Slashdot Mirror


A look at Thunderbird 2.0 Beta

lisah writes "Linux.com has reviewed Mozilla's first beta release of the Thunderbird 2.0 email client and says that, while it 'won't knock your socks off,' there are plenty of reasons to try it out or upgrade from previous versions. The new Thunderbird does away with the limitations of labels and instead allows users to tag emails to their heart's content, in the same vein as Google's GMail. Developers also tossed in a bunch of other useful features like customizable pop-up notification of new email, better search capabilities, and a neat way to navigate through the history of recently read emails. Mozilla developers didn't get everything right, however, since the account setup continues to be something of a headache."

63 of 254 comments (clear)

  1. IMAP by devilspgd · · Score: 3, Informative

    At least it's a painless upgrade, but as a hardcore IMAP user I'm not seeing a ton of usefulness.

    As far as I can tell labels don't work at all if you use IMAP, multiple machines, multiple clients, and have more then one folder.

    --
    Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
    1. Re:IMAP by duguk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yep you can already - theres a drop down from list already in the program, and its automatic depending on the account you're reading from.

    2. Re:IMAP by i.of.the.storm · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thunderbird can easily check mail from multiple accounts. I'm sure it can send mail from multiple accounts too, but I haven't tried.

      --
      All your base are belong to Wii.
    3. Re:IMAP by Bob54321 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is reasonably easy to set up receiving from multiple email accounts. I currently have 1.5 set up to receive from five. Multiple SMTP support requires manual addition beyond the first. I find the SmtpSelect extension (https://addons.mozilla.org/thunderbird/2234/) useful for switch between SMTP servers based on where I am sending email from.

      --
      :(){ :|:& };:
    4. Re:IMAP by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Yes. I haven't checked 2.0b1 out much yet, but in 1.5 and 2.0a1 you can associate a SMTP account with a POP3/IMAP account. Then when you click compose, you can select any SMTP account from the dropdown, but by default it will select the appropriate account for the IMAP/POP3 account you're browsing at the moment.

      Unfortunately even with this I have accidentally sent e-mail from the wrong account (well, an unexpected one at least) several times. Hehe, oops... guess it's a good thing I have the same name attached to each from address, as opposed to my IRC/IM nickname...

    5. Re:IMAP by skiflyer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yep, I'm in 2.0 beta, and it's just the same... easy, I'd even say too easy cause I often send from the wrong address, but I prefer taking the responsibility on myself as opposed to having to jump through hoops.

    6. Re:IMAP by skiflyer · · Score: 4, Informative

      If by labels you mean tags, then you're doing something wrong.

      I use multiple machines over IMAP, I use webmail/Thunderbird/Outlook and I have many folders (both IMAP and local) as well as multiple accounts.

      My tags translate fine between them all... granted my Thunderbird tags aren't available in Webmail (and I'm not sure about Outlook I don't use it often)

    7. Re:IMAP by spiffyman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thunderbird can easily check mail from multiple accounts.

      A side note to this: because of the way GMail does POP, any time you send an email from the web interface to GMail, Thunderbird will download it to your Inbox. I've grown to expect this and have filters set up to move these emails to appropriate folders, but it's something users should be aware of before migrating from webmail to Thunderbird using GMail. If anyone knows of a solution, it'd be nice to see here.

      GMail does retain copies of everything on their servers, though, which makes me a happy user. Far too many times I've been on-campus without my laptop and needed something from that account.

      --
      So you can laugh all you want to...
    8. Re:IMAP by omeomi · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm sure it can send mail from multiple accounts too, but I haven't tried. Yep, works like a charm. I do that all the time.

    9. Re:IMAP by ThePhilips · · Score: 2

      NO! NO! NO!

      Leave all the GUI/HTML nastiness to Tb/Netscape/Mozilla/Opera/FoxMail/Evolution/etc.

      Please, please, please, do not ruin last properly working MUA out there. And do not give anyone (very very bad) ideas.

      P.S. I know, my post might look funny, but it is sad reality. Tb has pretty constant number of bugs which are never getting fixed. Many were filed in times of Mozilla Messenger - and yet unfixed. As of now, Tb still cannot properly produce error message when more than single mail box is checked. If it works, it works. If there are problems - Tb would be totally unhelpful/counterproductive in finding them. mutt/fetchmail work all the time and allow to really see if there is a problem and what problem is. With Tb you might just get some error message in background - and would be left wondering for days why mail isn't coming/get mail button does nothing.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
  2. automatic grouping by lawpoop · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What I'd like to see is automatic grouping of emails into folders. This would be the same as a bunch saved searches, except you wouldn't have to manually make them, they would be created automatically.

    The best place to start would be to automatically create saved searches for all emails in your address book. If you wanted to go nuts with it, you could do a saved search of all unique email addresses in your inbox, if they number above a certain threshold. You could then also do some standard groupings that a user could select, like 'Yesterday, this week, this month, last month', common strings in the subject lines, etc.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
    1. Re:automatic grouping by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Opera's M2 mail client (a part of their browser) was doing that years ago - every contact in your address book was given a saved search folder.

    2. Re:automatic grouping by warrior_s · · Score: 5, Informative

      "You could then also do some standard groupings that a user could select, like 'Yesterday, this week, this month, last month', common strings in the subject lines, etc."

      Go into the inbox (or any other folder you have) window and press "g"

    3. Re:automatic grouping by warrior_s · · Score: 3, Informative

      Now what key to I press to get grouping by my address book? ;)
      View->"Sort By"-> "Grouped by Sort"

      There are lot of options by which you can sort and then group.

  3. edit incomming mail by hey · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When I switched from Eudora to Thunderbird the thing I missed the most was the ability to edit ANY message. Including incomming ones. For example if somebody mailed me something that was unclear I could edit it to add a sentence from myself clearifying. I really like this freedom.

    1. Re:edit incomming mail by timmarhy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      not a good idea. a year from now how will you know it was you that edited it? unless it tags your changes in a way YOU can't change it'd turn into a mess.

      --
      If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
    2. Re:edit incomming mail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is TB Header Tools Extension 0.6.6 ...
      http://www.extensionsmirror.nl/index.php?showtopic =1906&hl=header

      But we want to change the *body* of the message

    3. Re:edit incomming mail by bustersnyvel · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is exactly one of the reasons why I keep using Mutt (http://www.mutt.org/). I can edit any message, and I often use that feature.

      My voicemail system leaves a message in my email box with the subject "Voicemail from <telephone number>". I always edit that subject to reflect the contents of the voicemail message. Since 90% of my voicemail messages are coming from 2 telephone numbers, this is really a requirement if I want to find a specific message ever again.

      Another feature I miss in many email clients (probably Thunderbird 2.0 too, haven't checked that one yet) is the ability to freely edit email threading. Sometimes I want to break a thread into two parts, or I want to link two emails into a thread, for instance emails discussing the same subject but different subject headers. This is also something Mutt does very well.

      The third reason I keep using Mutt is that it displays mails originating from myself in a different way. All mails from someone else show the "From" header in the index. All mails from myself show "To <recipient>" and are displayed in a different colour. This allows me to store both incoming and outgoing messages in the same folder, allowing for gmail-ish mailboxes that contain the entire discussion.

      As long as there isn't a GUI mail client that can do all this, I'm not moving away from Mutt.

    4. Re:edit incomming mail by Anthracks · · Score: 2, Informative

      For what it's worth, there's an open feature request for this in Bugzilla, if you would like to track its progress. But for the love of God, don't go spamming it with more "me too" messages. It already has more than enough. There's also mention of an extension that helps with this. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=25473 9

      --
      Rock over London, Rock on Chicago. Wheaties: Breakfast of Champions.
  4. Import... by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it able to import data from other fucking Thunderbird installs yet? I'm tired of having to fiddle around with the profile folder whenever I do a fresh Windows install and need to put my e-mail back.

    Come on, guys. How hard can it be to add support for that to the import wizard? It just needs to be a frontend for copying the files! That feature has been lacking from Thunderbird and its ancestors for, like, ever.

    1. Re:Import... by cortana · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's not that simple. Preferences would have to be scanned and hardcoded paths (that shouldn't exist in the first place, granted) to exiting files in the old profile would have to be changed... hard to do if you moved the old profile folder before importing (e.g. backed it up by copying, or put an old hard disk in a new computer causing it to be mounted in a different location or assigned a different drive letter).

