Piyush P Kurur
ppk at cse.iitk.ac.in
Wed Nov 18 00:48:23 EST 2009
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 09:09:55PM +0100, Arvid Picciani wrote:
> Antony Jepson wrote:
>> On 2009-11-17, Patrick Brisbin wrote:
>>> In gmail's web interface a thread is vertical, sorted by time. However
>>> here in mutt, I can see that I've replied to you in our own little
>>> thread branch.
>> I definitely prefer the proper threading available in Mutt. I often find
>> myself navigating through my email more quickly using Mutt than I do by
>> using Gmail - however, this is probably because I still point and click
>> when using the web interface.
> i WOULD find mutts way perfect, if it actually worked in real live. People
> NEVER reply on the correct branch, so its sort of useless. you have to
> crawl the entire tree anyway to find the responses you want to read. On the
> other hand, gmail thinks conversations never branch, which is just as
I think that is not the problem with mutt. I have been using mutt for
some time (about say 5 years). What I think about it is really captured
by the Author's quote:
All mail clients suck. This one just sucks less.
Couple of thinks I like about it is
(1) It works on the terminal (yes this is the most important feature for me)
(3) not so difficult to configure
(4) Can use my favorit editor (emacs) while editing.
(5) support for gziped mailbox, encrypted mailbox etc (however not so natura
way of doing it)
(6) Great thread support (some folks seems to disagree)
(7) limiting, searching etc which can be keyboard controlled.
Alipine is also good but I used to hate the pine interface.
More information about the arch-general