Scalix editions, it has a flexible, open architecture, and supports Outlook, Evolution, Scalix Web Access, an
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
What, like this [calendarserver.org]?
Why do people use Outlook and Exchange? Because Outlook is more full-featured than any other email client out there (I admit, this isn't always a good thing, but just try getting someone who *wants* those features to use a generic IMAP application. And Outlook will *never* do IMAP right, because that eliminates most of the reason to buy Exchange), and because Exchange gives you the calendaring and schedu
6 Of One... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Or if you do host your data with somebody else, you can use public key encryption and not trust them with the access to your data, keeping your private key on your system.
Re:6 Of One... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just as the time came when everyone went from centralized servers to desktops, the time is coming where everything will move back to centralized servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Thank GOD!! ...and all (or mostly) because the people who made IBM dumb terminals and the people who made Wang (and other) dumb terminals didn't think it worth the effort to come up with a standard for such devices. Now the PC, for the most part, is that standard.
The disadvantage to this "all the way around the barn" path that we've taken is that we now ha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google Maps and some other things are great, and everything, but it only goes so far. The web platform is a piece of crap platform to develop desktop applications on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:6 Of One... (Score:5, Insightful)
Try getting to your old email messages from the hospital to find the phone number of your friend's mother at the critical moment. I delete and attach so few messages it really doesn't matter if it takes a couple more seconds with a web client than a desktop app. Having access to my email from anywhere in the world at any time is far more valuable. I will never go back to desktop email.
Re:6 Of One... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:6 Of One... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:6 Of One... (Score:4, Insightful)
On the one hand Google do better backups than I do and I'd be amazed if I ever lost data from my Gmail account
On the other hand do I want sensitive data stored on someone else's server?
You decide...
Re:6 Of One... (Score:5, Insightful)
Two other important questions related to the one above...
Do you own your own email server? If the answer is no, do you have your client options set such that email messages are deleted from the email server once they are grabbed by your client?
I don't think that data are any more secure on non-web clients unless the user is actually aware of what makes their data more or less secure.
Re: (Score:2)
True, in the short term.
In the long term, though, all those servers cost a lot of money to operate. Google isn't just going to keep everyone's email around forever if they're not making money from it in some way. The security of your data, therefore, depends on the continued su
Re:6 Of One... (Score:5, Insightful)
The privacy angle is bogus. If you are using somebody else's mx, then they can archive all your mail anyway, even if you are using a desktop application. If you are using your own mx, then there's nothing stopping you installing a webmail application on your own server.
Encryption (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course not. You'd better stop using email then. Email is like a postcard. It can be read or archived by anybody at any step in its journey.
If something is somewhat sensitive, you'd better encrypt it. If it's very sensitive, it doesn't belong in email at all. Email is NOT PRIVATE.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, but so are laptops, palmtops, and etc; so are server accounts where you leave the mail on the server and can download it into multiple clients, so that you can get your mail at work, but that still leaves it retrievable at home, both on real (that is, non-web) clients.
I'm not comfortable, frankly, with Google or whomever handling my mail.
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't someone usually handling your mail anyhow? I mean, unless you're sending all your mail encrypted (in which case who cares is Google handles it?) or all of your mail is on your own server on your own network and it never leaves your own network, it seems to me you have to consider your e-mail to be "in the wild".
Really, even if you're keeping your e-mail on your personal server, if you're conversing with people who use Gmail, Google has that e-mail anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry... (Score:5, Interesting)
The Zimbra guys even have connectors for Evolution and Exchange if you want to stick with thick desktop apps, but if there is one thing Gmail has proven is that users are willing to give up functionality for remote accessibility, and with Zimbra, they don't even have to do that.
Yes, Gmail (Score:2)
Re:Yes, Gmail (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Yes, Gmail (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Yes, Gmail (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There was a time, not that long ago, when automatic highlighting of URLs in plaintext email, and automatically routing those links to your web browser, was a pretty slick feature. Now, it's considered standard. I can't think of a major desktop email program that
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that's pretty neat (also, being able to open an attached spreadsheet in Google Docs and work on it without installing anything is pretty slick, too). However, there's no reason why you couldn't have that in a desktop/client-side email client.
