On 05/02/2008, BartlebyScrivener <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 4, 4:20 pm, "Dotan Cohen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Sure, for plain text OOo and Word are terrible tools. They are not > > meant for that purpose. However, when you need markup such as that for > > print documents, a word processor is a necessity. > > A necessity? Only if you don't know LaTeX.
That's true. Though I've never been into kinky. > But I think you see my point. For a text and keyboard person, mutt is > much more efficient. To me using Thunderbird to send email is like > trying to manage text with a word processor. > > To pick up on your analogy. Mutt is made for the purpose of managing > and sending plain text emails. If that's what you want to do, then > it's much more efficient and programmable than a gui email program > like Thunderbird. I see what you are saying. Tell me, in mutt can I have several (5-6) compose messages open and switch between them and the main window that I'm copying / pasting from? Also, will mutt remember that when I write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I need the From address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED], and when I write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I need the From address to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] Those two features are necessary to my workwflow, and so far as I understand only GUI mail clients perform the former, while only Thunderbird (with an extension) can perform the latter. Thanks. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?