On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 11:21:47PM -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
It's so much cooler to have messages fade and titles bold/unbold in front of your eyes. Rich text email (in the form of HTML) can be exchanged using Netscape/IE...
You can have that with redmutt too. Use text/enriched, defined in RFC 1
Also spracht Jeremy Blosser...
> I'm curious what benefit you think there is in a menu system over just a
> well-annotated .muttrc? Presumably what a menu system would do is let you
> see what each variable does (theoretically using the manual entry for it so
> we stay consistent) and then let yo
Be warned; I'm likely going to contradict myself at least once here.
I'm fairly ambivalent about this issue...
Jeremy Blosser ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm curious what benefit you think there is in a menu system over just a
> well-annotated .muttrc?
It's less intimidating for the more recalc
Brandon Ibach [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > From: dannyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > 2) You can configure it without reading the man page ... errr, I mean, going
> > to the web site, errr, I mean finding the manual, err, I mean, reading the
> > whole fucking manual to find the keyword you want ...
Quoting Roberto Suarez Soto ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) from Thu, Jul 22, 1999 at 01:57:12AM
+0200:
> On Jul/20/1999, Brandon Ibach wrote:
>
> > you really have so many mailboxes that the longer format used by Mutt
> > is that much of a problem?
>
> In my case, yes. I've got ... (counting ...) 20
On Jul/20/1999, Brandon Ibach wrote:
> you really have so many mailboxes that the longer format used by Mutt
> is that much of a problem?
In my case, yes. I've got ... (counting ...) 20 mailboxes defined in
my .muttrc (and a few more for archiving purposes, as you said you have
too). A w
This next bit has to do with why people might prefer Pine...
Quoting mutt-users-digest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 00:18:20 -0500
> From: dannyman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Email client poll
>
> This is border-line troll ...
>
>
* Anders Andersson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
> must be good". Like if all things Linus does is great, yeah right...
The point was, if anyone isn't a stupid newbie, it's Linus.
For what it's worth (hmmm, probably not a whole lot if you think about it!),
here's the mailer representation on mutt-* (as percentages of messages with
valid X-Mailer/User-Agent header or with the pine message-id). I'm ignoring
the sub-versions of mutt and everything <= 0.1%...
mutt-users
Recently, Anders Andersson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990716 18:59]:
> >
> > FYI, Linus Torvalds himself uses Pine. So it's not just newbies
> > or morons.
>
> Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
> must be good".
On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 10:47:07AM +0200, Anders Andersson wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990716 18:59]:
> > FYI, Linus Torvalds himself uses Pine. So it's not just newbies
> > or morons.
> Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
> must be go
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [990716 18:59]:
>
> FYI, Linus Torvalds himself uses Pine. So it's not just newbies
> or morons.
Heh, I love it the way people looks up to Mr Torvalds, "If Linus uses it, it
must be good". Like if all things Linus does is great, yeah right...
Anders
-
An
On Tue, Jul 20, 1999 at 12:18:20AM -0500, dannyman wrote:
> 3) News support, without reverse-hacking in one of Brandon's old patches.
Great! It's a mail reader. Can it make coffee? Can it clean my shoes? No ??
I won't use it then...
--
Ralf Hildebrandt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.stahl.bau.tu-bs.de
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 10:26:03AM +0200, Gerrit Holl wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:26:10PM -0500, dannyman wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:31:11AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > It is possible that some people actually like Pine better than Mutt, as
> > > absurd as that seems
Thus wrote Renaud Colinet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [99.07.19 16:30]:
> on Jul 19, Gerrit Holl wrote:
> > Why?
> > Are there actually things where pine is better?
> > Some people seem to like a menu-driven system, I think...
> What's wrong with that? I was a long time Pine user before switching to
> mut
on Jul 19, Gerrit Holl wrote:
> Why?
> Are there actually things where pine is better?
> Some people seem to like a menu-driven system, I think...
What's wrong with that? I was a long time Pine user before switching to
mutt and I must admit that their menus are quite well designed and make
it easy
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 03:42:32PM -0500, Mark Bainter wrote:
>
> Why in the world would it be beneficial to have pre-compiled DOS and/or W32
> binaries available? This smells more like digging for trouble to me.
Lynx does it.
