Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mutt 1.6

mutt.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 191 posts

Re: Mutt 1.6

#41

Post by nextos »

norswap wrote: post #33
nextos wrote: post #3

I use it daily. It's a lovely email client. Close to the Unix ideal of doing one thing, and doing it well. Integration with other utilities (notmuch, isync) for indexing and sync'ing is very easy, thanks to close adherence to Unix principles, and gets you a very neat setup. Nothing to envy from Gmail.

I personally always felt that "full applications" were disconnected from the Unix philosophy. By definition, such an application does many things: fetch things from the network, display them, sort them, ... it talks many protocols, concerns itself with many I/O systems. I'm certainly not saying that it is the way to go, but a real Unix philosophy way of dealing with email would be to use a command to pull mails from…

Well, mutt is close to what you say. It's just a MUA [1].

That is, it just reads emails on a local mailfolder. Fetching emails to that mailfolder from the server, sending emails and doing other operations is a task of 3rd party programs.

[1] OK, it has a few addons for lazy people. But most experienced users ignore them.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#42

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

adrusi wrote: post #28
profeta wrote: post #14

most desktop clients (mutt included) almost died when everyone moved to gmail and such. imap/pop access was too expensive (when compared to having a so-so UI for free) or not available. now that gmail and yahoomail give imap for free, they will surely comeback. see N1 for example.

Pretty sure gmail supported POP from day one, and it has supported IMAP since 2007 [1]. The problem is that gmail's mail organizational system is sort of incompatible with POP/IMAP and completely incompatible with a number of clients. That started to change around 2010 when gmail had been so popular for so long that the standards and clients started to accomodate gmail's way of doing things. Desktop MUAs won't sudden…

But aren't users also used to using mobile mail apps, not websites? At least for iOS users, I could imagine them being comfortable with Mail.app.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#43

Post by kxyvr »

Can anyone recommend a CalDAV based calendar program that either integrates into or works well along side Mutt? I've tried khal and it works alright, but I recall it being a little wonky with timezones.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#44

Post by tomphoolery »

adrusi wrote: post #28
profeta wrote: post #14

most desktop clients (mutt included) almost died when everyone moved to gmail and such. imap/pop access was too expensive (when compared to having a so-so UI for free) or not available. now that gmail and yahoomail give imap for free, they will surely comeback. see N1 for example.

Pretty sure gmail supported POP from day one, and it has supported IMAP since 2007 [1]. The problem is that gmail's mail organizational system is sort of incompatible with POP/IMAP and completely incompatible with a number of clients. That started to change around 2010 when gmail had been so popular for so long that the standards and clients started to accomodate gmail's way of doing things. Desktop MUAs won't sudden…

$weed = "yes please"

Re: Mutt 1.6

#45

Post by adrusi »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #42
adrusi wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure gmail supported POP from day one, and it has supported IMAP since 2007 [1]. The problem is that gmail's mail organizational system is sort of incompatible with POP/IMAP and completely incompatible with a number of clients. That started to change around 2010 when gmail had been so popular for so long that the standards and clients started to accomodate gmail's way of doing things. Desktop MUAs won't sudden…

But aren't users also used to using mobile mail apps, not websites? At least for iOS users, I could imagine them being comfortable with Mail.app.

You'd think, but the shift from desktop apps to web apps happened concurrently with the rise of mobile apps. It doesn't seem that users think of mobile and desktop apps the same way.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#46

Post by nextos »

profeta wrote: post #15
JoshTriplett wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use k-9 mail these days, which is OK but doesn't handle huge folders well. However, back when I had an n900 with its hardware keyboard, my mobile mail client was ssh, screen, and mutt.

you can have that again: bbm priv. An android phablet with a full hardware keyboard.

Or a Pyra!

Re: Mutt 1.6

#47

Post by brunosutic »

elsigh wrote: post #8
nextos wrote: post #3

I use it daily. It's a lovely email client. Close to the Unix ideal of doing one thing, and doing it well. Integration with other utilities (notmuch, isync) for indexing and sync'ing is very easy, thanks to close adherence to Unix principles, and gets you a very neat setup. Nothing to envy from Gmail.

> Nothing to envy from Gmail. I switched because of search, which is amazing in gmail and hard in mutt (for me). What do you do?

I use `notmuch` for searching local mail. It's pretty powerful and blazing fast.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#48

Post by nextos »

elsigh wrote: post #8
nextos wrote: post #3

I use it daily. It's a lovely email client. Close to the Unix ideal of doing one thing, and doing it well. Integration with other utilities (notmuch, isync) for indexing and sync'ing is very easy, thanks to close adherence to Unix principles, and gets you a very neat setup. Nothing to envy from Gmail.

> Nothing to envy from Gmail. I switched because of search, which is amazing in gmail and hard in mutt (for me). What do you do?

I use notmuch. It's really powerful and quick. You get all Gmail features, plus some more.

There's also mutt-kz, with notmuch deeply integrated.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#49

Post by duskwuff »

jd3 wrote: post #27
Nullabillity wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail has provided free IMAP since they launched, and Yahoo has had it for years too. Personally, my main draw to Gmail is that I just don't have to deal with ISPs blocking SMTP, which can get really annoying really quickly on laptops.

>ISPs blocking SMTP is this actually still a thing? I know on our campus network they block SMTP on the wired network, but not on the wireless (for some boneheaded reason or another).

All sane residential ISPs block port 25 (SMTP) to prevent spam.

All sane mail providers offer SUBMISSION (same protocol as SMTP) on port 587, which is intentionally not blocked by ISPs.

Re: Mutt 1.6

#50

Post by 0xCMP »

trengrj wrote: post #35
SwellJoe wrote: post #6

It's been many years since I've used mutt, but I'm considering going back to it. For a while, HTML email had become so common that it was uncomfortable to use a text email client, but that trend seems to have reversed...most of my business communication is plain text (maybe a shift in the people I interact with for business). The speed of mutt is damned near impossible to beat, and the bandwidth usage is so tiny (I c…

Where do you live / travel where you are spending $300 a month on Internet? I live in Australia (not the cheapest place) and spend $50 AUD a month for 12G of data and free international calls to 10 countries.

In the US we also have T-mobile with unlimited internet (limited highspeed internet)
Post reply on HN