    2. Re:Import... by Nicholas+Evans · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which is exactly why Thunderbird's import wizard needs handle importing its own profiles.

    3. Re:Import... by Aokubidaikon · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'm too lazy to copy folders around. Thunderbird developers are too lazy to write an import/export function. Stalemate.

    4. Re:Import... by NSIM · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree, being able to import message folders should be an option, it's not that hard to, MozBackup on Windows can save an existing profile, everything, passwords, mails, accounts, plug-ins etc and import them into a new install, made life bearable when loading each new Vista build :-(

    5. Re:Import... by arkhan_jg · · Score: 2, Informative
      I agree it's annoying, and they should fix that. One workaround I use (apart from IMAP servers where possible) is to copy the profile to another partition with my other data that stays between reinstalls, and then modify the thunderbird shortcut to run

      "c:\program files\mozilla thunderbird\thunderbird.exe" -profile d:\mythunderbirdprofile Beats risking forgetting to back it up!

      I modify the my documents folder location also (right click on it on the start menu) - saves a hell of a lot of effort on reinstalls.
      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
  5. Re:The one feature I can't live without by cortana · · Score: 2, Funny

    Mozilla? Integrate with the platform it runs on? You jest, sir! ;)

  6. Pop-up notifier for e-mail? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So... is the pop-up notifier for new e-mail as useless as the current system tray "new mail" icon from Thunderbird 1.5?

    You see, there's only a handful of things that I want to be notified for immediately. And those things can be only identified via rules. (From a particular domain, or with a specific subject line.) Preferably *after* the anti-spam filters have cleaned the bogus messages out of the way (sometimes domains are spoofed).

    Which, sadly, is one thing that Outlook rules does properly where Thunderbird 1.5.x (and older) has failed at.

  7. Tabbed Messages by Bob54321 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does any one know what happened to message tabs. Its a feature I would really like as I become sick of having to re-find a message if I want to check another at the same time. I saw this proposed at some stage and thought it was going to be a 2.0 feature but there is no comments on it in the review. Did it get pushed back to 3.0?

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
  8. Can we finally use SpamBayes? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you've ever used SpamBayes for MS Outlook, you'll understand why bayesian analysis engines need to have some sort of grey area instead of just a binary spam / ham bit. With SpamBayes in MS Outlook, I have (3) results after spam processing:

    "ham" - Messages which scored below a rather low value (10?) and are considered non-spam. Those messages get left alone in whatever folder they were found in.

    "unsure" - Anything that falls in the middle gets moved to a "Maybe Junk" folder. For the most part, this stuff is spam, but the bayesian engine isn't quite sure. So it's worth checking for false positives (which are rare, but can happen until the engine is trained).

    "spam" - Stuff in the spam folder scored so high on the bayesian value that it's almost certainly spam. The odds of finding a false positive in this folder are extremely low so I never bother looking.

    Now for the real magic of SpamBayes... it remembers where a message was when it was flagged as "unsure" or "spam". If you find a message that was mis-tagged, you can tell SpamBayes that it made a mistake and it will add the message to its ham corpus and move the message back where it belongs.

    (That and intelligent message notification are the two things that drive me nutz with Thunderbird 1.5 and prevent me from switching over entirely.)

    --
    Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  9. More in-depth technical stuff... by Aphrika · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...can be found here.

    I have to say, it looks awesome! Any idea when we can get our hands on it?

  10. UI Responsiveness? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Have they finally fixed the UI responsiveness issue? In Thunderbird 1.5, I find that the message pane is nigh unusable if Thunderbird is trying to retrieve mail in the background. Then there's the issue that Thunderbird gets a bit slow when dealing with folders with a few thousand messages (such as a popular mailing list where you keep a year's worth of posts for easy reference).

    --
    Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  11. State of email by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In the last few years the browser platform has matured and after a long period of it being awkful, I'm content with the current state of things. But I feel that email has not improved at all over the last ten years. The only major change has been the rise of spam - a step backwards.

