On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 10:48:01AM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 11:28:59AM +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
Bat! does have a couple of features that Mutt lacks, but those are the
features that I do not need. Maybe others do.
What features does it have?
It can be
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 19:20:28 +0200, Marius Gedminas wrote:
It can be a "mail server" for the local network (I don't quite remembet
what kind of server is that -- maybe it's just The Bat! server + a
couple of The Bat! clients), it has some automatic form processing
(whatever that means).
Eugene Lee [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
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.
This should be possible now...
1) create the templates you want, using your
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 06:39:45PM +, 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
I suppose my main reason for using mutt is that it runs on Linux and
(my version of) it can handle Unicode. I think the only other options
for a Unicode MUA on Linux are Mozilla and a suitably patched
bleeding-edge Emacs. (On Windows there's Outlook, of course, which
apparently handles charsets
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 09:38:22AM +0100, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
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.
Definitely. Especially for my administrative
On 2000-03-10 10:07:11 +, Edmund GRIMLEY EVANS wrote:
Perhaps I should make jed do Unicode so I have an
alternative ...
This sounds like a great idea. ;-)
--
http://www.guug.de/~roessler/
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 02:20:27AM -0600, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
:Eugene Lee [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
:
: 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.
:
:This
On 2000-03-10 02:57:41 -0800, Eugene Lee wrote:
Hullo, %%%FROM%%%!
I have a comment about your message about "%%%SUBJECT%%%" on %%%DATE%%%.
set attribution="Hullo, %F!\n\nI have a comment about\
your message about \"%s\" on %d.\n\n\
- begin original message
On Fri, Mar 10, 2000 at 12:04:42PM +0100, Thomas Roessler wrote:
:On 2000-03-10 02:57:41 -0800, Eugene Lee wrote:
:
:set attribution="Hullo, %F!\n\nI have a comment about\
: your message about \"%s\" on %d.\n\n\
: - begin original message -"
:set post_indent_string="- end
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 13:57:08 -0600, David DeSimone wrote:
If TheBat! does everything that he wants it to, then he should use it.
No
I received several messages sent by TheBat, and they weren't really
RFC-compliant! It was breaking threads or something like that.
Perhaps this has been
Hi!
...and then J McKitrick said...
% 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
Any pointers to such a thing so that we can
J McKitrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.
Such arguments rarely lead to a useful exchange of information. They
more usually end up as "My computer can beat up
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 07:22:05PM +, J McKitrick wrote:
[snip]
Of course, the bat doesn't support IMAP, while mutt does.
Other than that, it looks like it's just a matter of GUI vs text.
Hmmm... not according to it's feature list. "support for imap4, pop, apop,
smtp protocols"
regards,
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 01:57:08PM -0600, David DeSimone wrote:
Such arguments rarely lead to a useful exchange of information. They
more usually end up as "My computer can beat up your computer" type of
"discussion." Is your friend actually interested in learning from this
exchange, or
Actually, maybe it's my fault here. I always tell him my unix box can
beat up his windows box with one hard drive tied behind its back. He
just argues that windows is simpler, and that power tools should be
made easier to use.
But then they wouldn't be power tools anymore ;-)
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 06:39:45PM +, 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.
on Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 06:20:07PM -0800, Eugene Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 09, 2000 at 06:39:45PM +, 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
18 matches
Mail list logo
