Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
> Leonidas Jones wrote:
>> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>>> Leonidas Jones wrote:
>>>> I wrote an article concerning this, referring to SeaMonkey's ancestor,
>>>> Netscape 7. I think it applies here as well:
>>>> Basically, do not use Inbox as a long term repository for stored email.
>>>> If you need to keep email, store it in archive folders.
>>> I would have to disagree with you on that Lee. That might have been a
>>> problem in the old Netscape days, but its not now. I've had stuff in my
>>> inbox for years, and never had a problem. Then again, my inbox isn't
>>> over 2 gigs big either. But I do have other folders that are about that
>>> big and still don't have problems.
>> But Grant, if they are in other folders, they are not in Inbox, are
>> they?  I don't think it matters how long items have been there, its
>> the size and the constant access that does it.
> but I'm saying I have many messages within the inbox that have been
> there for years, and I've never experienced any problems.
>> Since the OP found that the problem did not occur with a clean Inbox,
>> but reoccurred with the old Inbox restored, is that not instructive?
> I think the OPs problem is he reached the size limit for an SM folder
> which is 2 gigs!:
> While in TB its 4 gigs:
> Talk about discrimination! ;-)

Yes. maybe Thunderbird's/Lightning 4GB capability is the way to continue
the SM Maibox directly ?
Firefox is also the default browser installation with every Linux
distro, and looks to have more and easier addons and plugins
installations. Some suggenstions/thoughts about +/- for the FF/TB/L
combination (integration) compared to the SM suite?

Another candidate is Evolution which is the default installation on
several Linux distributions, though it doesn't seem to be compatible
with the mailbox format directly. And I don't know its capacity yet.

support-seamonkey mailing list

Reply via email to