Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 13:03 -0500, Doug McGarrett wrote:
> On 12/02/2013 12:26 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:20 -0600, yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> >> 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.
> > You misunderstood my point. There might be nothing bad with using mbox,
> > but having the freedom to chose mbox or maldir is the freedom to chose.
> > Mozillas nanny you, they chose the mail format for you, the chose Google
> > as startpage for you, they make decisions for you. I want to decide on
> > my own. I don't need somebody to make decisions for me.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Ralf
> >
> >
> >
> Start (Home) Page:
> Firefox>Edit>Preferences>General>Home Page
> Set it to anything you like. Or nothing.
>
> For Thunderbird--Mail format:
> choose font, choose top or bottom reply, choose color,
> choose sig, enable spam filters, I can't even name all the
> possibilities.
>
> Sacrifice something good and useful to the great god FOSS, again!
I already mentioned that I know the available options. It's the policy,
IOW what they make default. For the mailer as mentioned one mail before
this one, the HTML editor gives the full Windows feeling, at best when
used by people who install the Windows fonts to their Linux, this often
does mislead people to sent "cryptic" HTML mails, by using a Microsoft
font with e.g. smilies.
When did you start the last time Thunderbird, not Icedove, for the first
time? The last time I wanted to test Thunderbird again, some month ago,
it opened with advertisings.
Reply to: