On Tue, 30 Oct 2007 05:26:22 +0100, "A. Pagaltzis" <pagalt...@gmx.de> said: > * Matt McLeod <m...@boggle.org> [2007-10-30 03:30]: > > The biggest problem with Thunderbird is that all the other GUI > > IMAP MUAs suck even more. > > Purportedly Mulberry sucks less, except for, it's written for an > OS powered by purified hate...
I've tried using Mulberry. It might not suck as an IMAP client, but if memory serves it felt cluttered and overcomplicated. There was no way we could sell it as an alternative to Outlook. > And anyway, is there a *terminal* MUA for IMAP that doesn't suck? People keep telling me mutt is great as an IMAP client but I remain to be convinced. I do recall it being absolutely dreadful without the experimental header cache stuff, and still not being all that good. > By all appearances there's no passable IMAP client at all. > Considering the complexity of IMAP that may be unsurprising... I'm not convinced that there's an unhateful MUA, though weirdly this webmail client I'm using right now isn't so bad. Matt -- * Matt McLeod | mail: m...@boggle.org | blog: http://abortrephrase.com/ *