It's just harder. With a web based system, it's always going to be easier to do mashups.
Re:Sorry... (Score:5, Insightful)
Until you don't have an Internet connection. I can type up 30 emails and queue them in the outbox until I do get connected if it is local.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sorry... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I just RDP in to my home computer when I'm away from home. Remote access problem solved. Added benefit is that if I'm at work, they can't see my personal email.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
A bit presumptuous, maybe?
I take for granted the following, and then some: regular expression support; being able to easily read or manage mailboxes that have tens of thousands of messages; a fully customisable and intuitive interface that corresponds with other programs I regularly use; on and off-line access to mail stores and archives; the ability to copy, move, sort, filter, munge, rewri
Desktop applications (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point: desktop applications are inherently preferable to the individual user. The argument can be made that a corporate environment, in which more than twenty people may need to use a program with limited seats in a license, or in which more than five people need to work collaboratively on the same data set, a client-server type may be more appropriate. Webapps are a client-server type of application in which the client is the web browser and the server is the application running within the web server. Viewing it as such may help to expose the odd nature of allowing so many middle layers to persist.
Desktop apps are important not only for security but also for efficiency and to prevent the gratuitous overconsumption of network resources.
I will not use Thunderbird yet (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're referring to the message body itself, then that's a function of the client of the person who replied, not the person receiving the reply.
Re:I will not use Thunderbird yet (Score:4, Informative)
Tools -> Account Settings -> [your account] -> Composition & Addressing
Check "Automatically quote the original message when replying"
And select "Then, start my reply above the quote"
Granted, that's not the default, and not everybody will bother to change it, but there is indeed a configuration option. Even if it were the default, some people would probably change it back to what it is now anyways. If you're participating in a long email thread, you can always trim out old quotes yourself every three or four replies so it doesn't get out of hand.
But Webmail is catching up (Score:4, Informative)
Gmail has the distinct advantage of being both web accessible while at the same time also accessible via any pop3 e-mail client.
Sort of a "cake and eat it too" scenario.
I currently use Thunderbird to keep track of the 4 accounts that my wife and I use. I also have the ability to access my mail online should I not have my laptop with me. I also have the ability to use GMail as an offsite backup of my mail should I ever have a total OS crash and need to reinstall. The large amount of storage on the gmail servers plus the ability to re-download anything stored on the gmail servers means that I can restore my local copy of my emails.
If more webmail sites used gmail's strategy, webmail would likely catch up to pop3 and possibly surpass it
Re: (Score:2)
1. There is no elegant offline viewing of email. When "on the go" I don't have access to an internet connection half the time so I can't read my gmail. (I don't want the overhead of the entire Google Desktop and that is a hack anyway). Plus, Gmail has been unavailable to me 3 times already this week (Error: please try back later).
2. While Google's triple redundant approach to backups sounds pretty good, what if they accidentally delete my mailbox? Stuff ha
Re: (Score:2)
1. There is no elegant offline viewing of email. When "on the go" I don't have access to an internet connection half the time so I can't read my gmail. (I don't want the overhead of the entire Google Desktop and that is a hack anyway). Plus, Gmail has been unavailable to me 3 times already this week (Error: please try back later).
I've never seen Gmail unavailable, except when Google actually went down due to DNS issues between me and them.
However, with GMail mobile running on my cell phone (Java app for mobiles, browse to http://gmail.com/app [gmail.com] ), I'm never without access to quick and easy email.
The backup issue is a potential problem. But you can fire up a POP client and download all your messages locally if you want, so where's the fire there?
The short of it is that since I've started using GMail, I've not needed an email client on
Re: (Score:2)
Until the day that GMail lets me use procmail to do what I want with my e-mail before it hits my INBOX, I will continue to use "desktop e-mail" (If you can consider pine desktop e-mail).
Drag and Drop (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah dude, that's the answer... Why not take it one step further and have them write a bash script while they're at it? Or maybe some Perl? Ruby? C? Assembly?
Seriously, that may work for you, but it's still pretty sucky to have to do that...
I agree with GP - what if I have a screenshot on my clipboard that I want to paste? Or some files in my clipboard?
It's much slower to do all the work to create a zip file with all the crap you want than it is to just drag and drop or
Cameras, guns, and 3- Mail. Similar arguments (Score:5, Insightful)
When talking about cameras to buy, some folks advocate SLR, expandable, large cameras that have huge optical zoom, attachment points, and a huge slew of features. Other folks will say "I'll take an Elph" (or some other small format, quality camera that's the size of a pack of cigarettes. The most common argument the big camera people will use is something to the effect of 'yes, but you're sacrificing 20% image quality' (or something along those lines. A common response? "Sure, but I'm about X times more likely to actually HAVE the camera on me when something interesting happens. A big camera that takes slightly better pictures that's at home is less useful to me than this."
Concealed pistol arguments have both sides too. "I prefer the 9MM Glock" or "Nothing less than a
E-Mail clients seem to be heading in the same direction. T-Bird has some great features and rationales for using. It does stuff that can only really be done from a fixed location (private mail, etc), and yes, it can integrate with desktop apps. But... I rarely use those extra features. I've switched to webmail knowing that I'm trading off some features, but the payoff of being able to actually GET to it wherever I am has paid off many more times than not having integration into MS Word or something.
Different audiences, different needs, but both sides have their reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
I much prefer to use Thunderbird for most of my mail usage, but webmail isn't that far off. I use RoundCube [roundcube.net]
Re:Cameras, guns, and 3- Mail. Similar arguments (Score:4, Interesting)
People assume desktop clients mean POP3, probably because that's all that GMail offers. Well, of course that's what GMail offers - because they don't want you to know about IMAP.
My provider offers webmail AND IMAP support. I can view my mail on my computers using Thunderbird. Or, if I don't have Thunderbird available or configured, I can just log into webmail. All my mail is synchronized between the server and the client. If I delete something in webmail, it's deleted in Thunderbird - and vice versa.
Oh, and I can view my mail on my PDA, too - without using the crappy Google client. And with IDLE support, I get new messages the instant they arrive - on both my PC and my PDA. And I can set up rules on the server to filter mailing lists and other emails into folders.
People think GMail is the end-all of mail because the only other thing they have used is some ISP's crappy POP3 mail.
Thunderbird displays all 6500 messages in my inbox at the same time, on the same screen. Which webmail can do that? Thunderbird downloads mail to my local system, so I can access it offline. Which webmail does that? Thunderbird supports S/MIME encryption and signatures.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't count the number of times my cell phone has randomly dialed someone or gone into the web browser simply from being leaned on in my pocket. And that's with the 'safety' (keypad lock) on.
If my cell phone had been a gun, I'd be sporting some stigmata by now.
Interoperability (Score:5, Funny)
And Outlook also works with just about any mass mailing worm, virus, or trojan out there!
I'd like to see you try that with a web client!
Nope, I'm stickin' with Outlook.
Re: (Score:2)
Difference is when a virus DOES affect my box, it only affects my box. Should someone take out gmail or yahoo mail then exactly how many people are screwed?
Working offline (Score:5, Interesting)
Graphically, I also think most clients are nicer to look at. That may not be that important to most people, but it is to me.
That said, I like that I have the option of using Web mail when I'm near someone else's computer. (Ideally, I think I'd use IMAP so that my folders, etc. from my client would match the ones I see when I log on using the Web. I've actually been looking for a provider that offers IMAP where I could also transfer my domains so I'd still have everything in one place. I'm also looking for a price that would be competitive with GoDaddy, who currently handles my email and domains.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unlimited domains, Unlimited E-mails, $8/month. Plus I have a TON of space.
Enough that I'm using it as a backup for all pictures. I have an rsync that syncs all of my documents to their server once a day.
For $8/month it's great. I have all my e-mail hosted there. My catchall gets forwarded to google then bounced back to my main account. So google does my spam filtering for me.
I'm a desktop fan (Score:2, Funny)
I would tell you about it, but I would just be repeating myself.
+5 Insightful
-5 Lonely bastard
search... (Score:4, Insightful)
Today I had to pull page counts from ten HP 0299c digital senders and the scanners IP addresses were spread out through ten different work orders - using an outlook plugin called Lookout (this company was eaten by Microsoft but you can still find the plugin if you look around) I was able to search a bit less than 4gb of email archive in two different
You'd play hell doing that with a webmail client.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I search my email archive several times a day - I just provided one example.
As everyone compares desktop app to Gmail (Score:2)
While desktop client allows you to easily re-order inbox, and then filter out with flexible searches.
Plus the regular advantages of offline storage, better security, integration with other applications (though new Google agents allow integration wh
Re: (Score:2)
Umm... If you don't know what you are looking for, sorting won't work either unless you can read really fast while scrolling. If you are talking about scrolling, then yes, desktop apps beat webmail hands down.
But sorting your emails any differently
I'd love to disagree (Score:2)
Yeah but what do they LACK (Score:3, Interesting)
Really. all the major mail clients piss me off in different ways.
Thunderbird - where is my ability to point Thunderbird at two or three address books simultaneously? Still way behind the times when it comes to cross-account integration. You can only add ONE remote address book, and it HAS to be LDAP. No remote VCARD address book support. Just starting to get on board with multiple remote calenders.
Also - why the hell is there not a white-list for SSL certs? I KNOW my mail server has an untrusted self-signed cert. Frankly I don't give a fuck -it's my server I trust it, all I care is that it's encrypted. So Why do you have to pop up an annoying SSL cert dialog every freaking time I start up? Every other mail client on the planet allows me to accep tthis dialog once and NOT PROMPT ME AGAIN.
Outlook 2007 - WHY THE HELL DO YOU NOT HAVE PROPER THREADING YET. It's been 6+ years since this feature was available in all the open source clients. You'd think a billion dollar company could pull it off.
However, much better than thunderbird now when it comes to multiple accounts and calenders and address books. Supports a crapload of formats for both. Still not as good as KMail in this area, but a close second.
KMail - Stop crashing on me already. Also get HTML composer support in order, this is 2007 now you're like 4 years behind the times. As well, why can't I work in one folder while another account loading? There is no need to put this stupid wait screen up over the whole message area. However - nice work on the multitiude of calender and address book formats. If only exchange calenders worked properly.
I am starting to think I need to fork my own client off to get the functionality I need.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am using KDE 3.5.6, Kontact 1.2.4, kmail 1.9.6, kaddressbook 3.5.6
Same.
Kmail does not crash with me.
You're obviously not excersizing it with multiple IMAP accounts like me.
Eh? I can use HTML formatting features just fine in kmail? Try Options -> Formatting (HTML)
Try to reply to an HTML email with the formatting intact. WHOOPS! Try to create an HTML formatted signature. WHOOPS! Try to paste an image from your clipboard into the email. WHOOPS!
All these things have been in progress @ bugs.kde.org
Thunderbird addressbooks (Score:2)
You can add multiple LDAP servers. Unfortunately, I believe you can only use one at a time (you can associate a different one with each of your accounts, though & there are extensions which make switching between accounts easier).
The sync kolab extension will sync the local addressbook with vcards in an IMAP directory. Most email clients don't have remote VCARD support of any kind. It would be nice if
Re: (Score:2)
I don't like the idea of interacting with my inbox disconnected and 'synching' it later. Too much chance for error IMO.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Integration (Score:2)
Intellisync for Yahoo lets you synchronize your Yahoo webmail address book with Outlook and your PDA. Works great for me. Also syncs calendar, todo, and notepad.
Why I Won't Use Thunderbird (Score:3, Interesting)
I have tried MANY times to use Thunderbird. Every time it fails for some weird quirk or another. The profile mechanism just doesn't work properly. It never stores the profile where i want without a whole bunch of fussing with a special start of Thunderbird (thunderbird -profile or something). Then, when I migrate my email into Thunderbird, it just cant handle huge volumes RELIABLY each time I have tried. Sometimes it imports, but invariably it fails afterwards in terms of speed or just disappearing the inbox -- which leads to the oh so helpful fix people point to about restoring the profiles.
