On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 08:18:50PM +0200, Uli Armbruster wrote: > * Andrew Hills <ahi...@ednos.net> [10.06.2013 19:20]: > > On Mon, 10 Jun 2013 18:12:57 +0100 Michael Stevens <mstev...@etla.org> > > wrote: > > > Are there any mail clients that don't suck? > > > > Mutt for CLI, Claws Mail for GUI. I don't think either of them suck. > > In case you don't instantly see this in Claws and didn't look into the > header, he uses Mutt! > > So @ op, what do you not like about Mutt? > Not OP, and also mutt user.
Well mutt is niceish, but not suckless. (well at something like 20MB of ram seem a bit mutch for mail client, at least for me, but maybe its not and its my ignorance on how much resources email managment needs) Also I must note that mut is NOT CLI, it is TUI. It seems to be a bit complicated, though mail clients are quite a big pieces of software and thus that might be natural and expected, still. Uses quite a lot of memory, and as mentioned is not cli, but rather curses app. Also setup with imap over ssl is a bit complicated. As for alternatives, for some time I have tried heirloom mailx, which is really cli application, seems to have considerably smaller footprint. Though interfaces is a bit rough, and since it seems it uses less(no?) caching its at least feels a bit slower on remote imap. Still, I might switch to it some time. As a nice plus for mailx, it is very simple to make it work with imap over ssl, like i.e. gamail, can be done with couple of minutes of man page reading. Also Christop/__20h__ is working on some mail client that sounded quite nice and interesting from the description, but afaik it is not yet available(?).
