 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / General / Networking / October 2005I want a decent email client...
...one that must have the following features: True references based message threading. Grouping of threads when sorting by date. Show/hide messages if read/unread/tagged. Ability to space through threads without opening unrelated, or read messages. Attachment support. Either HTML display or easy display of HTML emails in web browser (as MailSmith does). In-line image display or easy opening of images in viewer application. ...and I'd like, but do not absolutely require the following: Wordservices support (so I can more easily use Excalibur spellchecker). A nice, uncluttered UI. Sadly after so many years I _still_ cannot find an email client that will do all this :-( The closet I've ever found is MacSOUP. It's unbelievable that MacSOUP's afterthought of an email client beats long established clients like Eudora! F**k me - Eudora can't even handle message threading properly! Please tell me I'm wrong and there's a client that will do _some_ of the above, at least. TIA, Jamie Kahn Genet  SignatureIf you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. * Jamie Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, 2005-05-20 17:55 +0200: > ...one that must have the following features: Mutt <http://www.mutt.org> (take v.1.5.9) can do everything on your list. > A nice, uncluttered UI. It sure does have one, it's a command line application :) -Andre > * Jamie Kahn Genet <jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz>, 2005-05-20 17:55 +0200: > > ...one that must have the following features: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -Andre I would never denigrate a CL app just for being CL, but I really want a GUI app. I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL apps cannot easily pass URLs and other info between themselves and GUI apps. Tell you what though - should anything happen to MacSOUP I'll be moving to a CL solution faster than you can say 'modern email sucks!'. What else is there? Regards, Jamie Kahn Genet SignatureIf you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. > I would never denigrate a CL app just for being CL, but I really want a > GUI app. I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL > apps cannot easily pass URLs and other info between themselves and GUI > apps. Tell you what though - should anything happen to MacSOUP I'll be > moving to a CL solution faster than you can say 'modern email sucks!'. > What else is there? Go to <http://www.macorchard.com> and track down some clients you can take for test drive. I use PowerMail <http://www.ctmdev.com> myself. I don't think that it will support all the features on your list though. But most of them are. SignatureRegards, Kjell O Alingsås, Sweden <http://www.kio.nu> > > I would never denigrate a CL app just for being CL, but I really want a > > GUI app. I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > don't think that it will support all the features on your list though. > But most of them are. Have done many a time :-) MacOrchard is one of my favourite sites. I've tried Eudora, OE (a long time ago, urrgh - so freaking bad...), Finder Mail, MailSmith, Musashi, SweetMail, and several others over the years. Thanks anyway. Regards, Jamie Kahn Genet SignatureIf you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. > > > I would never denigrate a CL app just for being CL, but I really want a > > > GUI app. I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > tried Eudora, OE (a long time ago, urrgh - so freaking bad...), Finder > Mail, MailSmith, Musashi, SweetMail, and several others over the years. Mulberry? -Andrew (a Eudora user) SignatureAndrew Starr eMailman(r): http://www.emailman.com NewsReaders: http://www.newsreaders.com > I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL > apps cannot easily pass URLs and other info between themselves and GUI > apps. Where did you get this strange idea? Unix pipes have been doing this for years. Mutt can do it for sure. It's also probably the most configurable and functional mail client out there. Not to mention fast, efficient, and remotely accessible. It's not particularly _friendly_, at least at first. But iirc that wasn't one of your requirements. > > I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL > > apps cannot easily pass URLs and other info between themselves and GUI > > apps. > > Where did you get this strange idea? Experience. Lynx is a good example. Regards, Jamie Kahn Genet SignatureIf you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate. >> > I need the interoperability GUI OSX apps have. Typically CL >> > apps cannot easily pass URLs and other info between themselves and GUI >> > apps. >> >> Where did you get this strange idea? Mr Genet has edited the quoted text, which is a good thing. But, intentionally or otherwise, he's done so in a misleading way, which is not such a good thing. I'll have to fill in the context he chose to remove. He was given the suggestion (not originally by me) that he try the mail client 'mutt'. It was in response to this that he made the bogus claim above. In text he chose to remove, I pointed out that unix has long supported this in general (it's easy with pipes), and that mutt in particular