If I want to do some quick web browsing, and I'm stuck running W95
On Mon, Jul 19, 1999 at 05:07:24PM +0200, Thomas Roessler wrote:
> Heck, I even know users who are still using mailx. So what? I've
> been happy with it for some years myself, before MIME became
> omnipresent, and I started using pine and elm me+ (and, finally,
> mutt).
Ah, now I remember why
On 1999-07-15 23:21:47 -0400, Mark Mielke wrote:
> Mutt not being #1 shouldn't be surprising, nor a discouragement.
> It's a simple fact that people are satisfied with crap.
It's not even about people being satisfied with crap.
It's about people having different needs. I can totally understand
On 1999-07-16 12:37:13 +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:
> Maybe in a further version themes could be added.
As you mention later in your own message, mutt is "themable" if you
want to call it like that, simply due to the fact that you can
include configuration files.
The whole point behind creati
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:26:10PM -0500, dannyman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:31:11AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > * Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
> > > (like Pine) not because they liked th
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:31:11AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> * Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
> > (like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
> > inertia. As I said, *if we car
On Sat, Jul 17, 1999 at 05:06:02PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I also think we could expand this base a lot if pre-compiled DOS and/or
> > W32 binaries were easily available.
>
> I think people using binaries aren't very likely to contribute.
Maybe in raw percent, but the actual use wou
* Tom Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If there aren't enough mutt users, mutt will not be kept up to date,
> and as new mail protocols etc. are created, mutt will eventually stop
> working.
As long as there are people using it it will keep working. It's doing
just fine now right? I think tryin
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:05:29PM -0700, rex wrote:
> ...
> Yarn users would be good candidates to use Mutt if DOS/W32 binaries
> were available.
Actually, the reason I've only been a little obnoxious about asking for
these is that I found a copy of ElmPC out on simtel which, thanks to
Pete's f
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> * Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
> > (like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
> > inertia. As I said, *if we care*, there are things w
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:03:57PM -0600, Tom Hall wrote:
> If there aren't enough mutt users, mutt will not be kept up to date,
> and as new mail protocols etc. are created, mutt will eventually stop
> working.
> This, to me, is the main reason we need to keep a good base of users.
> I also th
Tom Hall [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:46:09AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This, to me, is the main reason we need to keep a good base of users.
> I also think we could expand this base a lot if pre-compiled DOS and/or
> W32 binaries were easily available.
I kind
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 10:46:09AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > So we can win 'mindshare', and mutt will continue to work as the 'net
> > evolves. See http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html.
>
> I think we're not giving people enough credit. Just because they
> use some other mailer w
* Tom Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So we can win 'mindshare', and mutt will continue to work as the 'net
> evolves. See http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html.
I think we're not giving people enough credit. Just because they
use some other mailer we think it's because they're forced to
* David Thorburn-Gundlach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> % Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
> % Just curious.
>
> BECAUSE MUTT RULZ, d00d!!!
Then it should promote itself, G.
* Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
> (like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
> inertia. As I said, *if we care*, there are things we could try to do
> about this. If we don't care, we
On Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 12:37:13PM +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:
> Thus spake Mark Mielke ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
>
> > Also many of them wouldn't know how to use a non "impressing" view of
> > their mailbox. It's so much cooler to have messages fade and titles
>
> Standard-Mutt is b/w for me with
Thus spake Mark Mielke ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Also many of them wouldn't know how to use a non "impressing" view of
> their mailbox. It's so much cooler to have messages fade and titles
Standard-Mutt is b/w for me without my config files.
Maybe in a further version themes could be added. That wo
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 04:56:06PM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ...
> Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
> Just curious.
So we can win 'mindshare', and mutt will continue to work as the 'net evolves.
See http://www.cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html.
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 10:41:53PM -0400, David Thorburn-Gundlach wrote:
> Yo, d00d!
> ...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said...
> % * Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> % Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
> % Just curious.
> BECAUSE MUTT RULZ, d00d!!!
Yes, but p
Stasinos Konstantopoulos [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 04:26:33PM -0400, John Franklin wrote:
> > > Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
>
> IMHO that's one of the great things about the site as well as mutt
> itself. I visit the page for the inform
Yo, d00d!
...and then [EMAIL PROTECTED] said...
% * Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
%
% Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
% Just curious.
BECAUSE MUTT RULZ, d00d!!!