So I am glad he has his opinions on email. But with all the issues with Thunderbird I think he should try to make that application must easier to manage (note, I didn't say "use") and less time on interviews IMHO. Oh, and please don't reply with "Oh, I have a 10k message inbox and it works fine for me." I know, many of you have no problems but if you google thunderbird you will see my own experience is not rare.
Re: (Score:2)
It works the exact same way as other Mozilla applications. In most cases, making heavy use of multiple profiles is limited to testing--what other use cases are there for needing multiple profiles? Most people with multiple accounts want them all in one profile. The few who want to keep them partitioned will only have a few profiles, so it is easy to make shortcuts. What client are you using that has better profile support? Most clients lack profiles alto
Re: (Score:2)
The format I am importing is (yes I am embarrassed!
Why settle for one or the other... (Score:2)
Email is not private!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Some users want to have their data local for privacy and control.
I can think of many reasons to use a desktop mail client. Some of them are actually good reasons. But this one is completely ridiculous. Email is not private. If he had said "Some users want to have their email local so that they can decrypt and encrypt it with GnuPG," that would have been an understandable statement. But plain text email is not private, under any circumstance, ever, any more than a postcard with plain text is private!
I hope people are not using desktop email thinking it is more private. A false sense of security is worse than no security!
I have not used desktop email programs (Score:2)
I can access my email anywhere with web based email programs and I do not have to remember any complicated smtp or pop3 information that changes when I switch ISPs either. Its just always there.
I do not understand how client based email programs are better? Maybe customization in a proprietary ms shop I can see. But Thunderbird is not integrated with MS products like OUtlook is and it will never catch up as MS uses its products to lock out competitors.
The interface is not the issue (Score:3, Insightful)
Web based:
Can be accessed from any computer that has a browser.
Mail cannot be read while offline
Desktop based:
Requires a configured mail client
All mail can be downloaded at once and read at a latter date when an internet connection is not available
It would appear to me that this means Web based mail would be more attractive to Desktop users who can't easily move their computer arround and who are likely to have a permanent internet connection whereas Laptop and Notebook users would prefer a local client as wireless availability can be limited and it is easier for them to move arround. Of course, you coudl always go with my aproach. I use a web based e-mail but keep a local copy on my desktop. That way I can read my mail from anywhere I want and I also have it available if my connection dies ( which is rather often unfortunately ). Best of both worlds in my opinion.
interesting project (Score:3, Informative)
right tool for the job... (Score:3, Insightful)
So, enough with these "foo is better than bar" declarations. Both exist and are popular because they are the best solution for *some* problem.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I run several independent qmail/vpopmail mail clusters, with a couple of different webmail packages, IMAP access from anywhere, and Eudora, Thunderbird, and MSOE at various times, and user IMAP from another Exchange server for our corporate parent.
And I *still* prefer to shell in and use pine for my "personal" account on campus rather than the other solutions they provide. It's convenient, easy, has never lost me an email, works under low bandwidth conditions, and after 1
Not really that significant. (Score:2)
No reason you can't do that on the server, and then insert headers that are recognized and processed by the desktop client. It's just a matter of standardizing the headers.
Many ISPs run all incoming email through a spam filter and rank it; it's pretty trivial to insert a rule (if you have a MUA that supports processing incoming mail according to rules) to put all the ISP-flagge
Re: (Score:2)
large mailboxes (Score:2)
I've gone and split my mailbox somewhat to have some attachments sent to a imap mailbox to get them on my actual desktop, leaving a copy in my regular mailbox that I can access via mutt. For better or worse, i get 1500-4k messages a day. None of these oth
Re: (Score:2)
I have a fetchmail process that fetches mail from GMail automatically every 15 min, and GMail is set not to delete fetched messages from the server (the client MUST flush them to download more than the first approx. 400 messages). Why not just forward? -- then you don't get all the messages that you *sent* from GMail AFAIK.
But I still use my own mail server
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No it isn't - GMail lost 40-50 of my e-mails, and said they could basically do nothing about it. So much for storing all data!
Now, all of my GMail accounts get periodically - every 5-15 min. - fetchmailed to my backup server. And I find myself using GMail less and less now since it's easier to just fire up Thunderbird, pull POP off the backup server (my laptop automatically opens an SSH tunnel to my office network) and be able to read/write messages without wa