On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 06:39:45PM +0000, J McKitrick wrote: : :I just got in a debate over email clients, and my windows friend :argues anything i can do in mutt, he can do in TheBat! just as easily. :I checked the feature list, and it is extensive. Most of what mutt :offers, thebat offers. Why is the advantage of mutt, or any :text-based email client? - uses any editor you want (like any Unix mail client) - has extensive hook mechanism (although choice of actions isn't) - spawn subshells to do whatever - tags messages without moving them to another folder/mailbox Having said this, I saw one feature in TheBat that I'd like to see Mutt have someday: the ability to create and use templates for new messages, replies, forwarded messages, etc. -- Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- why is mutt better? J McKitrick
- Re: why is mutt better? David T-G
- Re: why is mutt better? J McKitrick
- Re: why is mutt better? Alan
- Re: why is mutt better? Mikko Hänninen
- Re: why is mutt better? Lars Hecking
- Re: why is mutt better? David DeSimone
- Re: why is mutt better? J McKitrick
- Re: why is mutt better? Lars Hecking
- Re: why is mutt better? Vincent Lefevre
- Re: why is mutt better? Eugene Lee
- Re: why is mutt better? Bevan Broun
- Re: why is mutt better? Jeremy Blosser
- Re: why is mutt better? Eugene Lee
- Re: why is mutt better? Thomas Roessler
- Re: why is mutt better? Eugene Lee
- macros and templates (was: why is mutt bett... Mark Weinem
- macros and templates (was: why is mutt bett... Mark Weinem
- Re: why is mutt better? Ralf Hildebrandt
- Re: why is mutt better? Stefan `Sec` Zehl
- Re: why is mutt better? Marius Gedminas