definitely supports it. In case this is still not clear, I'll be even more concrete. If I'm using mutt to read mail and one of the messages it displays contains a url, I can invoke an operation that will pass that url off to any browser I want, including both gui browsers like Safari and text browsers like links. In short, mutt does exactly what Mr Genet says suchs apps typically can't do. And not because it's atypical -- other non-gui mail clients support this too (vm is an example). Now that we have that straight: > Experience. Lynx is a good example. A good example of what? Afaik lynx is not a mail client, so it's not relevant to that part of the discussion at all. That leaves only the case of using lynx as an html viewer from a mail client like mutt. As far as I know, that works too, though I can't test it now since I don't use lynx anymore. So in the context of this thread, what exactly is lynx supposed to be an example of? Hello, everyone. I used Eudora for almost ten years on the Mac, but I made the mistak on my personal, 70-MB, nonprofit educational Web site of using <mailto:> tag on every page for my only e-mail account at the time When "spam" started to be a real problem a couple of years after created my site in 1994, I ended up creating hundreds of filters wit Eudora, but still doing nothing to stem the flow of "spam." Eventually I had to shut down that e-mail account, which I'd had since 1991 (when first started using the Internet, doing everything by accessing a UNI system). I tried Eudora under Mac OS X but I was not happy with it, an Qualcomm's level of support was less than it had been in the earlie years. (Plus, I'd had problems under Mac OS 9 with corrupted mail boxe in Eudora, and I was afraid of the same problem occurring under Mac O X.) Please note that I am not "bashing" Eudora. I have been trying different clients and I have about decided to star using Mailsmith. I've been using Bare Bones Software's BBEdit since i was released and Bare Bones Software has always been very responsive often "going beyond the call of duty." Mailsmith comes bundled free with SpamSieve, which has received mixe reviews, but the application itself generally gets good reviews. actually do not want to receive HTML e-mail messages. I long for th days when the message itself was enough. (I can remember the early day of having to put new-line characters at the end of each line of text - or risk getting "flamed"!) I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has switched t Mailsmith and what your opinion is. Thank you very much, in advance! Cordially, Davi -- DavidM David M. Dickerson URL: http://ddickerson.igc.org/ * * * "In a world of absurdity, we must invent reason; we must create beauty out of nothingness." -- Elie Wiese macosx.com - The Answer to Mac Support - http://www.macosx.co > I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has switched to > Mailsmith and what your opinion is. I really like Mailsmith, except that it doesn't support LDAP, which has struck me a a stupid, stubborn, decision on BareBones' part. I use it to receive email in my scripted workflows because it has a great Applescript disctionary, but without LDAP support I can't use it for day-to-day email. SignatureLife. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who > I really like Mailsmith, except that it doesn't support LDAP, which has > struck me a a stupid, stubborn, decision on BareBones' part. Did you mean to say imap? Lack of ldap support doesn't seem like such a big deal. Otoh, lack of imap in a modern mail client is definitely a reason not to use ut. The most full featured imap client that runs in osx is probably mutt, but it's not very well integrated with other osx features. > Did you mean to say imap? Lack of ldap support doesn't seem like such a > big deal. Otoh, lack of imap in a modern mail client is definitely a > reason not to use ut. No, I meant to say what I said. But indeed, Mailsmith doesn't support IMAP either. As I said, they're a stubborn lot at BareBones. I don't care about IMAP. I do care about LDAP. djb SignatureLife. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who Entity D P Schreber spoke thus: > lack of imap in a modern mail client is definitely a > reason not to use Since switching to Google Mail I'm finding IMAP to be irrelevant if not entirely obsolete. Gmail allows POP and SMTP as well as webmail. POP means I can download mails to Entourage from a FREE email account. SMTP means I can SEND email from any ISP I am using. Google is smart! In case I am using a different machine, Gmail's interface is fast, easy to use and inoffensive. Plus I can upload my entire Contacts database for online use and backup. If anyone wants a Gmail invitation just ask. -- Gnarlie > Entity D P Schreber spoke thus: > >> lack of imap in a modern mail client is definitely a >> reason not to use > Since switching to Google Mail I'm finding IMAP to be irrelevant if not > entirely obsolete. You must be kidding. The gmail web interface is mediocre at best, not nearly as nice as what good standalone mail clients provide. Sure, it has a great search engine, but in every other respect it's very primitive. I could never use gmail.google.com as my primary mail gui. POP access to gmail is occasionally useful, but of course it makes no sense at all