On Jul/20/1999, Brandon Ibach wrote:
you really have so many mailboxes that the longer format used by Mutt
is that much of a problem?
In my case, yes. I've got ... (counting ...) 20 mailboxes defined in
my .muttrc (and a few more for archiving purposes, as you said you have
too). A
Quoting Roberto Suarez Soto ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) from Thu, Jul 22, 1999 at 01:57:12AM
+0200:
On Jul/20/1999, Brandon Ibach wrote:
you really have so many mailboxes that the longer format used by Mutt
is that much of a problem?
In my case, yes. I've got ... (counting ...) 20
Brandon Ibach [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
From: dannyman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
2) You can configure it without reading the man page ... errr, I mean, going
to the web site, errr, I mean finding the manual, err, I mean, reading the
whole fucking manual to find the keyword you want ... errr, I
On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 12:18:20AM -0500, dannyman wrote:
3) News support, without reverse-hacking in one of Brandon's old patches.
Great! It's a mail reader. Can it make coffee? Can it clean my shoes? No ??
I won't use it then...
--
Ralf Hildebrandt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990716 18:59]:
FYI, Linus Torvalds himself uses Pine. So it's not just newbies
or morons.
Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
must be good". Like if all things Linus does is great, yeah right...
Anders
-
On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 10:47:07AM +0200, Anders Andersson wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990716 18:59]:
FYI, Linus Torvalds himself uses Pine. So it's not just newbies
or morons.
Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
must be good".
Recently, Anders Andersson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990716 18:59]:
FYI, Linus Torvalds himself uses Pine. So it's not just newbies
or morons.
Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
must be good". Like if
For what it's worth (hmmm, probably not a whole lot if you think about it!),
here's the mailer representation on mutt-* (as percentages of messages with
valid X-Mailer/User-Agent header or with the pine message-id). I'm ignoring
the sub-versions of mutt and everything = 0.1%...
mutt-users
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:26:10PM -0500, dannyman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:31:11AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
(like Pine) not because they liked the features
On 1999-07-16 12:37:13 +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:
Maybe in a further version themes could be added.
As you mention later in your own message, mutt is "themable" if you
want to call it like that, simply due to the fact that you can
include configuration files.
The whole point behind
On 1999-07-15 23:21:47 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
Mutt not being #1 shouldn't be surprising, nor a discouragement.
It's a simple fact that people are satisfied with crap.
It's not even about people being satisfied with crap.
It's about people having different needs. I can totally understand
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 05:07:24PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
Heck, I even know users who are still using mailx. So what? I've
been happy with it for some years myself, before MIME became
omnipresent, and I started using pine and elm me+ (and, finally,
mutt).
Ah, now I remember why I
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 03:42:32PM -0500, Mark Bainter wrote:
Why in the world would it be beneficial to have pre-compiled DOS and/or W32
binaries available? This smells more like digging for trouble to me.
Lynx does it.
If I want to do some quick web browsing, and I'm stuck running W95 at
on Jul 19, Gerrit Holl wrote:
Why?
Are there actually things where pine is better?
Some people seem to like a menu-driven system, I think...
What's wrong with that? I was a long time Pine user before switching to
mutt and I must admit that their menus are quite well designed and make
it easy
Thus wrote Renaud Colinet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [99.07.19 16:30]:
on Jul 19, Gerrit Holl wrote:
Why?
Are there actually things where pine is better?
Some people seem to like a menu-driven system, I think...
What's wrong with that? I was a long time Pine user before switching to
mutt and I
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:26:03AM +0200, Gerrit Holl wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:26:10PM -0500, dannyman wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:31:11AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is possible that some people actually like Pine better than Mutt, as
absurd as that seems to us ;)
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 05:06:02PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I also think we could expand this base a lot if pre-compiled DOS and/or
W32 binaries were easily available.
I think people using binaries aren't very likely to contribute.
Maybe in raw percent, but the actual use would go
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:31:11AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
(like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
inertia. As I said, *if we care*,
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:37:13PM +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:
Thus spake Mark Mielke ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Also many of them wouldn't know how to use a non "impressing" view of
their mailbox. It's so much cooler to have messages fade and titles
Standard-Mutt is b/w for me without my
* Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
(like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
inertia. As I said, *if we care*, there are things we could try to do
about this. If we don't care, we
* David Thorburn-Gundlach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
% Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
% Just curious.
