Holger Eitzenberger [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Most *nix's come with pine installed by default. If you get a telnet
> account somewhere you get pine, if you login to your uni account you
> most likely will see pine. Reason? Maybe it has to do with pines
> limited possibilities to configure (easier for newbies), which makes
> it also the preferred MUA installed by sysadmins since it's likely
> that fewer problems arise.
Good point(s). For me it was elm that was there to use, so switching to
Mutt when I found it was just a logical upgrade.
A lot of the pro-Pine comments were "I can use it with telnet", which
obviously is not something just Pine has (duh). So if it's just inertia
(and we care), then maybe some advocacy needs to be done.
> Maybe we should point out other areas where mutt is superior over
> other MUAs and make them publicly available.
I've got some stuff like this on the web page -- it seems to me that people
need to first hear about Mutt and be curious enough to look into it, and
when that happens they will go to the web page. I'm always open to
suggestions for the site. As for getting people to look if there is a
better console mailer out there than they have, I dunno. Pine does a lot
of stuff in bad ways but people tend to not realize it's bad ways until
they see it done right. "You never miss what you never know."
One advantage though is that people that care about the kind of issues Mutt
excels in (size, configurability, standards compliance) are not going to be
happy with something else and *are* likely to go looking.
--
Jeremy Blosser | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://jblosser.firinn.org/
-----------------+-------------------------+------------------------------
"Would you fight to the death, for that which you love?
In a cause surely hopeless ...for that which you love?"
-- D. McKiernan, _Dragondoom_
PGP signature