to POP and store everything; that completely defeats the purpose of gmail's large capacity. No, the only way gmail can ever be really useful is if the mail remains on the gmail servers, to make use of the search engine, but is still accessible from external mail clients for everything else. In other words ... imap access, the very thing you claim it obsoletes. Without it, my gmail accounts will always be secondary. Hi, everyone. Thank you for your input about Mailsmith and Eudora. I remember thinking that Eudora 4.X in the mid-1990s seemed abou "perfect" to me. It was stable and rarely crashed. I continued to upgrade software, Mac OS versions, and hardware, and found that the version of Eudora I was running on a G3 Mac (Mac OS 9 in the late '90s had a recurrent problem with the "In" box corruptin and becoming inaccessible. (Sometimes I could salvage some conten using BBEdit.) The problem may not have been Eudora, but the fact tha I got so much e-mail every day that I did not clean out my In bo frequently enough. (I was always behind in replying to messages, and i I sorted messages before replying, I often forgot to answer them.) I was aware of Mailsmith's lack of IMAP support, but not it's lack o LDAP support. I guess that I have never used the LDAP protocol in a e-mail client. Would someone mind explaining to me the importance o this feature to you personally? (Please note that I do -not- want t start a controversy; I realize that e-mail clients are like religion -- which may explain why I'm having such a hard time making decision.) After Eudora became less and less stable for me personally in the lat '90s (and another reason may have been that my "G3" was actually PowerMac 7600 in which I'd installed a 300-MHz G3 processor upgrade), did run version 6 under Mac OS X but it never became second nature to m has it had been before. My ideal client would offer full Unicode support, an option fo text-only e-mail (i.e., no HTML), and spam filtering, such a SpamSieve. Mailsmith and Eudora are ASCII text only, but I have specia friends in Odessa, Ukraine, with whom I occasionally exchange Russia e-mail (Windows Cyrillic) -- which is the reason I use Outlook on m Windows XP Pro (and Linux) computer. (There is much to loathe abou Outlook, but changing e-mail encodings is a snap.) The problem I have with trying different e-mail clients is the issue o being able to import messages after the trial period. I have multipl e-mail accounts and I receive many messages, so I am talking about large number of messages. Bare Bones Software has always been very good to me. I've never pai the full price for BBEdit, which I've used since it came out. origininally used the Vantage text editor by Baseline Software ( defunct company in Memphis that apparently specialized in buying th rights to shareware programs but not bothering to buy the source code) System 7 basically broke all of Baseline's programs (although I got Th Talking Moose to work, for fun, months before Baseline ever did). Baseline made a cross-upgrade deal with Bare Bones Software (Vantage t BBEdit) for $49, but Bare Bones sent me a printed manual becaus Baseline told me it was part of the upgrade (and then promptl corrected Baseline about the policy)! I've had similar instances wit Bare Bones over the years. Qualcomm has not been responsive to my questions about Eudora, but Bar Bones is always responsive about BBEdit and I'd get a discount o Mailsmith as a registered user of BBEdit. I've gotten sick of bloated HTML messages, especially from users o Outlook Express and Outlook on Windows, and I started out using Pico o a UNIX system (and used Pine a bit, too). Obviously, I'll have to make this decision, but I would be intereste in the relative importance of LDAP for an e-mail client, as long as don't start a dispute. (Please!) Thank you very much, in advance! Cordially, Davi -- DavidM David M. Dickerson URL: http://ddickerson.igc.org/ * * * "In a world of absurdity, we must invent reason; we must create beauty out of nothingness." -- -Elie Wiesel macosx.com - The Answer to Mac Support - http://www.macosx.co > I guess that I have never used the LDAP protocol in an > e-mail client. Would someone mind explaining to me the importance of > this feature to you personally? Within the company I work for I do not have to worry about updating my address book as people leave or are hired as Mail can look it up on our LDAP server. All I need to know is someone's first name. I personally don't use IMAP because I want my mail on my Powerbook regardless of my network status. Both are solely personal preferences. djb SignatureLife. Nature's way of keeping meat fresh. -- Dr. Who Dave Balderstone Wrote: > Within the company I work for I do not have to worry about updating m > address book as people leave or are hired as Mail can look it up on ou [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Both are solely personal preferences. Hi, Dave. Thank you for your response. At the corporation where I worked previously we used an IMAP server. For personal e-mail, I've never used LDAP or IMAP, although understand that IMAP support is important to some people. (Like you, want all of my e-mail on my computer -- and the e-mail would all b personal or related to my consulting work.) I may go ahead and give Mailsmith a try, although