Slashdot Mirror


Must-Have Extensions for Thunderbird 2.0

Operator writes "While Firefox has been in the spotlight for some time now, Thunderbird has yet to enjoy the same wide adoption or glowing praise despite being an excellent email client. It's no surprise that a popular topic has been Firefox's best (and worst) extensions while Thunderbird add-ons have gone largely unnoticed. In celebration of the recent release of Thunderbird 2.0 here are the best extensions for the program along with some honorable mentions."

262 comments

  1. inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I still don't understand why I need to have multiple copies of gecko shared libraries / dlls in memory since the split-up of mozilla into firefox, thunderbird, and sunbird. How is this waste of space supposed to be more efficient?

    1. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by dkf · · Score: 4, Informative

      I still don't understand why I need to have multiple copies of gecko shared libraries / dlls in memory since the split-up of mozilla into firefox, thunderbird, and sunbird. How is this waste of space supposed to be more efficient?
      It's because it makes distribution much simpler. If this bothers you (though why it should when even entry-level machines have vast amounts of memory available even after loading the OS) get Seamonkey instead and stop griping here.
      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    2. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by darjen · · Score: 1

      It makes sense for people like me who use Firefox but not Thunderbird. I'll just stick to webmail.

    3. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by MCZapf · · Score: 1

      If you really wanted to, I think you could move all the DLLs into a single directory (in your PATH) and delete all the extras. They'll end up shared in memory as well. You risk version incompatibility if you do, however.

    4. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Most computers have more memory availible now doesn't make loading who whole rendering engine and whatnot into memory multiple times. Its inefficient, and quite frankly silly.

      Why not have each application plug into a single, standalone installation of XULRunner, or some such? Redundant libraries only get loaded once that way. It saves resources and boosts performance.

      Firefox on its own already uses entirely too much memory. Throw in T-Bird, make it load much of the same libraries attributing to Firefox already eating up ridiculous amounts of memory, its absurd. It makes allot more sense to just share and load the same libs. Imagine if every other project did this, and you'd have eleventy billion copies of libc not only installed on your system, but loaded into memory, or if each KDE app installed and loaded an individual copy KDElibs into memory for each application, or if each GTK app installed and loaded its own GTK libs into memory?

      It's inefficient, its a waste of resources, and that doesn't change just because its Mozilla doing it.

    5. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by mpe · · Score: 1

      I still don't understand why I need to have multiple copies of gecko shared libraries / dlls in memory since the split-up of mozilla into firefox, thunderbird, and sunbird. How is this waste of space supposed to be more efficient?

      Presumably because someone wanted the Windows version to be installable as a non privileged user, thus not requiring write access to C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM32. But Windows isn't smart enough to spot when a DLL is already resident...

    6. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      and i don't understand how that is on-topic

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    7. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Asztal_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Since Firefox 3 and SeaMonkey 1.5 (and probably Thunderbird, too) will be based on XULRunner, this problem should be solved by then.

    8. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Asztal_ · · Score: 1

      Err.. probably. I haven't actually read anything that says they'll share runtimes, but I think they do.

    9. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by shokk · · Score: 0

      News flash! Most people use webmail than a dedicated web client. Why saddle them with the extra bloat?
      When you're doing one task, you may not be doing the other. You have the flexibility to choose.
      Isn't freedom great?

      What would be nice is if there was a "core mozilla" module that was loaded that powered the rendering engine and could be shared by any Mozilla app such as Firefox, Seamonkey, Thunderbird, Sunbird, Songbird, etc. It would still have to be separate apps so that one doesn't start up a frankenstein app like Emacs.

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    10. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by cortana · · Score: 1

      It's been called various things over its lifetime... it started off as the GRE. These days it's called xulrunner/libxul possibly. Eventually Firefox and Thunderbird, etc. will hopefully both link against a shared copy. This hasn't happened already because it's not a priority for the developers, and because managing any kind of shared resource is a huge pain on most operating systems, but systems like Debian are already linking third-party apps against a shared xulrunner (in the form of libxul0d, libnss3-0d and libnspr4-0d).

    11. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by dkf · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It makes allot more sense to just share and load the same libs.
      Nice dream. Doesn't work too well unfortunately except in highly centralized distribution schemes like those used by Linux distributions. Since the primary distribution mode of FF/TB is by direct user download, it is better for those programs to go out with the libraries that they need so that they work for people. The alternative, pitching ordinary users into library versioning hell, is far worse.

      In other words: Theory? Meet Real World Practice. Practice? Say Hi to Ivory-Tower Theory.
      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    12. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1, Informative

      I know that you had to bash Windows because you're a typical /-hole poster, but the fact that Windows won't reuse the libraries in this instance is a feature, not a bug. I believe the change occured with Windows 2000, but Windows *used* to check loaded modules, ignoring the path to the module, before loading another copy. This caused one half of the problem known as DLL-Hell. Now, Windows will only reuse a loaded module if the path to the newly requested module is the same. This allows for applications to ship their own versions, which may be incompatible, and have both applications loadable at the same time.

      So, in other words, it's you that is not smart.

    13. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Don't sane operating systems use copy-on-write anyway? So all those code pages should be shared - if you load a 100MB .so 5000 times you use 100MB of RAM...

    14. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but the problem is that they all use different copies of the library (at least on Windows and Mac. In other words, Firefox is loading something like /firefox/gecko.so while Thunderbird is loading /thunderbird/gecko.so. Even though both gecko.sos are the same, the operating system doesn't realize that and loads them into different memory locations.

      What needs to happen is that the installers for Firefox, Thunderbird, and Sunbird should put the core Mozilla libs in the same place, outside the application's folder (e.g. install libs in /mozilla/core/ and install Firefox in /mozilla/firefox/.)

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    15. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but couldn't they use a common "mozilla" dynamic library for the things they share. Nevermid that you distribute them separately, they should share the libraries they have in common.

    16. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by khanyisa · · Score: 1

      There are plans underway to do that - search for XULRunner and see what Benjamin Smedberg has been up to

    17. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Err.. probably. I haven't actually read anything that says they'll share runtimes, but I think they do.

      Why would they bother, otherwise? Isn't this precisely the point of XULRunner? :)

    18. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Chaos+Incarnate · · Score: 1

      Just checking the names wasn't smart. But surely Windows could have still checked to see if they were loaded, but been smarter about it—check the file sizes and a checksum to see if they're actually the same file. Instead they just threw the baby out with the bathwater. How smart was that?

      --
      Benford's Corollary to Clarke's Law: "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
    19. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Ivory tower theory" Heh.

      Because its really that complicated a process to have the installer check for XulRunner, and update/install it along with the installer. Net-installers have been around for a very long time now.

      It really isn't all that difficult to synchronize major releases, either. Just make sure upstream, that current/parallel releases of the applications use the same/current release of the library. Have updates download/install updates for all three. That way there's no version hell to deal with.

    20. Re:inefficiency of splitting mozilla by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Firefox on its own already uses entirely too much memory.

      And then there's that memory leak. I often have to restart firefox because the memory leak is eating all my resources. I'm think I'm going to start using Opera for all my regular browsing, and only use firefox when I need Web Developer or any of those many other brilliant extensions. Firefox iis simply a terrible memory hog, and I don't think that's ever going to change.

  2. enigmail extension by UnixSphere · · Score: 5, Informative
    https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addon /71

    Enigmail adds OpenPGP message encryption and authentication to your email client. It features automatic encryption, decryption and integrated key management functionality. Enigmail requires GnuPG (www.gnupg.org) for the cryptographic functions. Note: GnuPG is not part of the installation.

    1. Re:enigmail extension by Lord+Ender · · Score: 1

      PGP is old and busted. S/MIME is the new hottness.

      99% of the world doesn't want or care to maintain a web of trust. They are happy to let Verisign/Thawte/whoever do it for them.

      --
      A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  3. Lightning by Nedmud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not complete yet, but it's already worth using it, IMO. Having a calendar integrated with my mail helps me to check my schedule as regularly as I check my mail.

    1. Re:Lightning by thsths · · Score: 1

      > It's not complete yet, but it's already worth using it

      It is better than nothing, but it is not a proper calendar either. BTW, is there any way to get rid of it temporarily if I don't want to use it? It takes up so much space that could have better use sometimes.

      Anyway, if you need a real calendar, you have to go for a more powerful solution, such as Gmail, KMail, Evolution or Outlook. Note that the later two programs suck quite a lot.

    2. Re:Lightning by ppz003 · · Score: 4, Informative

      > It's not complete yet, but it's already worth using it

      It is better than nothing, but it is not a proper calendar either. BTW, is there any way to get rid of it temporarily if I don't want to use it? It takes up so much space that could have better use sometimes.