BECAUSE MUTT RULZ, d00d!!!
Then it should promote itself, G.
* Tom Hall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So we can win 'mindshare', and mutt will continue to work as the 'net
evolves. See http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html.
I think we're not giving people enough credit. Just because they
use some other mailer we think it's because they're forced to or
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:46:09AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So we can win 'mindshare', and mutt will continue to work as the 'net
evolves. See http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html.
I think we're not giving people enough credit. Just because they
use some other mailer we
Tom Hall [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:46:09AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This, to me, is the main reason we need to keep a good base of users.
I also think we could expand this base a lot if pre-compiled DOS and/or
W32 binaries were easily available.
I kind of
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:03:57PM -0600, Tom Hall wrote:
If there aren't enough mutt users, mutt will not be kept up to date,
and as new mail protocols etc. are created, mutt will eventually stop
working.
This, to me, is the main reason we need to keep a good base of users.
I also think
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
* Jeremy Blosser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
(like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
inertia. As I said, *if we care*, there are things we could
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 12:26:02AM +0200, J Horacio MG wrote:
Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
That's surely due to mutt being command line based.
mutt is not commandline based. Ok, you can send a mail via the
commandline if you must, but you can be sure
Thus spake Hal Burgiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
That's surely due to mutt being command line based.
When ignorance is bliss ...
Can you give me reasons why to use mutt instead of Outlook Express,
that I can tell my friends
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 10:52:55AM +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:
Can you give me reasons why to use mutt instead of Outlook Express,
that I can tell my friends here?
* Faster.
* Smaller.
* Doesn't crash.
* Colorful
* Can properly encrypt mail
* Does all and even more than what OE does
* Not
Horacio --
...and then J Horacio MG said...
%
% Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
Actually, I saw PINE out ahead at something like 26%, while
Communicator was only at 22% or so...
% That's surely due to mutt being command line based.
Yeah. Thank Heavens
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 11:18:45AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
"Alex, I´m honest -- Outlook is very good and totally fits my
needs... so - why do you use mutt?"
* to show my individuality
* because I can randomize my signatures with it
* because I'd like to be able to read my mail
Alexander Langer [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Can you give me reasons why to use mutt instead of Outlook Express,
that I can tell my friends here?
- standard compliance (if they care; if they don't you have another lecture
to give them ;)
- very accessible remotely on slow modem lines -- read
Holger Eitzenberger [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Most *nix's come with pine installed by default. If you get a telnet
account somewhere you get pine, if you login to your uni account you
most likely will see pine. Reason? Maybe it has to do with pines
limited possibilities to configure
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 03:02:54PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
Holger Eitzenberger [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
...So if it's just inertia
(and we care), then maybe some advocacy needs to be done.
If it's advocacy you want, release pre-compiled binaries for W32 and/or
DOS. PC hackers will
John Franklin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
88x31 seems to be a common size for such things, but
John Franklin [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
Sven has one on his site, so does Brandon Long; I dunno
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 04:26:33PM -0400, John Franklin wrote:
Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
88x31 seems to be a common
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
Just curious.
It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
(like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
inertia. As I said, *if we care*,
Holger Eitzenberger zei Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:07:03AM +0200 dat:
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 04:26:33PM -0400, John Franklin wrote:
Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
Then again, I didn't
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 04:49:04PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
much since the s/n ratio got so bad. Most of the comments seem to be
newbies. The informal survey of mail headers done a while back by someone
on this
Lars Hecking [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
The current Slashdot Poll is "Which email client do you use?"
So far, only about 8% of the votes are for mutt, at a total
of about 4.5k votes.
Still 8% at 8k votes.
I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
much since
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 12:26:02AM +0200, J Horacio MG wrote:
Jeremy Blosser dixit:
Uh, we do, and even crashed netscape when I tried a second time (just to
check if I had done it right the first time, of course).
Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
J Horacio MG [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
Jeremy Blosser dixit:
I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
much since the s/n ratio got so bad. Most of the comments seem to be
newbies. The informal survey of mail headers done a while back by someone
on this
43 matches
Mail list logo