I'll read through th manual thoroughly first and experiment with the demo version. (I would however, like a plain-text client that supports Cyrillic e-mail, s maybe I'll keep looking.) Thanks again, Dave! Cordially, Davi -- DavidM David M. Dickerson URL: http://ddickerson.igc.org/ * * * "In a world of absurdity, we must invent reason; we must create beauty out of nothingness." -- -Elie Wiesel macosx.com - The Answer to Mac Support - http://www.macosx.co > For personal e-mail, I've never used LDAP or IMAP, although I > understand that IMAP support is important to some people. (Like you, I > want all of my e-mail on my computer Just to restate the (perhaps) obvious: There is no contradiction in "IMAP" and "keeping your mail on your machine". It's called caching the mail locally, and is a setting in all IMAP-capable mail readers. That way, I have full control of my e-mail /both/ on my own machine /and/ using the webmail interface - when I need that, which I do sometimes. And that includes both incoming and outgoing mail. Signature/Jon Put "jaalborg" for "navn", remove ".invalid". Jon Aalborg Wrote: > Just to restate the (perhaps) obvious: There is no contradiction i > "IMAP" and "keeping your mail on your machine". It's called caching th [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > /and/ using the webmail interface - when I need that, which I do > sometimes. And that includes both incoming and outgoing mail.Hi, Jon. It is an obvious point, but it is an important one and bear emphasizing. Mailsmith, not supporting IMAP, would not give me this option. Also, I am beginning to consider my desire for Cyrillic e-mail, but write messages in Russian infrequently. Mailsmith's method of storing e-mail in a database, rather than i 'mbox' format, makes me a bit uncomfortable, but I believe tha stability is not a problem. I do know that Mailsmith can handle a hig volume of e-mail, which is a feature that I definitely require. Thanks, Jon! Cordially, Davi -- DavidM David M. Dickerson URL: http://ddickerson.igc.org/ * * * "In a world of absurdity, we must invent reason; we must create beauty out of nothingness." -- -Elie Wiesel macosx.com - The Answer to Mac Support - http://www.macosx.co > No, the only way gmail can ever be really useful is if the mail remains > on the gmail servers, to make use of the search engine, but is still > accessible from external mail clients for everything else. In other > words ... imap access, the very thing you claim it obsoletes. Without > it, my gmail accounts will always be secondary. The mail does stay on the Gmail servers. When you download it via POP, it puts a copy into the All Mail section. If you send using gmail, a copy goes into the Sent section. Personally I can't stand imap. It was always too slow and on occasion I've needed access to e-mail when I wasn't able to be online. Gmail gives me full access to all my mail at all times whether I'm somewhere without internet access (obviously not new mail then) or when I'm without laptop and just have web access. Greg B. SignatureActual e-mail address is gbuchner and I'm located at mn.rr.com Entity Greg Buchner spoke thus: > The mail does stay on the Gmail servers. When you download it via POP, > it puts a copy into the All Mail section. If you send using gmail, a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > without internet access (obviously not new mail then) or when I'm > without laptop and just have web access. I agree, every IMAP service I have used was slow, unreliable and exceedingly complex to set up. Especially irritating was the blocked IMAP ports due to spam. Before Gmail we were stuck with an email address provided by our ISP, or webmail. With Gmail SMTP the ISP is irrelevant. I've been using Gmail for a year now and have no major complaints. The only minor complaint is that it's slow or impossible to send mail sometimes. Usually for only a few minutes though. -- Gnarlie > Before Gmail we were stuck with an email address provided by our ISP, or > webmail. We were? I've had e-mail hosting elsewhere for a years now. SignatureA few minutes ago I attempted to give a flying fsck, but the best I could do was to watch it skitter across the floor. (Anthony de Boer) > Before Gmail we were stuck with an email address provided by our ISP, or > webmail. With Gmail SMTP the ISP is irrelevant. Fastmail, .Mac, Pactec and many others have offered ISP-independent mail hosting since almost the dawn of the Internet. I have never had problems using any of them with any (European) ISP I have used. Signature/Jon Put "jaalborg" for "navn", remove ".invalid". > Personally I can't stand imap. It was always too slow and on occasion > I've needed access to e-mail when I wasn't able to be online. Gmail > gives me full access to all my mail at all times whether I'm somewhere > without internet access (obviously not new mail then) or when I'm > without laptop and just have web access. Am I overstating the obvious when I point out that Apple Mail (and other mail programs, I assume) can cache all of your IMAP mail? I use IMAP with Mail, and I always have access to all of my e-mail when I'm not online. Of course, that doesn't solve your speed problems. I've never found IMAP to be slow (I use Fastmail), but my e-mail needs are fairly light, so maybe speed has never been