    Some of the comments below will link to my lack of skills in areas of system administration and I encourage replies to those issues as much as any other feedback. Better yet - write a howtoforge article describing how to set such a system up under debian stable :)

    My needs for an email system are:
    - data should be stored on the server (centralised backup, provision for web mail when you need it, ability to have an administrator control it, access from multiple hosts)
    - server-side spam filtering which can also take easily feedback from the client on what proved to not be spam, or what was and was missed.
    - server-side addressbook
    - should deal only with plain text - non plain text should be flattened to plain text. It would be nice to automatically bounce office files with a message to tell the person to send stuff as PDF or plain text.
    - effective searching
    - very responsive client for reading mail
    - very responsive client for writing mail
    - effective communication between client and server that doesn't require the user to wait

    I don't really see how thunderbird's design lends itself to fitting into an infrastructure that meets those requirements.

    Perhaps my biggest problem with Thunderbird and all mail clients that I've encountered is that IMAP proves to be inadequate. Communicating with an email server over IMAP makes for a klunky experience (*particularly* over a latent connection), and it shouldn't need to be this way. Perhaps IMAP is a bad fit for the task.

    Time and time again we see people trying to build a 'Microsoft Word killer' without them ever stopping to think about whether a monolithic word processor is even a good idea (I suggest that it's not). Similarly, Thunderbird strikes me as a really good attempt at producing a product idea that is fundamentally flawed. We should be working to phase out monolithic email clients.

    Surely all that should be required of a good client is this:
    - Keep the client's disk archive of the mailbox synchronised with the server so that searching is easy, and do so inobtrusively (all the IMAP clients I've used are quite obtrusive and brittle as the number of possible connections rises), but reflect changes to the client back on the server (I don't think fetchmail does this)
    - Composer that has access to the server's addressbook and sent folder and has a spellchecker
    - Email viewer

    --


    Believe with me, my saplings.
    1. Re:State of email by daveburnham · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you take a look at Blitzmail you'll find that it actually hits most of your specs. It's still in use at Dartmouth (where I'm a student) but hasn't seen any major updates since the early 90s. It uses its own protocol instead of IMAP, which means you need to run the Blitzmail server too, but the server software supports Blitzmail, IMAP and POP. It also allows fuzzy matching of names when you send an email to someone in the Dartmouth directory, which is a pretty handy feature, also implemented on the server side. Spam filtering is done with Spam Assassin on the server side. It's extremely simple, but I'm going to guess that at least 80% of the people here still use it and swear by it. I've tried to convert to Thunderbird, but end up coming back to Blitz every time. Since it is basically stuck in 1994 it runs very quickly on any computer you can find. I can walk up to a public terminal, sign on, see that I have no new messages, and sign off in about 4 seconds. Anyway, if you're on vacation and have nothing better to do the technical details are here. While it's a little dated, it's proof that not all email has to look like Outlook and IMAP.

    2. Re:State of email by LordLucless · · Score: 2, Insightful
      - very responsive client for reading mail - very responsive client for writing mail - effective communication between client and server that doesn't require the user to wait

      Those requests are about as useful as asking for them to make the internet go faster. You want to store all your messages on the server? Fine. There's a drawback to that. It's called latency. You want speed and responsiveness? Then you're stuck with local.

      Similarly, Thunderbird strikes me as a really good attempt at producing a product idea that is fundamentally flawed. We should be working to phase out monolithic email clients.

      Comparing Thunderbird to Office is absurd. In what way is it "monolithic"? It does the very basic requirements needed by an email client, and provides an extension mechanism for optional increases in functionality. If you wanted an example of a monolithic email client, I'd point you in the direction of Outlook, which bundles calendar and task management into an email app. Oddly enough, though, Outlook seems to be one of Microsoft's most popular offerings. Could it be possible that people that aren't you actually prefer their "monolithic" clients? I know I'd hate you forever if you forced me to use webmail, or connect to the internet whenever I wanted to check my stored mail.

      Don't use it if you don't like it, but Thunderbird's doing most of what I want it to do now, and I'd certainly rather use it than the centralized system you propose.

      should deal only with plain text - non plain text should be flattened to plain text. It would be nice to automatically bounce office files with a message to tell the person to send stuff as PDF or plain text.


      Good luck with that. Once you've got that generally accepted you should start campaigning to make lynx the default browser.
      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:State of email by The+OPTiCIAN · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah - you mention inadequacies of IMAP a few times. Which makes me wonder - why is there constant effort going into IMAP mail clients yet no effort to create a protocol that fixes up all the problems with IMAP.

