Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

SpeedVin · 2009-09-29 19:14:29

Hello.
I had question to all emial client user's:
Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?
And I have one more question.
Is there any option to backup/compress your mail in mutt or thunderbird?

ataraxia · 2009-09-29 19:18:46

Some of us have mail on servers that provide no webmail, or a bad one. For my work mail, my only webmail choice is Squiirelmail, which I hate.

rebugger · 2009-09-29 19:23:57

webmail often lacks some nice features - and: if webmail is down, you can't read your mails

brisbin33 · 2009-09-29 19:27:41

i use mutt because its light and fast, i prefer keyboard navigation, CLI emailing, compose in vim, the list goes on...

plus i find spending hours on a muttrc oddly satisfying.

i access gmail and gmx accounts locally under ~/Mail which is kept in sync with offlineimap. this also means you could back up ~/Mail any way you'd like.

SpeedVin · 2009-09-29 19:34:07

Ok this argument's are good.
But what do you think about what more funcinality have email clients compared to web mail interface?
To mutt user's:
Are muut working with UTF8 support?
And what about Mutt vs. Thunderbird?
I don't want to start flame

Last edited by SpeedVin (2009-09-29 19:34:52)

Runiq · 2009-09-29 19:35:09

brisbin33 wrote:

i access gmail and gmx accounts locally under ~/Mail which is kept in sync with offlineimap. this also means you could back up ~/Mail any way you'd like.

Hm... What's the point on using offlineimap instead of normal POP3 access? I kind of can't see the difference, and it seems to destroy the purpose of IMAP…?

rebugger · 2009-09-29 19:35:59

Better configurable junk-filter, combine all my pop3 and imap accounts in one app, fast moving/copying of emails (drag&drop is faster than webpage reload/ajax), backup my mails (hey, even my mailprovider can crash their servers and lose mails)

brisbin33 · 2009-09-29 19:48:12

Runiq wrote:

brisbin33 wrote:
i access gmail and gmx accounts locally under ~/Mail which is kept in sync with offlineimap. this also means you could back up ~/Mail any way you'd like.
Hm... What's the point on using offlineimap instead of normal POP3 access?

best of both worlds? local and remote copy of emails, i can still access the accounts from my phone or some other computer if i don't happen to have my flashdrive with me (putty/id_rsa key). or if my computer dies....

i've been toying with the idea of downloading everything locally and serving it back out myself... some day maybe.

Vintendo · 2009-09-29 19:51:52

Runiq wrote:

brisbin33 wrote:
i access gmail and gmx accounts locally under ~/Mail which is kept in sync with offlineimap. this also means you could back up ~/Mail any way you'd like.
Hm... What's the point on using offlineimap instead of normal POP3 access? I kind of can't see the difference, and it seems to destroy the purpose of IMAP…?

What's the point of offlineimap when you have Imap in mutt?

//Edit: Too late, good point brisbin

Last edited by Vintendo (2009-09-29 19:53:21)

Runiq · 2009-09-29 19:53:20

Ah, cool. Think I'll give it a try then, thanks for the explanation.

Nezmer · 2009-09-29 20:04:10

And yes , mutt works with UTF-8 .

ngoonee · 2009-09-29 22:34:40

Vintendo wrote:

Runiq wrote:
brisbin33 wrote:
i access gmail and gmx accounts locally under ~/Mail which is kept in sync with offlineimap. this also means you could back up ~/Mail any way you'd like.
Hm... What's the point on using offlineimap instead of normal POP3 access? I kind of can't see the difference, and it seems to destroy the purpose of IMAP…?
What's the point of offlineimap when you have Imap in mutt?
//Edit: Too late, good point brisbin

As he said, local copy of all your mails. For backup purposes, and offline usage (similar to pop3), yet with a complete copy still on the server which has its flags/folders updated when you update yours (similar to IMAP)

Xiong Chiamiov · 2009-09-30 02:45:45

I don't believe that you can use public-key encryption with webmail.

Runiq · 2009-09-30 05:48:39

ngoonee wrote:

As he said, local copy of all your mails. For backup purposes, and offline usage (similar to pop3), yet with a complete copy still on the server which has its flags/folders updated when you update yours (similar to IMAP)

Ah, now I see the difference. Thank you.

Last edited by Runiq (2009-09-30 05:48:56)

.:B:. · 2009-09-30 08:51:46

As much as I like (love even) Gmail's interface, I always find a local client easier. I don't have to fire up my browser and log in every time, and it is a desktop app (I'm not happy about the whole cloud and 'do your thing online instead of on the desktop' hype).

I should be looking into offline IMAP though...

LeoSolaris · 2009-09-30 14:03:51

Another little draw for email clients... most of them have "Redirect." If you get an email from a friend that was intended for someone else, you can be nice to your friend by redirecting the email to the intended recipient instead of forwarding. The Intended recipient never knows that it bounced through you, and your friend saves some face.

Of course the possibilities for mischief with this feature are fairly high...

brisbin33 · 2009-09-30 14:35:57

Vintendo wrote:

Runiq wrote:
brisbin33 wrote:
i access gmail and gmx accounts locally under ~/Mail which is kept in sync with offlineimap. this also means you could back up ~/Mail any way you'd like.
Hm... What's the point on using offlineimap instead of normal POP3 access? I kind of can't see the difference, and it seems to destroy the purpose of IMAP…?
What's the point of offlineimap when you have Imap in mutt?
//Edit: Too late, good point brisbin

Also, imap in mutt for me is sooooo slow (proportional to the size of the mailbox of course). accessing it as a MailDir not only speeds up general use but also opens up all those nifty MailDir tricks in conky, xmonad, etc. and being a bash junky, i can write scripts to manipulate my mails and print info about them just by grepping through some files in the appropriate directories.

Runiq · 2009-09-30 14:44:53

brisbin33 wrote:

opens up all those nifty MailDir tricks in conky, xmonad, etc.

Okay, sold. That's just great.

madalu · 2009-09-30 17:35:38

Answer to OP:

Because mail is just plain text, so if it's local, you can manipulate
it with all the tools you're familiar with.

I use Gnus (in Emacs) for mail; so I have all the power of Emacs at my
disposal when I'm reading mail.

Also, to follow up re: offlineimap: It's not just a downloading tool; it's a synchronization tool. You can have a local copy of your mail and still access it on the server via webmail.

SpeedVin · 2009-09-30 18:44:54

madalu wrote:

Answer to OP:
Because mail is just plain text, so if it's local, you can manipulate
it with all the tools you're familiar with.
I use Gnus (in Emacs) for mail; so I have all the power of Emacs at my
disposal when I'm reading mail.
Also, to follow up re: offlineimap: It's not just a downloading tool; it's a synchronization tool. You can have a local copy of your mail and still access it on the server via webmail.

Oh that is what I need some mail clients have mailing list's feature (you know better ml reading) but how it works?

makimaki · 2009-09-30 20:39:01

brisbin33 wrote:

Also, imap in mutt for me is sooooo slow ...

Likewise, I too use offllineimap/mutt, but I hover between that and alpine. Alpine only downloads the headers of the n most recent emails, and continues downloading headers only as you scroll up or search. I also find it to be faster than mutt loading my massive maildir, but it is nice having a local backup of my emails.

briest · 2009-10-02 16:29:09

brisbin33 wrote:

Also, imap in mutt for me is sooooo slow (proportional to the size of the mailbox of course)

Do you use header caching? It can accelerate remote imap access, but is disabled by default. Also playing with imap_idle (yes, if server supports), imap_keepalive (low) and timeout (high) may produce nice results.

brisbin33 · 2009-10-02 16:33:47

briest wrote:

brisbin33 wrote:
Also, imap in mutt for me is sooooo slow (proportional to the size of the mailbox of course)
Do you use header caching? It can accelerate remote imap access, but is disabled by default. Also playing with imap_idle (yes, if server supports), imap_keepalive (low) and timeout (high) may produce nice results.

i've tried everything (always caching, and setting various imap_* options). trust me. it's funny, it wasn't bad at first, then one day i'd hit j/k and 3 seconds later the indicator would move... that's when i set up offlineimap.

I'm very happy with this maildir setup now . thanks anyway tho.

Vintendo · 2009-10-02 21:23:18

brisbin33 wrote:

briest wrote:
brisbin33 wrote:
Also, imap in mutt for me is sooooo slow (proportional to the size of the mailbox of course)
Do you use header caching? It can accelerate remote imap access, but is disabled by default. Also playing with imap_idle (yes, if server supports), imap_keepalive (low) and timeout (high) may produce nice results.
i've tried everything (always caching, and setting various imap_* options). trust me. it's funny, it wasn't bad at first, then one day i'd hit j/k and 3 seconds later the indicator would move... that's when i set up offlineimap.
I'm very happy with this maildir setup now . thanks anyway tho.

OMG, mutt is flying right now! Even with header and message cache is mutt + imap not the fastest. I reccomend offlineimap for everyone.

Arch Linux

#1 2009-09-29 19:14:29

Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#2 2009-09-29 19:18:46

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#3 2009-09-29 19:23:57

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#4 2009-09-29 19:27:41

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#5 2009-09-29 19:34:07

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#6 2009-09-29 19:35:09

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#7 2009-09-29 19:35:59

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#8 2009-09-29 19:48:12

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#9 2009-09-29 19:51:52

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#10 2009-09-29 19:53:20

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#11 2009-09-29 20:04:10

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#12 2009-09-29 22:34:40

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#13 2009-09-30 02:45:45

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#14 2009-09-30 05:48:39

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#15 2009-09-30 08:51:46

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#16 2009-09-30 14:03:51

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#17 2009-09-30 14:35:57

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#18 2009-09-30 14:44:53

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#19 2009-09-30 17:35:38

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#20 2009-09-30 18:44:54

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#21 2009-09-30 20:39:01

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#22 2009-10-02 16:29:09

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#23 2009-10-02 16:33:47

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

#24 2009-10-02 21:23:18

Re: Why use mail client over web site mail inteface?

Board footer