      Anyway, if you need a real calendar, you have to go for a more powerful solution, such as Gmail, KMail, Evolution or Outlook. Note that the later two programs suck quite a lot. From an article not too long ago, you can use Google Calendar in Lightning or Sunbird nightlies.
    3. Re:Lightning by pixr99 · · Score: 1

      > BTW, is there any way to get rid of it temporarily if I don't want to use it? It takes up so much space that could have better use sometimes.
      Tools -> Add-ons Then pick Lightning and click Disable.
    4. Re:Lightning by acroyear · · Score: 1

      Tell Lightning and Sunbird to support upload-via-FTP and I'll use it almost exclusively. Right now, as long as their only web access is "Webdav", it sucks and it locks out using it to only those who have total control over a web server.

      I use reminder fox right now because it supports FTP upload. I then view the calendar online with phpCalendar parsing the iCal file.

      --
      "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
      -- Joe
    5. Re:Lightning by joe+155 · · Score: 1

      I assume that lightning is a good add-on, but as you say it is far from finished - so far from finished that it wouldn't even let me create a calender when using the xpi on linux with thunderbird 2.0 (the last "next" button just didn't work, so I could only go back or cancel)... I wish that they would get it to version 1.0 because I would be interested to use it along with my google calender (there is an add-on which allows communications between them called provider, if you're interested)

      Having said that I wish that thunderbird would just come with a working calender right out of the box... it is so essential for most people and requires such a small amount of space...

      --
      *''I can't believe it's not a hyperlink.''
    6. Re:Lightning by snoyberg · · Score: 1

      From an article not too long ago, you can use Google Calendar in Lightning or Sunbird nightlies.

      I believe you're referring to using GCALDaemon. I followed the article at http://www.linux.com/article.pl?sid=07/02/14/15222 7 last night and things work pretty well.

      --
      Thank God for evolution.
    7. Re:Lightning by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Don't forget google calendar provider either. Still not complete either, but definately worth it(you need lightning!). Now I can add stuff from tbird and google calendar shows it (shared calendar for vacations to let clients + friends know) as well as we use it for todo lists and other stuff(shared calendars) that really help us out. Not that the google calendar interface is bad, it's just more convenient sometimes to not have to leave the email client to do it.

    8. Re:Lightning by alfa2omega · · Score: 1

      Google calendar works well with Lightning as google provides iCal support among other protocols.

    9. Re:Lightning by pelago · · Score: 1

      > BTW, is there any way to get rid of it temporarily if I don't want to use it? It takes up so much space that could have better use sometimes.

      You can drag the dividing bar down to the bottom of the screen. Annoyingly, if you quit and restart Thunderbird you have to drag it down again.

    10. Re:Lightning by bahwi · · Score: 1

      Yeah but with the provider it's two way, with iCal it's one way. :)

  4. dispMUA - Display Mail User Agent by xTK-421x · · Score: 4, Informative

    I find this extension to be helpful when dealing with certain email issues. It displays an icon representing the user's email software if it's in the known list of mail agents.

    Home Page: http://cweiske.de/misc_extensions.htm

    Extension Link: http://www.cweiske.de/files/download/misc/dispmua- 1.3.2.xpi

    List of Supported Agents: http://cweiske.de/misc_extensions_dispmuas.htm

    --
    "TK-421, why aren't you at your post?"
    1. Re:dispMUA - Display Mail User Agent by harrypelles · · Score: 1

      I just installed this into TB per your post. Very cool - thanks for the mention!

  5. The list by hywel_ap_ieuan · · Score: 4, Informative
    The extensions in TFA, which is a one-pager: Minimize to Tray, Quicktext, Quote Collapse, Nostalgy.

    Runners-up: Dictionary Switcher, View Headers Toggle Button, Contacts Sidebar.

    It also mentions "Mozilla has three recommended extensions, Foxytunes, Enigmail, and an adblocker"

    1. Re:The list by Gertlex · · Score: 1

      The extensions in TFA, which is a one-pager: Minimize to Tray, Quicktext, Quote Collapse, Nostalgy.

      Runners-up: Dictionary Switcher, View Headers Toggle Button, Contacts Sidebar.