      --


      Believe with me, my saplings.
    4. Re:State of email by halfnerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      OfflineIMAP would fix most synchronization problems. Dovecot is a fast IMAP server and Maildrop coupled with your favourite smap filter could take care of the server part. Couple that with a good mail client (mutt) and a way to synchronize contacts. mutt can be customized with own keybindings, so that way one could add support for training the mail filter. I keep my home directory in a darcs repository to keep it in sync between machines. Other people use Subversion.

  12. Re:hashcash by nuzak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Hashcash would be better off DEAD. It was conceived of in the days when legitimate mail originators outnumbered spam ones, and the worst kind of attack on your MTA was "mailbombing". Zombie herders have vast amounts of CPU to burn now by generating hashcash, and it will barely impact their mailflow, while legitimate mail senders like (smaller) ISPs would be punished by it.

    --
    Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
  13. Just one feature by AVryhof · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm a web developer... and maintain hundreds of sites.

    So, if you can imagine... even with asking people to at least let me know what site is theirs, I have hundreds of messages with the Subject "Web Update" or "Website"

    I would simply like the ability to edit the subject line of messages I receive for organizational purposes.

    That would be the "Killer" feature for me...

    Another novelty feature that could be useful is a Calendar view of messages, so I could graphically see when each message arrived and prioritize it appropriately.

    1. Re:Just one feature by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I would simply like the ability to edit the subject line of messages I receive for organizational purposes.

      I just want to follow up on how this might be implemented, since I think it's a great idea. Thunderbird could allow you to insert an additional header, perhaps called X-ModifiedSubject, where you would enter your modified version of the subject line. When the messages are listed, the X-ModifiedSubject would be displayed as the subject if it existed. If there was no X-ModifiedSubject line, the normal Subject would be displayed, but in a different color from the X-ModifiedSubject, so you can easily distinguish the ones you changed from the ones you didn't, and not confuse anybody when talking about the email on the phone (since the sender won't know you've made the change). When you reply to an email containing a X-ModifiedSubject, Thunderbird should have you choose between the new subject (more descriptive) and the original subject (vague, but more recognizable to the recipient) when generating the subject line of the reply. I suppose any searches you do on the "Subject" field should search both the Subject and the X-ModifiedSubject.

      For example, your mail headers might contain:
      Subject: WebSite
      X-ModifiedSubject: Need to update copyright date on website

      That way, when you browse your mail listings you see "Need to update copyright date on website" instead of just "Website," and you can easily tell what the message is about without clicking into it and reading the whole thing.

  14. Re:Poor SMTP = Not Viable by barneyzang · · Score: 2, Informative

    Try using the SmtpSelect extension. I had some of the same frustration you experienced until I found it.
    https://addons.mozilla.org/thunderbird/2234/

  15. Meh by SCHecklerX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I looked at Thunderbird a couple of times to see what it had to offer. I always end up going back to Sylpheed. Sylpheed has its own little problems, but overall is a good mail client. I use it with IMAP over SSL and SMTP Auth with Starttls to my home server, and also take advantage of its multiple account capability to use as a dual mail client at work (I'm the mail admin, so the SMTP servers forward to a local mailbox on the linux box on my desk ... local mailboxes is one thing that thunderbird continually fails to get right). I have Sylpheed on 2 different machines at home, my work machine, and as a windoze portable app (nothing special to do there, it just works, point it to a config file on the USB key). Coupled with IMAP this works great for me.

  16. Better Whitelisting? by Bill+Dimm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    From what I've read about Thunderbird, the only options for whitelisting (passing to inbox without spam filtering) are your whole address book, or everyone that you've ever sent email to. Are there any plans to make it more flexible than that? Here are some things that I can think of that would be handy. Sorry if any are already included -- I can't play with Thunderbird until I upgrade to GTK2 (soon):

    1) Ability to easily whitelist all email coming from a particular domain. This would ensure that you get all emails from a client company, not just one individual. Perhaps there could be a preferences setting that allows you to indicate that you want to be prompted each time you send an email to a new domain to see whether the whole domain should be whitelisted or just the recipient. I assume I could create a mail rule to filter a domain, as I currently do with Netscape Communicator, but that is pretty inconvenient.

