Incoming from Paul Scott: > > Faster as far as processor time, etc. is not relevant *if the machine is > fast enough* since the machine still has to wait for the user to do > something.
I couldn't care less whether the machine is waiting for me to do something. That's its job. :-) However, consider the effects of the converse of that. If you're always moving to fatter and fatter GUI apps, you're forever forcing yourself to upgrade to faster hardware to keep up with the apps. Just ask that little outfit in Redmond. It's practices like that which have made Intel rich. If you regularly _eschew_ apps like that, your overall cost in hardware can be held in check, and you'll get more out of your hardware dollar. > When GUI means point and click there may only be a very few places this > is useful for experienced geeks. OTOH having X serve up multiple XTerms > at a much higher resolution is certainly an improvement over seeing one > text-mode screen at a time in many situations I use a GUI almost all the time; X Window. And yes, I do have multiple XTerms on it. That's still a lot lighter than some of the multi-megabyte MUAs we're seeing these days. Consider the cost of that one feature you're hoping to satisfy that you think mutt can't provide. Is that _really_ worth the cost in RAM, disk, and your time? If so, by all means, fire away. Not me. I like this machine. I'd like to continue using it for a long time to come. -- Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced. (*) http://www.spots.ab.ca/~keeling - - -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