      It also mentions "Mozilla has three recommended extensions, Foxytunes, Enigmail, and an adblocker"


      A personal recommendation of mine is Minimize To Tray Enhancer. It adds options to start Thunderbird when Windows starts and to start Thunderbird minimized. Both are quite useful. On the "downside" it's not an official Mozilla plugin, but it's still actively updated, unlike the original extension.
  6. Wait for Penelope ! by Rastignac · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Now that the great Eudora is dead (no more updated), the Penelope project will bring Eudora's goodies to Thunderbird.
    Just wait for Penelope, a better Thunderbird than Thunderbird !

    --
    -- Rastignac was here.
    1. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Chris+whatever · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I have tried thunderbird on windows but to me, other than it's free, i dont like it, i like to be able to use word as an editor, and there is so much more features in Outlook.

      One other thing that annoyed me (maybe that was a setup i did not find) was that when you answered the e-mail it worked like MAC the answer was at the bottom so you had to scroll down to read the answer,,,very very annoying.

      But again my sister and my brother in law both use MAC and their answers always show at the bottom of the e-mail never on top, so i guess it might be something that's just missing.

    2. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ahhh, you young kids are so amusing. The "correct" way to quote is to add your discussion after the text you're quoting. You should also snip out the parts of the email which you are not replying to. You see, that way you can actually read the discussion from top to bottom, just like a book, and have all the relavent information in proper order. Proper netiquette which, apparently, nobody remembers or follows.

      Now get off my lawn.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    3. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by mrotschi · · Score: 1

      It sounds like a troll, it tastes like a troll, but (I guess) this is not a troll !

      > i like to be able to use word as an editor,

      Mail should be plain ASCII in most cases (You don't know if the receiver of the email can read HTML mails)

      > when you answered the e-mail it worked like MAC the answer was at the bottom so you had to scroll down to read the answer,,,very very annoying.

      Standard netiquette is "below", that is why the default is below.
      If you want the reply "above", set your cursor above or in the middle and type ! :P

    4. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One other thing that annoyed me (maybe that was a setup i did not find) was that when you answered the e-mail it worked like MAC the answer was at the bottom so you had to scroll down to read the answer,,,very very annoying.

      No, what's annoying is people who top-quote. Like yourself, apparently.

      An email is a discussion between one or more people. The natural flow of text is top to bottom, like any other formal or informal piece of text. You therefore should always place the newest text, I.e. your reply, at the bottom of the email.

      What's also annoying are people who capitalise the word "Mac". Don't do that. If you mean "Macintosh", it isn't an acronym. The acronym "MAC" is "Media Access Controller", which is part of an ethernet card.

      A third annoying thing are people who spell "Athlon" with an extra "a" I.e. "Athalon". You didn't actually do that in your post, but I'd be willing to bet that you do, whenever you get the chance.

    5. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Wite_Noiz · · Score: 3, Informative

      there is so much more features in Outlook Unless I'm mistaken, Thunderbird replaces Outlook Express, not Outlook.
      There are huge differences between those two.

      I agree that I'd like Thunderbird to handle more of Outlook's work, but there are extensions (like Lightening) that are slowly doing that.

      the answer was at the bottom At least put some effort in!
      Account Settings > [account] > Composition & Addressing > Select: start my reply above the quote

      Personally, I use Thunderbird because I find it very quick and easy to use.
      I do get the occasional inbox/email corruption, but that's why I keep my profile folder regularly backed up (something that's hard to do with Outlook Express).
    6. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Miseph · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes! Top quoters are simply infuriating!

      Oh, and even if you aren't actually replying to a quote (because, for example, you use GMail and it already reads like a book), please for the love of God strip out all the cruft like signatures ads (I'm in a lot of Yahoo! Groups, which tack ads onto everything... come to think of it, so does plain old Yahoo! Mail), because the rest of us probably didn't want to read it the first time, let alone have it waste our visual real estate when we're trying to read a completely different email.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    7. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What do you mean?

      Ahhh, you young kids are so amusing. The "correct" way to quote is to add your discussion after the text you're quoting. You should also snip out the parts of the email which you are not replying to. You see, that way you can actually read the discussion from top to bottom, just like a book, and have all the relavent information in proper order. Proper netiquette which, apparently, nobody remembers or follows.

      Now get off my lawn.
    8. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Tack · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You see, that way you can actually read the discussion from top to bottom, just like a book, and have all the relavent information in proper order. Proper netiquette which, apparently, nobody remembers or follows.