    2) Ability to easily whitelist an address without putting it in your address book or sending mail to it, e.g. by simply clicking a button while viewing a message from the address. For example, if I receive an emailed newsletter that I requested, it would be nice to whitelist it without cluttering my address book.

    3) Are emails sent by someone on the whitelist visually differentiated from other emails in some way, such as coloring the sender name differently? That could make it easier to differentiate between valid emails and any spams that slip through the filter.

  17. Re:hashcash by redcane · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't think you understand the ratio of work between verifying and creating the collisions. The example given in the FAQ is a requirement of an OC12 to flood a reasonable email server with too many hashes to verify, and 2-3 seconds on cutting edge hardware to generate each hash. So your basically stemming the mail to the rate of a 2400 bps modem across the zombie networks. Sure it doesn't solve the problem, but it makes it that bit more expensive to send spam, locking more spammers out of the game.

  18. mutt by whoisjoe · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Still hard to beat mutt--I can use it over an SSH connection and it's much more responsive than any GUI or web-based mail client. It's also insanely configurable.

    When I first started using it at the office, I used to joke that when it came to Word document attachments, in the time that it took an Outlook/Netscape user to open the document in Word, I was able to open the document in catdoc, skim through, confirm that the document was not worth reading and delete the message.

  19. Re:Poor SMTP = Not Viable by bahwi · · Score: 4, Informative

    Huh? It's easy, it's just a drop down to change the SMTP server. I do it all the time to test qmail setups on different servers.
    There's even a few add ons you can use, like this one and this one. I guess maybe it works different than you expect, but it works well for me.

  20. 1 hour by Swimport · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've had it one hour and it crashed already. Not that outlook is any better.

  21. Re:Poor SMTP = Not Viable by acroyear · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was about to say (having finally read the article) - *most* users only need one SMTP server, but there are extensions that make it easy to set up alternates. This is why extensions exist: keep the basic interface simple, allow "power users" to improve things.

    --
    "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
    -- Joe
  22. Speaking as an Exchange Server specialist... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 3, Interesting
    ...of some years, I can no longer find any real reason to run Outlook at home. I've got the whole family on Thunderbird & Google Calendars, and we're loving it.

    One lovely little thing about Outlook I've always thought useful though was the English language date parser in the "Meeting Request" form -- you know, where you can type in "two years from yesterday" and it parses it to the correct date? Bloaty but useful, if you remember it's there. (Anyone willing to tackle that one? LoL...)

    Some of the best features in Outlook are buried -- VBA forms, because they don't show up in the preview pane (which many folk use in preference to opening the message), Journalling, because not all of us have the discipline or inclination to account for our time that tightly (and those who need it want to bill directly, too) and the email-addressable public folder (ES only) with it's extended rule set is nice.

    Trouble is, of course, these features aren't really used. Some of this is just bad tuning, but a lot of it is just streamlined out of our day because the return on effort is bad.

    A lot of brainy people got together and dumped features in bulk into Outlook, and the result is just too many features -- features that consume eyeball space, that aren't used and just get in the way. UI Clutter can be a real pain when you sit in front of a screen all day.

    If people want mail and calendaring, no point in buying Outlook just for that. And even in sophisticated corporate environments, the niche features just don't get used.

    Wasn't there a recent thread where folks said they're not interested in technology any more, they just want things to work? I really like simple, rugged messaging, and I think the appeal of Thunderbird for the masses is that it really does just one thing very well, and doesn't try to be a games console or a file explorer too. Not everybody likes to keep ten different rule sets in their head when they open a program. To be anywhere near successful, the next generation of Outlook should divest itself of all that nichy stuff. Any fool with a dollar can buy air time, but simple ideas have broader appeal, because not all users are nerds anymore. Microsoft's marketing should spend less on advertising and more on learning what the non-nerds really want to use.

    Thanks for the rant. T-bird rules, ok?

    --
    Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
  23. Icedove! by gardyloo · · Score: 4, Funny

    I use Icedove, you insensitive clods!

  24. I do this with my IMAP server by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm with you on message notification, but it's not a huge issue for me -- I just check it frequently on my (Linux) desktop, and watch the Dock icon on my Powerbook. But if you know of a better Linux email client I could be using, I'm listening -- my solution works with ANY IMAP client. Read on...

    I use bogofilter, but it's the same thing: spam, unsure, and everywhere else.

