--C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Dec  4  7:55, Jamis Buck wrote:
> That said, it wasn't the UI that put me off. I mean, I've a vim guy, and 
> mutt seems to me to be to email clients what vim is to text editors. It 
> was the massive hodge-podge of options that you had to wade through to 
> set it up. I took one look at the options screen and went back to 
> Thunderbird.

It really is the vim of editors.  Also like vim, it has pretty good
default settings (aside from mbox, imho).  It's the sort of thing you can
set a few options in, be efficient in working with, and gradually set
options the way you want over the course of... well, forever.  I've been
using mutt for a while now and I still find neat new tricks.  They're not
necessary things, but they're definitely far above and beyond Thunderbird
or any other mail client.

> Also, I pop all my mail, and I haven't had the time to sit down and 
> figure out how to get that to work with mutt.

Mutt has built-in pop support that (knowing mutt) should be sufficient,
though I haven't used it.  I recommend getmail, a python mail fetcher.
It's also very easy to configure and powerful.

> Maybe someday I'll have the patience to try again. I'm sure I'd love it, 
> once I got used to it, but like you, Carl, I'm not quite ready for that 
> leap yet.

It's definitely worth the effort :)  After all, if we didn't occasionally
take such leaps, we'd all program in FORTRAN or C rather than ruby ;)
Tom

--C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBsPIJ/rVdTqQq7OwRAkGFAKDJ9mufnnMDwAjfMUPC7V4rH+jP8QCgmGPA
aKRcjEkG1ucxP9Lv0Q6xr1s	MS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--C7zPtVaVf+AK4Oqc--