      I used to feel this way too, being one of the more pedantic, elitist, hardcore, old school netiquette snobs around. However after having lived in the real world for a while, I find the practice of full bottom posting to be far more annoying than full top posting (where "full" means the entire quoted text is preserved).

      On a mailing list or active thread among many people, it quickly becomes tiresome to constantly scroll down to the start of the reply for every new email that comes in. My old school snobbery still insists that the proper method is to prune your quoted reply text to the relevant context and reply inline. But for those who are too lazy to do this (nearly everyone except us throwbacks) and as a result end up quoting the entire email, I find in this case top posting to be far more practical and sensible than bottom posting.

    9. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by mpe · · Score: 1

      One other thing that annoyed me (maybe that was a setup i did not find) was that when you answered the e-mail it worked like MAC the answer was at the bottom so you had to scroll down to read the answer,,,very very annoying.

      What's wrong with your "End" key?

    10. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by operagost · · Score: 1

      Mail should be plain ASCII in most cases (You don't know if the receiver of the email can read HTML mails)
      Or, you could just include the HTML or rich text as an attachment in a multi-part message. The plaintext version will appear first even in a dumb email client and be perfectly readable.
      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    11. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then use a decent mail client that can skip quoted text.

    12. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Tack · · Score: 1

      Then use a decent mail client that can skip quoted text.
      Is that your best argument? Using proper inline quoting (with pruning irrelevant quoted text) or top-posting that becomes unnecessary. Besides, there is no decent mail client. They all suck.
    13. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Vicarius · · Score: 1

      Sending an HTML (or multi-part) message you increase likelihood of your message being flagged as SPAM; especially if your message (text) is small. SpamAssassin is an example of a filter that uses message type in its rules. If you do not need HTML features in your message, then do not use anything but plain-text option.

    14. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Noksagt · · Score: 1

      You can use external editors from Thunderbird, including MS Word. I suppose that MS products probably have tighter integration with each other, but Outlook is a truly horrific IMAP client. I can't think of many features Outlook has which thunderbird lacks, can you expand?

      Regarding top posting vs. bottom posting: this is hardly a "Mac style" issue & many different clients each have there own style. It is configurable in thunderbird & you can set it top post if you really want that. (Conventions vary with different groups of people & different people have their different tates. It is usually good etiquette to trim the quoted text to the minimum and to post directly below relevant passages. If there are separate issues you are responding to, different quote blocks make it easy to see context.)

    15. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I used to feel this way too, being one of the more pedantic, elitist, hardcore, old school netiquette snobs around. However after having lived in the real world for a while, I find the practice of full bottom posting to be far more annoying than full top posting (where "full" means the entire quoted text is preserved). The GP wasn't talking about full bottom posting. He was referring to what I call "contextual inline quoting", which is the practice of deleting all of the quoted text, except for enough to give contextual reference, and then quoting inline.

      I have no big beef with either top or bottom posting, provided that the author can be bothered to trim his fucking quotes. Since we live in a world where the vast majority of people can't be bothered to actually do so, the practice of fully-quoted top posting has become the norm. It doesn't help that practically every modern mail client encourages the practice. I will agree that fully-quoted bottom posting is an absolute abomination.

      Provided that the author trims his quotes to a minimum, neither is all that annoying.
    16. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0




      ... word "Mac". Don't do that. If you mean "Macintosh", it isn't an acronym. The acronym "MAC" is "Media Access Controller",


      Punctuation goes inside the quotation marks, Mr. Pedantic.





    17. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's old. He jokingly hinted at that fact by writing "book".

    18. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by mpe · · Score: 1

      Standard netiquette is "below", that is why the default is below.

      Actually the reason has more to do with most languages reading from the top of the page to the bottom. Hence you have "footnotes" rather than "headnotes".
      Giving an "answers" before a "questions" or a comment prior to whatever is being commented upon simply does not make sense. Things make most sense if they are directly after whatever they refer to. Whilst postfixing everything to the end of the message might be necessary with a paper letter this restriction has never applied to email (or derivatives).

    19. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh I'm sorry, you lose! Let's see what you could have won!

      Well, better luck next time.

    20. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by R2.0 · · Score: 1

      I believe that both styles are appropriate, depending on the context.

