For a while i've just used the browser for email having found Thunderbird, Evolution and similar so slow on imap. Mutt i managed to set up but being so configurable wasn't to my liking.
Alpine seems the fastest of any i've tried... easy to setup - just wondering if anyone else on here uses it. If they do any problems?
jmaes
On 22 May 22:35, James Freer wrote:
For a while i've just used the browser for email having found Thunderbird, Evolution and similar so slow on imap. Mutt i managed to set up but being so configurable wasn't to my liking.
Alpine seems the fastest of any i've tried... easy to setup - just wondering if anyone else on here uses it. If they do any problems?
Alpine is really just the apache licenced PINE, I used PINE briefly about 10 years ago, it wasn't as flexible as mutt, and I've been using mutt ever since :)
On Wed, 23 May 2012, Brett Parker wrote:
On 22 May 22:35, James Freer wrote:
For a while i've just used the browser for email having found Thunderbird, Evolution and similar so slow on imap. Mutt i managed to set up but being so configurable wasn't to my liking.
Alpine seems the fastest of any i've tried... easy to setup - just wondering if anyone else on here uses it. If they do any problems?
Alpine is really just the apache licenced PINE, I used PINE briefly about 10 years ago, it wasn't as flexible as mutt, and I've been using mutt ever since :)
-- Brett Parker
I am aware that Mutt is highly configurable but i found it too complex for my uses. Each to their own. For linux 6 month upgrades; using alpine remotely and having only to backup the pinerc file makes it a breeze. Alpine seems the only mail client that is fully imap compatible... i just wondered if anyone used it on here.
james
On 27 May 23:20, James Freer wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2012, Brett Parker wrote:
On 22 May 22:35, James Freer wrote:
For a while i've just used the browser for email having found Thunderbird, Evolution and similar so slow on imap. Mutt i managed to set up but being so configurable wasn't to my liking.
Alpine seems the fastest of any i've tried... easy to setup - just wondering if anyone else on here uses it. If they do any problems?
Alpine is really just the apache licenced PINE, I used PINE briefly about 10 years ago, it wasn't as flexible as mutt, and I've been using mutt ever since :)
-- Brett Parker
I am aware that Mutt is highly configurable but i found it too complex for my uses. Each to their own. For linux 6 month upgrades; using alpine remotely and having only to backup the pinerc file makes it a breeze. Alpine seems the only mail client that is fully imap compatible... i just wondered if anyone used it on here.
*raises eyebrow* - I'd like to know why you think that Alpine is more fully imap compliant than mutt... but never mind!
But, you might want to look at cone for another example of a console based mail client.
On Mon, 28 May 2012, Brett Parker wrote:
On 27 May 23:20, James Freer wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2012, Brett Parker wrote:
On 22 May 22:35, James Freer wrote:
For a while i've just used the browser for email having found Thunderbird, Evolution and similar so slow on imap. Mutt i managed to set up but being so configurable wasn't to my liking.
Alpine seems the fastest of any i've tried... easy to setup - just wondering if anyone else on here uses it. If they do any problems?
Alpine is really just the apache licenced PINE, I used PINE briefly about 10 years ago, it wasn't as flexible as mutt, and I've been using mutt ever since :)
-- Brett Parker
I am aware that Mutt is highly configurable but i found it too complex for my uses. Each to their own. For linux 6 month upgrades; using alpine remotely and having only to backup the pinerc file makes it a breeze. Alpine seems the only mail client that is fully imap compatible... i just wondered if anyone used it on here.
*raises eyebrow* - I'd like to know why you think that Alpine is more fully imap compliant than mutt... but never mind!
But, you might want to look at cone for another example of a console based mail client.
-- Brett Parker
Imap compliancy i base simply on what i've read... which i am more than happy to admit could be junk - i believed what geeks say and as they're more IT knowledgeable than myself. Perhaps Mutt is much better now than when i tried it which was 2008 or thereabouts.
Cone i actually tried first. But i had a problem with it sending messages and the admin are not that helpful. Alpine admin are a great friendly list and Alpine has proved its credentials over time. Cone wouldn't display html text just leaving it as code in the email. Cone was written i believe as a replacement for Alpine but developed by one person rather than a team and not exactly a helpful person. With html Alpine somehow cleverly pics out the words and removes the code which allows one to read the email - one can switch to the other file that makes up an email message and view it in the browser.
One day when i have time i might give Mutt and Cone another go but for me anything that requires a lot of setting up... i've got to put aside.
james
On Tue, 22 May 2012, James Freer wrote:
For a while i've just used the browser for email having found Thunderbird, Evolution and similar so slow on imap. Mutt i managed to set up but being so configurable wasn't to my liking.
Alpine seems the fastest of any i've tried... easy to setup - just wondering if anyone else on here uses it. If they do any problems?
I use Alpine as my main client, and like it a lot. Nice fast keyboard shortcuts to control everything when I've got a full-size keyboard, but also a point-and-click control system that's more convenient when I'm running it on my mobile 'phone. Also works irrespective of whether I'm in an X windows environment or a text-only terminal. And it's Unicode-based, which helps when I need to put mathematical notation in e-mails. The one problem I'd flag up is that it doesn't play very nicely directly with POP3 servers - but I've resolved that by installing Getmail as an intermediary between Alpine and POP3.
-
Brett Parker -
Dan -
James Freer