:-D
--
David Thorburn-Gundlach * It's easier to fight for one's principles
(play
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 04:49:04PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
> much since the s/n ratio got so bad. Most of the comments seem to be
> newbies. The informal survey of mail headers done a while back by someone
> on this
Holger Eitzenberger zei Fri, Jul 16, 1999 at 02:07:03AM +0200 dat:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 04:26:33PM -0400, John Franklin wrote:
> >
> > Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
> > on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
> > Then again,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slashdot poll?
> Just curious.
It isn't at all. Mostly we were talking about people using other mailers
(like Pine) not because they liked the features the most but out of
inertia. As I said, *if we care*
* Jeremy Blosser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.
Why is it so important that Mutt be #1 on a Slash
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 04:26:33PM -0400, John Franklin wrote:
>
> Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
> on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
> Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
>
> 88x31 seems to be a commo
John Franklin [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
> on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
> Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
Sven has one on his site, so does Brandon Long; I dunn
John Franklin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> Is there a support graphic a la "Netscape NOW!" that people could put
> on their home pages? I didn't see anything on the mutt.org site.
> Then again, I didn't see ANY graphics on the mutt.org site.
>
> 88x31 seems to be a common size for such things, bu
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 03:02:54PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> Holger Eitzenberger [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> ...So if it's just inertia
> (and we care), then maybe some advocacy needs to be done.
If it's advocacy you want, release pre-compiled binaries for W32 and/or
DOS. PC hackers will
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 (e
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 03:02:54PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> 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.
Is there a support graphic
Alexander Langer [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Can you give me reasons why to use mutt instead of Outlook Express,
> that I can tell my friends here?
- standard compliance (if they care; if they don't you have another lecture
to give them ;)
- very accessible remotely on slow modem lines -- read
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 11:18:45AM +0200, Ralf Hildebrandt wrote:
> > "Alex, I´m honest -- Outlook is very good and totally fits my
> > needs... so - why do you use mutt?"
>
> * to show my individuality
> * because I can randomize my signatures with it
> * because I'd like to be able to read my
Horacio --
...and then J Horacio MG said...
%
% Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
Actually, I saw PINE out ahead at something like 26%, while
Communicator was only at 22% or so...
% That's surely due to mutt being command line based.
Yeah. Thank Heavens ;
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 10:52:55AM +0200, Alexander Langer wrote:
> Can you give me reasons why to use mutt instead of Outlook Express,
> that I can tell my friends here?
* Faster.
* Smaller.
* Doesn't crash.
* Colorful
* Can properly encrypt mail
* Does all and even more than what OE does
* Not
Thus spake Hal Burgiss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
> > That's surely due to mutt being command line based.
> When ignorance is bliss ...
Can you give me reasons why to use mutt instead of Outlook Express,
that I can tell my frien
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 12:26:02AM +0200, J Horacio MG wrote:
> Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader.
> That's surely due to mutt being command line based.
mutt is not commandline based. Ok, you can send a mail via the
commandline if you must, but you can be sure
On Wed, Jul 14, 1999 at 04:49:04PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
>
> I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
> much since the s/n ratio got so bad. Most of the comments seem to be
> newbies. The informal survey of mail headers done a while back by someone
> on th
J Horacio MG [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> Jeremy Blosser dixit:
> > I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
> > much since the s/n ratio got so bad. Most of the comments seem to be
> > newbies. The informal survey of mail headers done a while back by someone
> >
On Thu, Jul 15, 1999 at 12:26:02AM +0200, J Horacio MG wrote:
> Jeremy Blosser dixit:
> >
> Uh, we do, and even crashed netscape when I tried a second time (just to
> check if I had done it right the first time, of course).
>
> Notice though, that netscape was by far the widiest voted mailreader
Jeremy Blosser dixit:
>
> Still 8% at 8k votes.
>
> I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
> much since the s/n ratio got so bad. Most of the comments seem to be
> newbies. The informal survey of mail headers done a while back by someone
> on this list may be
Lars Hecking [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote:
> The current Slashdot Poll is "Which email client do you use?"
> So far, only about 8% of the votes are for mutt, at a total
> of about 4.5k votes.
Still 8% at 8k votes.
I get the impression, though, that a lot of "the faithful" don't read /.
much sinc
59 matches
Mail list logo