      In a newsgroup or forum context, top quoting is more appropriate, as one is posting a reply for all to see, and the "conversation" shouldn't turn into a long, tit-for-tat dialog. In this case, the convention of quoting "Joe123 said:" first, and then *replying* is appropriate. Trimming is important here out of respect for the other readers.

      In one-on-one email exchanges, the opposite is true. One doesn't need to review the whole conversation, but only the last reply. Bottom quoting fits in with this - put the most relevant info latest, but keep the rest of the stuff for a conversation record. Trimming is only important to get rid of the fluff put on by overly long sigs and advertisements, but otherwise, keeping the text of the conversation in one place is better than having to find the particular email where a certain portion of the conversation took place.

      It's kind of like paper files. On my first project, the PM insisted that, when adding a document to a file, it go to the BACK of the file. Her reasoning was that, when reconstructing an issue, she could pull out the file and "read it like a book". The other method is to place the latest info in the front of the file folder, under the general theory that the latest info is the most relevant to a given situation. One can debate the merits of both, but her project was the ONLY situation I've ever been in that filed "in the back", which should be indicative of the relative polularity of the methods.

      --
      "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
    21. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by eaolson · · Score: 1

      Ahhh, you young kids are so amusing. The "correct" way to quote is to add your discussion after the text you're quoting. You should also snip out the parts of the email which you are not replying to.

      That works well for Usenet, where presumably everyone has access to the message history. In email, I've often had an multiple-round email thread forwarded to me asking if I can comment or if I can do something mentioned. Without the history of the email discussion present, it would make no sense.

    22. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by fossa · · Score: 1

      For one-to-one communication, I often prefer no-quoting. Mail clients generally don't do this, but they could display the entire conversation in a thread rather than treating everything as a discrete document (does GMail display threads like this?). Usenet clients should also do something similar, but none I've seen do so, other than Google News. Google News also does some auto trimming of quotes to make this more sane (if I remember correctly); it's a shame this isn't common in news readers (or maybe it is; I've only used a couple).

    23. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      In a newsgroup or forum context, top quoting is more appropriate, as one is posting a reply for all to see, and the "conversation" shouldn't turn into a long, tit-for-tat dialog. [...] In one-on-one email exchanges, the opposite is true. One doesn't need to review the whole conversation, but only the last reply. Bottom quoting fits in with this - put the most relevant info latest, but keep the rest of the stuff for a conversation record. Trimming is only important to get rid of the fluff put on by overly long sigs and advertisements, but otherwise, keeping the text of the conversation in one place is better than having to find the particular email where a certain portion of the conversation took place.

      The only use for bottom-quoting I've ever seen is when forwarding an entire e-mail thread to someone who hasn't been involved in the discussion so far. Decent tools for tracking the conversation over several mails and building a digest would be a far superior way to do this.

      Other than that, IMHO top-posting is a serious PITA even in one-on-one conversations. I'm dealing with several groups containing people elsewhere in the company right now, and I have double figures of e-mail discussions on the go on any given day. I hate it when people just send me something that goes straight into text, because the first thing I have to do is scroll down to the previous comments to remind myself what was said before. Then I have to try to work out which part of often quite long previous mails each comment refers to. None of this would be necessary if people just quoted properly. And don't even get me started on Outlook-style quoting in HTML e-mails, which makes it almost impossible to quote properly in reply even if you want to...

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    24. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      When you upload from a book, it's called "Reading".

      "Writing" refers to correcting a book.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    25. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Then the sender should compile a relavent message with commentary and formatting. Unless, of course, you don't mind wasting your time sifting through several layers of quotes, signatures, top/bottom/inline replies. It is my belief that when you ask someone else's advice, you should minimize their time in the process. That's just common courtesy. Of course, if I'm billing you for my time, then it's simply economy, unless you happen to be billing at a substantially higher rate than I am.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    26. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Chris+whatever · · Score: 1

      well scrolling forever aint pleasurable and other than not writing in caps and adressing people correctly ,posting the reply after the message has no bearing whatsoever.

    27. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Chris+whatever · · Score: 1

      to me e-mail clients are all the same with different tweaks. What bothers me is when a new one comes out and they change the fell of it.

      i know they dont want to be like outlook express but hey1 most people use outlook express so why not make something better than MS but with a look a like feel?

      There lies the problem of all other O.S (except MAC) like linux, most people wont change if it's too different, they like having better features and speed but not if they have to completely learn from scratch.
      , that's the sad truth.