    Advantages:
      - Filters on the server, as messages come in.
      - All the features you're talking about, from any IMAP client.

    Disadvantages:
      - Linux only (uses inotify to detect messages dropped to the "spam" folder)
      - Any other filters (LKML goes here, girlfriend's stuff goes here) must be implemented on the server, currently Maildrop only.
      - Filters on the server. If you have limited server resources, this may be a problem.
      - Could conceivably lose mail during a retrain, due to the (admittedly stupid) way in which I handle retrains.
      - While it works on any client, no client that I know of has decent keyboard shortcuts to help me out.

    Basically, when a message comes in, it goes through bogofilter first, then maildrop. Maildrop looks for a bogofilter header, and drops it in the "spam" or "unsure" folder when it finds it. Otherwise, it goes to the rest of my maildrop rules, which mostly sort things into folders by mailing list.

    There are also retrain folders: Retrain as spam/innocent. When a message is dragged to retrain/spam, it's retrained as spam and dumped in the spam folder. When it's dragged to retrain/innocent, it's retrained as innocent, with an extra header added (I think it's a bogofilter commandline option) to specify that it was reclassified (as it still might have a score of spam), and then is sent through the maildrop filters again. The maildrop filters look for that retrain flag, so it's guaranteed not to end up in spam this time, and gets sorted according to mailing list rules, etc.

    This is where inotify comes in -- which means it MUST be a Linux server for this to work. As soon as the message appears in that folder, maildir structure guarantees it's just been rename'd in, so it's complete and safe to touch. Therefore, I can immediately retrain stuff, meaning the wait is less than a second, but I don't have to poll.

    Boring implementation details follow:

    The one major design bug is that I don't really know how to deal with maildir folders, so when I see a message appear in one of the retrain folders, I immediately open it, then unlink the file, to prevent Thunderbird or my own script from touching it until I finish piping it through the retrain process. I probably should be putting it in some temporary place, and indeed, maildir folders do have a "tmp" dir, but I simply don't know how to use it properly -- and I would have to rename it where I'm unlinking now. Basically, if the rename/unlink succeeds, it means I've beat the client to it. But if it fails, it means the client has done that stupid thing it does where the message is "delivered" to the folder as new, then the client marks it as read, which moves it from the "new" to the "cur" dir within that maildir.

    I suppose I could build this into the IMAP server, but I like how this solution has already been ported from Exim/Courier-IMAP to Postfix/BincIMAP. I could write it as an IMAP proxy, but that's both more complicated and potentially slows down operation other than retrains -- an IMAP proxy would have to intercept and parse every line, whereas I only get to notice when an actual file is created in the retrain dir, and until that happens, my script does absolutely nothing.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  25. Re:Meta-Inbox by salesgeek · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you use POP3 this can easily be accomplished by simply setting delivery to Inbox in local folders. Not sure if this can be done for IMAP.

    --
    -- $G
  26. 2.0 is nice by salesgeek · · Score: 3, Informative

    Thunderbird has a couple of very nice new features:

    1. Threaded messages with your replies included in the thread! This alone is going to may 2.0 better
    2. New filter rules: forward and reply with template!
    3. A little better speed...

    Now all we need to make thunderbird closer to perfect:

    1. A way to view conversation by recipient.
    2. Better template managemetn
    3. something that can identify non-spam commercial email and newsletters and get them out of the inbox.

    --
    -- $G
  27. So still no multi-line header display then by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    One feature that Outlook has right is its multi-line header display, where you get sender and date on one line and subject on the next. That way, you can have a "wide" (group-headers-mail text) display on a non-widescreen monitor. Even the gmail method is better than the current Thunderbird one, which hasnt changed since the first graphical clients.

    It is a bit like tabs I think. You cant imagine how you lived without it once you get used to it.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  28. Compact folders by tsa · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've used Thunderbird for years before I found out that if you delete a message, it doesn't get deleted at all, but is just made invisible. It doesn't delete it until you 'compact your folders'. There's an option in the settings to have it do that automatically. I find this behaviour annoying, because if you don't know that you have to compact your folders (and which non-computer-savvy user does know that?) you will be left with an ever-growing, huge mail folder. I didn't discover this until my backup script started to take a long time copying my mail folders. I haven't seen this 'feature' in any other email client I've used. I hope the Mozilla team will correct this in the future.

    --

    -- Cheers!

    1. Re:Compact folders by AaronLawrence · · Score: 3, Informative

      This and several other difficulties and restrictions (like being unable to edit mail) are because Mozilla is based on an ancient but well established format for email folders - basically all the emails live in one enormous text file, and there is a separate index for finding it fast and caching headers.
      But of course if it's just one undifferentiated text file, there IS no efficient way to edit or delete mails out of the middle.
      Realistically, Mozilla should probably update to a decent database format but that is a huge change.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
    2. Re:Compact folders by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's actually worse than that. Failing to compact folders will eventually result in bugs and apparent data loss, requiring higher order geek hackery to restore what's left.

      Moreover, if you do switch on the prompt to compact folders automatically, it comes up so regularly that it makes Vista's password prompt for system-wide settings seem positively user-friendly. Also, the explicit menu command to compact folders sometimes does nothing, with no indication of why; I assume this is a bug, since it often seems to do nothing even if there's stuff to do.

      Seriously, it's nearly 2007. Remind me again why users should ever have to care about this sort of implementation detail?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  29. Re:Hotmail/Google Client by Kelson · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. have Thunderbird able to work as a client for GMail.

    Not sure if it's quite what you want, but Gmail does offer POP access and SMTP. They have directions for setting up Thunderbird to use it.

  30. SeaMonkey/Mail by wysiwia · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm astonished nobody mentioned SeaMonkey/Mail so far. I always though Slashdot commenters are power users which IMO better use SM/Mail than TB. Most of the complains about TB are fixed and several important features are included. And MozBackup helps with moving profiles and mails back and fore. So instead of complaining why not simply switch to SeaMonkey?

    O. Wyss

    --
    See http://wyoguide.sf.net/papers/Cross-platform.html
  31. has anyone figured out how to find&kill dupe m by artifex2004 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have mail from several .psts and other things I'd like to import. Problem is, I have some mail that dupes over different stores.
    Has anyone found a way to get TBird to search for duplicates and then delete extras?

    I'd be happy to import into folder trees called pst1, pst2, etc., then tell it to delete any dupes copied in pst3, then search and delete for any copies in pst2, etc., so that I'm left with just one of each that I can then sort properly into my main tree. But the functionality isn't there. Someone wanna write a plugin? :)

  32. May give it a whirl by polyp2000 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I use thunderbird - but there was one feature in KMail that saved my life on a couple of times - basically it would scan your email for references like "please find the attached file" (probably just the word attached rather than the whole phrase) but I've lost count of the number of times I have written an email and forgotten to attach a file. KMail would intercept the email send process and ask if you meant to attach a file - giving you a second chance to make the attachment.

    Does thunderbird 2 have this great feature? (here's where someone tells me its been in Thunderbird 1 for years! ... )

    N.

    --
    Electronic Music Made Using Linux http://soundcloud.com/polyp
  33. Re:The one feature I can't live without by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative
    No, it doesn't. However, a few days ago this unofficial build with Address Book integration floated past on a Mac users' mailing list to which I subscribe. It doesn't, however, support the system dictionary (and so my Thunderbird and FireFox installs (which I use for NNTP and Tribal Wars respectively) both think I am American.

    It's a shame that the Mozilla people didn't implement things like this the correct way; create a well-defined interface for address books, spell checking, etc, and then supply a default implementation for platforms that don't support them. Even Windows has a system address book, and yet Mozilla insists on using its own.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  34. Re:Poor SMTP = Not Viable by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Even without the extensions, it never even occurred to me that this was a problem or difficult to use until I read the article and comments here. I routinely send mail from two different ISPs for personal use, and from several official addresses at domains belonging to groups I help to run. In all, I probably have eight or nine accounts set up, and several different incoming and outgoing servers to deal with. It might have taken me a minute or two to find the SMTP server options when I first started using Thunderbird and needed a second account, but making out like it's some fatal flaw is just silly.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  35. Compatability with Exchange??? by Dan+Ost · · Score: 2

    I'm currently using Evolution to read my work email because the powers that be refuse to turn
    on IMAP support on the Exchange server.

    Could I use the new Thunderbird to do this?

    --

    *sigh* back to work...