an issue because I haven't had enough mail to make slowdowns apparent. > Am I overstating the obvious when I point out that Apple Mail (and other > mail programs, I assume) can cache all of your IMAP mail? Nothing is obvious on usenet, as earlier messages in the gmail subthread have made clear. > I use IMAP with Mail, and I always have access to all of my e-mail > when I'm not online. Of course, that doesn't solve your speed > problems. I've never found IMAP to be slow Neither have I. It's not hard to configure either. If you want your mail to reside on a server so that it's accessible from any location, and if you want to manage that mail using a well-designed mail client of your choice, imap works extremely well. As for design, pretty much any mail client you can name, imap-capable or not, is better than the primitive web guis offered by gmail, yahoo and the like. I run my own imap server locally, for mail I've retrieved off my isp's (POP only) server. Since this Mac is always accessible via ssh I can easily manipulate locally stored mail from anywhere, using any imap client. I highly recommend this approach for dealing with locally stored mail. So what's a "decent" imap mail client? Personally I now use mutt for almost all my mail needs. I started out using it only for fast access when I was connected remotely, and when I wanted to forward mail as an attachment (absolutely essential when reporting spam or phishing). But the more I became familiar with its capabilities, the more I started using it day to day. If Mail.app is the friendliest and best integrated mail client that runs in osx, mutt is probably the fastest, most powerful and most flexible. > The mail does stay on the Gmail servers. When you download it via POP, <sigh> I anticipated exactly this misunderstanding and I went out of my way to try to phrase my post so that it would be clear without being verbose. Obviously I failed. Usenet is a very challenging environment for expository writing. > Entity D P Schreber spoke thus: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > -- Gnarlie I would welcome an invitation to Gmail. Please respond to this with your Gmail address, and I will return my current email address, although you should be able to figure out my email address from the Header information of this article. SignatureDonald L. McDaniel Please reply to the original thread. ======================= Entity Donald L McDaniel spoke thus: > I would welcome an invitation to Gmail. Please respond to this with > your Gmail address, and I will return my current email address, You must be wackadoodle if you think I'm going to post my Gmail address here! Paste my signature line in Terminal and press <return> then send an email to that address. -- Gnarlie echo 38698196677083401706731788025369086101258315035012362P|dc > Paste my signature line in Terminal and press <return> then send an email to > that address. Neat. How do you do that? Nice & nerdy! :-) Signature/Jon Put "jaalborg" for "navn", remove ".invalid". Entity Jon Aalborg spoke thus: >> Paste my signature line in Terminal and press <return> then send an email to >> that address. > > Neat. How do you do that? Nice & nerdy! :-) Simple, download my "SpamfreeSignature" Applescript and run it: http://Gnarlodious.com/Apple/AppleScript/Scripts/ -- Gnarlie > Simple, download my "SpamfreeSignature" Applescript and run it: > http://Gnarlodious.com/Apple/AppleScript/Scripts/ Thanks! :-D Signature/Jon For mail address, run the following in Terminal: echo 36199371860304980107073482417748002696458P|dc > Hello, everyone. > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > David I'm a long-time Eudora user. IMO, version 4 was the last "perfect" version. I have used several other email clients over the years (since the mid 90s) and keep reverting to Eudora. It doesn't look "state-of-the-art," but it does the job (better than Apple Mail, IMO). The OS X version I'm on now (6.2.1) seems to be fine. > I'm a long-time Eudora user. IMO, version 4 was the last "perfect" > version. I have used several other email clients over the years (since > the mid 90s) and keep reverting to Eudora. It doesn't look > "state-of-the-art," but it does the job (better than Apple Mail, IMO). > The OS X version I'm on now (6.2.1) seems to be fine. I'm a long time Eudora user and have had none of the problems of the OP going back to the beta versions except shuddering crashes once in a while in Eudora. I thought that was normal. The first thing I did after upgrading to a Mac mini, and thus being able to run OSX, was to purchase Eudora again. I had an justified/unjustified feeling that the Mail app was not working correctly with my server. Of course, I just wanted Eudora back. Nary a crash. I purchased a compatible version of Fetch for FTP, BBEdit for text, and searched until I found MT-Newswatcher for newsgroups. It's the closest I can find that works as Newswatcher did. And frankly, with the same interface, it's much better. Any OSX browser is better than what I had. I'll grudgingly change OS's, but changing away from apps that I know intimately is much less likely to happen if I can find a substitute. Boy, Doom's gotten great, hasn't it? leo Signature<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/> |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.