Hello! On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 11:05:45 -0700, Michael Loftis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > --On Tuesday, December 21, 2004 07:59 +0100 Simon Matter > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The nice thing about Thunderbird is that it works fine. Same goes for > > recent kmail versions. Mulberry and PINE may do it better, but they don't > > look better. > > That'd be a significant change for the better if T-bird finally did it > right. I'll have to ask the T-bird users at the office to get ahold of the > latest version an see. I know the last time most of them upgraded they > still couldn't look into our support archive easily (20k+) because it'd sit > and try to pull down all the headers instead of doing it right and just > asking for the ones around where it was. > > It's not that I ever disliked T-bird as a mail client, it's that it's IMAP > behaviour was exactly as if it were an NNTP server.
I use Mulberry for this reason as well. One thing I have noticed though is that the unix version is significantly slower than the mac version. It could be a matter of processor speed as well though. But if I'm going into a large mailbox, the unix version will take about 5 seconds for me to open it. I think it has more to do with populating the UI element (list) than anything else. Just something that I've noticed. Another thing, I'm not positive, but I think Kmail does a decent job with large mailboxes as well. But none do as well as Mulberry, I've found. Regards, -JD- --- Cyrus Home Page: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyruswiki.andrew.cmu.edu List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
