Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:56:09 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 10:27 -0600, yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> > On Monday, December 02, 2013 05:14:17 PM Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > > On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 15:14:27 +0100, AP <worldwithoutfences@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 6:49 PM, Ralf Mardorf
> > > >
> > > > <ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> > > >> I can't remember what I tested a while ago. Perhaps Claws, maybe
> > > >> Sylpheed. I'll try _both_ again.
> > > >
> > > > Have all tried Thunderbird? I am eager to know about it. Is it
> > > > excellent?
> > >
> > > I used it for years, it was and likely is excellent, but not a native
> > > Linux app and as already mentioned before, I dislike the Mozilla policy.
> > > It's my eccentric, whimsical notion that I don't use Mozillas _if
> > > possible_, but I also guess that ... [1]. IOW Mozilla as a MUA for me
> > > never ever again. As browser I still use QupZilla and the Tor Browser
> > > Bundle quasi based on Mozilla software.
> >
> > Why would you say it's not Linux native? Is Thunderbird not compiled for
> > Linux? It's not running on Java or Mono or anything, is it? I don't follow
> > your logic here.
> >
> > Do you mean it's not exclusive to Linux? That's true, but why is that a
> > bad
> > thing?
>
> If you want adapt a Microsoft/Apple policy to Linux, then Mozillas are
> perfect. Go and give Google all your private data, don't care about the
> freedom to choose a mail format, use mbox (yes, it's UNIX, not
> Microsoft, but how often is it used by Linux MUAs?) ... Mozilla software
> is excellent regarding to technically aspects, but not regarding to
> freedom.
I don't see how POP3 or IMAP services are "nonfree" just because you have data
on a server somewhere. There might be privacy concerns but those protocols are
just as open as mbox is.
Perhaps you can elaborate how Mozilla's approach is "nonfree" aside from the
trademark issue we already know about.
Reply to: