Re: A rookie's query: Want to about Debian and the related
On Tue, 2013-12-03 at 07:44 +0100, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 11:51 -0600, yaro@marupa.net wrote:
> > On Monday, December 02, 2013 06:26:26 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
> >
> > Oh, that does clear it up. But again, I don't see that as a "free vs. nonfree"
> > issue. Most software will choose defaults for you and you can change it, even
> > Mozilla. I'm a KDE user, often a lot of KDE defaults I don't like or don't
> > make sense, Kopete being perhaps the worst offender.
> >
> > I often don't care for software that requires user-side configuration to
> > already be in place when run. By user-side I mean dotfiles in home directory. I
> > do not really mind if I have to set something up in /etc, however, largely
> > because I will most often be changing the defaults.
> >
> > I prefer Google anyway, though, as I have yet to see a search engine that
> > works nearly as well. I know a lot of people rave about Duck Duck Go, but
> > every time I use it it loves to bring up results in an order that doesn't hit
> > the same sort of relevance as Google. But Google using my search for
> > advertising doesn't bother me.
> >
> > Conrad
>
> My aversion against Mozillas is not objective. For me they cause a
> "Windows feeling". Once upon a time especially the browsers where good,
> but then they changed the sorting of the history and I never found out
> how to get back a sane sorting, that is common for most browsers. For
> the MUAs sharing the mails with other installs was and likely is a PITA.
> I'm not thinking about sharing by IMAP, just simply linking the mbox
> thingy.
> Still unique and very good is that the browsers provide profiles, all
> the add-ons. However, it's bloated software, even for the separated MUA
> and browser we nowadays know as Thunderbird and Firefox.
> The options to edit HTML mails in every why fakes that HTML mails do
> work, will look the same at the recipient's side, but a HTML mail at
> best can be share among MUAs by simple HTML editing and it anyway is
> better to prefer plain text.
Sorry for the extra broken English, I've got a cold :S and better don't
correct or try to rephrase my mails
Reply to: