Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (4498 mails)
| < Previous | Next > |
Re: [opensuse] Favorite E-mail Clients
- From: Kai Ponte <kai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 10:45:55 -0800
- Message-id: <200611201045.55543.kai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Monday 20 November 2006 07:51, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> On Monday 20 November 2006 07:42, Kai Ponte wrote:
> > On Monday 20 November 2006 07:05, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > > Of screwing up everyone's mail threading, since it fails to
> > > > > retain threading references,
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what that is.
> > >
> > > Then you need to learn about the In-Reply-To header, which is what
> > > makes nice hierarchical topic structures possible in contemporary,
> > > standards-based mail clients.
> >
> > Um, okay.
> >
> > I prefer flat listing in date order. My usenet client - Pan - is set
> > the same way.
>
> Is there _any_ mail client that won't do that?
Dunno.
>
> > > > > and enabling trojans, worms and virii to do their
> > > > > dirty work,
> > > >
> > > > Those are not a portion of the client, but rather the underlying
> > > > OS, which is inferior.
>
> You are very confused about what's happening where.
No, not confused. I don't think it is necessarily the responsibility of the
client to handle security for the OS. If the client wants to run scripts,
that should be fine and it is within the context of the OS to handle security
outside of that client.
If the OS allows software application X to write to the system, that is where
the security lies.
>
> > > You've got that really wrong. The underlying Windows OS kernel is
> > > just fine and well designed.
> >
> > Heh. That's funny!
>
> I'm glad you're amused, but it is a fact.
I won't go into why I don't like the WinNT kernel, I'd probably get shot off
for being OT, which this is straying, I think.
>
> Are you a software designer?
No, I'm a manager of software designers. :)
Seriously, I've been programming since '79, and professionally since '92, when
I graduated college.
>
> > > It _is_ the fact that Outlook and Outlook Express will
> > > automatically invoke active content of the messages they receive
> > > (compounded by the ability of that code to access many local
> > > resource and initiate outgoing email) that makes them such a ripe
> > > portal of infection and transmission of malware of various sorts.
> >
> > Again, the OS. If I ran active content on KMail or Thunderbird or
> > whatever under *nix, I'm still only one user and cannot infect the
> > system files, wherever they're located - /etc/fu/bar /bin/bash
> > /usr/opt/home
>
> You're very confused. If we wrote an Outlook clone (gave it active
> content capabilities, access to local address books and the ability to
> send mail all without any user interaction) for Linux, it would have
> the same vulnerabilities.
Not likely. In linux - with the beautiful su capbility - I cannot mess up any
system settings or applications.
If I try to go in and modify any file under /bin or /sbin, then I would be
flately denied. I like that. Yes, I could craft an application which causes a
buffer overflow, thus potentially creating an issue, but it would be highly
unlikely that such an application would spread very far.
OTOH, under Windows, that same functionality doesn't exist. It is very hard to
run Windows in lock down mode - trust me, I've tried - and be successful.
I still remember hearing on the news that there was this big, "I Love You"
virus that had hit the East Coast. I got into work early and tried to get to
our Exchange server to patch it, so we wouldn't be affected. Unfortunately,
the CEO had decided that was the day to come in very early. He saw an email
from his buddy in New York, saying, "I Love You" and got curious.... What a
mess!
>
> > I use KMail on my laptop, simply because it is integrated and has a
> > decent interface. There are - however - many things that I would like
> > to see updated. They're all UI features that I think the Outlook
> > client has it right for most - if not all - these desired features.
>
> Fine. Make requests to the KMail project. They'll take them seriously.
I have. So far, I haven't heard anything back. <shrugs>
>
> > Keep in mind - I'm discussing the client functionality, ease of use,
> > intuitiveness (which is probably the same thing), customization, and
> > speed. All of these are end-user experience features and very
> > subjective. I am stating nothing about the underlying code, adherence
> > to "standards", or security.
>
> Adherence to standards is very, very important for any application that
> operates in an Internet environment. One of Microsoft's biggest
> problems is their arrogant attitude about standards.
>
> > I'm sure some email uber-geek out there will tell me all my arguments
> > are bogus and that I should be using Mutt or Pine. :P
>
> You should use almost anything other than one of the Outlooks. If you
> have to use an Exchange server, my heart goes out to you. Now _that_ is
> the dregs.
...and I would. Being that I despise MS as a company, I would be happy to use
any email client if I could. Unfortunately, we are still on Exchange 5.5 and
cannot use Evolution or any other email client. (The connectors do not
exist.)
Again, I just brought up Outlook as an example of a fantastic UI and
functional eMail client. If there were a better Outlook - and Kontakt comes
close - I'd be all over it!
--
kai
www.perfectreign.com || www.4thedadz.com
a turn signal is a statement, not a request
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Monday 20 November 2006 07:42, Kai Ponte wrote:
> > On Monday 20 November 2006 07:05, Randall R Schulz wrote:
> > > ...
> > >
> > > > > Of screwing up everyone's mail threading, since it fails to
> > > > > retain threading references,
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what that is.
> > >
> > > Then you need to learn about the In-Reply-To header, which is what
> > > makes nice hierarchical topic structures possible in contemporary,
> > > standards-based mail clients.
> >
> > Um, okay.
> >
> > I prefer flat listing in date order. My usenet client - Pan - is set
> > the same way.
>
> Is there _any_ mail client that won't do that?
Dunno.
>
> > > > > and enabling trojans, worms and virii to do their
> > > > > dirty work,
> > > >
> > > > Those are not a portion of the client, but rather the underlying
> > > > OS, which is inferior.
>
> You are very confused about what's happening where.
No, not confused. I don't think it is necessarily the responsibility of the
client to handle security for the OS. If the client wants to run scripts,
that should be fine and it is within the context of the OS to handle security
outside of that client.
If the OS allows software application X to write to the system, that is where
the security lies.
>
> > > You've got that really wrong. The underlying Windows OS kernel is
> > > just fine and well designed.
> >
> > Heh. That's funny!
>
> I'm glad you're amused, but it is a fact.
I won't go into why I don't like the WinNT kernel, I'd probably get shot off
for being OT, which this is straying, I think.
>
> Are you a software designer?
No, I'm a manager of software designers. :)
Seriously, I've been programming since '79, and professionally since '92, when
I graduated college.
>
> > > It _is_ the fact that Outlook and Outlook Express will
> > > automatically invoke active content of the messages they receive
> > > (compounded by the ability of that code to access many local
> > > resource and initiate outgoing email) that makes them such a ripe
> > > portal of infection and transmission of malware of various sorts.
> >
> > Again, the OS. If I ran active content on KMail or Thunderbird or
> > whatever under *nix, I'm still only one user and cannot infect the
> > system files, wherever they're located - /etc/fu/bar /bin/bash
> > /usr/opt/home
>
> You're very confused. If we wrote an Outlook clone (gave it active
> content capabilities, access to local address books and the ability to
> send mail all without any user interaction) for Linux, it would have
> the same vulnerabilities.
Not likely. In linux - with the beautiful su capbility - I cannot mess up any
system settings or applications.
If I try to go in and modify any file under /bin or /sbin, then I would be
flately denied. I like that. Yes, I could craft an application which causes a
buffer overflow, thus potentially creating an issue, but it would be highly
unlikely that such an application would spread very far.
OTOH, under Windows, that same functionality doesn't exist. It is very hard to
run Windows in lock down mode - trust me, I've tried - and be successful.
I still remember hearing on the news that there was this big, "I Love You"
virus that had hit the East Coast. I got into work early and tried to get to
our Exchange server to patch it, so we wouldn't be affected. Unfortunately,
the CEO had decided that was the day to come in very early. He saw an email
from his buddy in New York, saying, "I Love You" and got curious.... What a
mess!
>
> > I use KMail on my laptop, simply because it is integrated and has a
> > decent interface. There are - however - many things that I would like
> > to see updated. They're all UI features that I think the Outlook
> > client has it right for most - if not all - these desired features.
>
> Fine. Make requests to the KMail project. They'll take them seriously.
I have. So far, I haven't heard anything back. <shrugs>
>
> > Keep in mind - I'm discussing the client functionality, ease of use,
> > intuitiveness (which is probably the same thing), customization, and
> > speed. All of these are end-user experience features and very
> > subjective. I am stating nothing about the underlying code, adherence
> > to "standards", or security.
>
> Adherence to standards is very, very important for any application that
> operates in an Internet environment. One of Microsoft's biggest
> problems is their arrogant attitude about standards.
>
> > I'm sure some email uber-geek out there will tell me all my arguments
> > are bogus and that I should be using Mutt or Pine. :P
>
> You should use almost anything other than one of the Outlooks. If you
> have to use an Exchange server, my heart goes out to you. Now _that_ is
> the dregs.
...and I would. Being that I despise MS as a company, I would be happy to use
any email client if I could. Unfortunately, we are still on Exchange 5.5 and
cannot use Evolution or any other email client. (The connectors do not
exist.)
Again, I just brought up Outlook as an example of a fantastic UI and
functional eMail client. If there were a better Outlook - and Kontakt comes
close - I'd be all over it!
--
kai
www.perfectreign.com || www.4thedadz.com
a turn signal is a statement, not a request
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
| < Previous | Next > |