    28. Re:Wait for Penelope ! by Chris+whatever · · Score: 1

      Whoa flamebait for an opinion and troll?

      where did i say that MAC or thunderbird was bad, i only said i dont like thunderbird.

      GAWWDD that makes me think that slashdot's moderators are very lousy judges sometimes

  7. Quote collapse by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Funny

    Alternatively, you can use my preferred method for eliminating the giant 200-line quoted message bombs that appear below a two-word response. Just bitch at the person repeatedly until they either start deleting the old e-mail quotes themselves or they just stop e-mailing you. Either way, problem solved.

  8. top posting by kv9 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    3. Quote Collapse: This allows you to collapse those pesky quotes that are at the bottom of every email. This is a must for people who are accustomed to using Gmail.
    top posting is bad mkay?
    1. Re:top posting by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      I agree... unfortunately, everyone at work does it. So if I start at the bottom, and the email goes back and forth several times, you simply can't follow it anymore. It must have been outlook that started that nonsense.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:top posting by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 5, Funny

      I fully concur. I can't stand top-posting, but I have to deal with it (and do it myself), otherwise everyone at work bitches about how I'm "intentionally being difficult"...

      I agree... unfortunately, everyone at work does it. So if I start at the bottom, and the email goes back and forth several times, you simply can't follow it anymore. It must have been outlook that started that nonsense.

      --
      This guy's the limit!
    3. Re:top posting by sarathmenon · · Score: 4, Funny

      I fully concur. I can't stand top-posting, but I have to deal with it (and do it myself), otherwise everyone at work bitches about how I'm "intentionally being difficult"...

      I agree... unfortunately, everyone at work does it. So if I start at the bottom, and the email goes back and forth several times, you simply can't follow it anymore. It must have been outlook that started that nonsense.


      Yup, you definitely hate top posting.
      --
      Microsoft: "You've got questions. We've got dancing paperclips."
    4. Re:top posting by Skrynesaver · · Score: 1

      As a result you have to remember what's going on in 20 odd threads or scroll like the afore-mentioned loon
      Of course my colleagues and clients top post also
      In fact you don't have to scroll up and down to get the sense of what is being said otherwise
      This means that judiciously snipped mail threads are legible in a single mail
      Thunderbird post-posts by default

      --
      "Linux is for noobs"-The new MS fud strategy
    5. Re:top posting by mgblst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why is top posting bad? If it is a conversation you are all involved in, then you shouldn't even need to scroll down. I came from a camp of bottom posters, but now I just want the email relating to me at the top. I don't see a problem anymore, and I am quite happy to ignore the previously sent emails, so they should be at the bottom.

    6. Re:top posting by Stavr0 · · Score: 4, Funny
      Because it's difficult to read.

      On 2007.04.25 9:35 Stavr0 wrote:
      > Why is top posting bad?
      >
      > On 2007.04.25 8:40, KV9 wrote:
      > > top posting is bad mkay?
      >

    7. Re:top posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Difficult to read only if you have a retarded client that does not order textes by reply order.
      I really HATE having to scroll down to see the actual interesting stuff just because an anal retentive dumbass think for whatever reason that I don't remember what I just have read in the previous post.
      Basically quoting the full text a the end is just a reminder in case off you have a stupid newsgroup/mail client, or if you don't read a thread in the good order for whatever reason.
      But for the majority, having to scroll through stuff they just read is stupid. So there is a reason they don't accept this stupid netiquette coming from old ages where intelligent client were not existing.

      and by the way, if you want to enforce the first rule, alors enforce the second one, that is:don't fucking quote the whole text at all....

    8. Re:top posting by pwrtool+45 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Gah. This sounds like countless conversations that have long been done to death on Usenet all over again.

      Some of us don't want to have to reread or needlessly scroll through the entirety of multiple emails to get to the most recent response(s). Especially in longer conversations involving several people. If you've forgotten what the email was about, then you can do your scrolling. Otherwise, the part you need (the most recent bit) is right there in front of you. Efficiency!

      But I guess that depends on if you're just a reader or if you're also a responder. People sending me email tend to want a response, so I prefer top-posting. YMMV.

      top posting is bad mkay?
    9. Re:top posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Moderation: -1 Whoosh! Right over his head.

    10. Re:top posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      'Eh? What sort of fucked up reasoning is that? A lot of people inter-mingle their reply with the original text: what does your clever email client do then? Oh that's right, it fucks up the text for you.'
      No, wrong, most people just quote your whole text THEN reply, ignoring all but the first rule of the 'netiquette'. So no real point in quoting at all exept to show what post they respond.
      You know what, my client show me what the post respond to in the first place.
      You don't have to scroll to read people who intermingle their answer, so this is not the point of the rant. And you can't inter mingle your answer if you only quote the text below your answer really, so this is unrelated.

      People who just quote the whole text below their answer are actually the intelligent people.
      They do not force people with intelligent client (the majority) to scroll down to read the answer.
      And they still allow the minority with no client to know what post is responded in case they have a gold fish memory....

      maybe I am not clear since english is not my first langage, but hell, consider this:the way netiquette is supposed to be better is NOT better for me, so hell with it.
      What is considerered bad manners in some contries is good manners in others..no one is 'right' on that.
      Netiquette is only right for some people, deal with it, it is not a law, stop trying to enforce it, cause you are at least wrong in this attitude.

    11. Re:top posting by Sax+Maniac · · Score: 2, Funny

      than top-post.
      It's better to remove all quotes
      which is a freaking pain in the ass.
      message backwards
      then I have read your
      If you top-post,
      we read top to bottom.
      Because in English

      --
      I can explanate how to administrate your network. You must configurate and segmentate it, so it can computate.
    12. Re:top posting by Dan+Ost · · Score: 1

      Some of us don't want to have to reread or needlessly scroll through the entirety of multiple emails to get to the most recent response(s).

      And you shouldn't have to. It is the responsibility of the sender to edit the thread down to just the parts that he is replying to so that he can respond to them in-line. In this fashion, they can respond to each point just like a real conversation. Top-posting pretty much limits you to replying to a single point in the entire email you're responding to which ruins email as a means to actually discus anything more complicated than lunch plans.

      But I guess that depends on if you're just a reader or if you're also a responder. People sending me email tend to want a response, so I prefer top-posting.

      If a one-line response is all that's required, then top-posting works (although it's still evil). Anything more complicated than that requires a more sensible format method.

      --

      *sigh* back to work...
    13. Re:top posting by vrt3 · · Score: 1

      If you ignore the previously sent emails, why not just delete them?

      --
      This sig under construction. Please check back later.
    14. Re:top posting by cyberfunkr · · Score: 1

      What if it's not a conversation you're involved in until later?

      Too many times at work I'll be forwarded a week long conversation from my boss that says (at the top) "Please fix the issue mentioned below." Now I have to scroll through 7-8 pages of messages from 4 different people; three of which top post and only one bottom posts.

      It usually takes longer to read the email to find out what the bug is and how they want fixed then it takes to fix the bug itself.

      Had everyone bottom posted I would be able to read it as a normal document and get my work done. Even if they all top posted it would require large amounts of scrolling up to get to the top of each message then scrolling down to read the whole message. Two steps forward, one step back.

    15. Re:top posting by Espinas217 · · Score: 1

      If the sender is going to remove most of the conversation so you don't have to scroll to see their reply at the bottom then it isn't a big deal to read the screen from bottom to top, specially if you have those nice ('>') quote indicators. And is better to have the most relevant part of the email at the top where you can see it clearly and your eyes can go always to the same part of the screen to start reading instead of going to the bottom and scan the text up until the last reply starts.

      --
      La vida no es una pastafrola. :wq
    16. Re:top posting by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1

      Um.

      You don't have to, if things are properly trimmed.

      You should only include the stuff that is relevant in your replies.

    17. Re:top posting by David_W · · Score: 1

      A: Maybe because some people are too annoyed by top-posting.
      Q: Why do I not get an answer to my question(s)?
      A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
      Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?

      Shamelessly stolen from somewhere ages ago because it highlights the point so well.

    18. Re:top posting by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      The quoted text isn't there for *you*. Otherwise, you might as well just delete the quoted text and move on. After all, as you say, you don't need it. That text is for others if they should need to read the conversation later, in which case top posting is *really* frickin' annoying.

    19. Re:top posting by ChrTssu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In my experience, I only need the gist of the preceding email to know what the responder is talking about. What I really need to know is what the responder is saying *right now.* Also, I don't know how many times a part of a message has been ignored or misread, leading to all kinds of confusion. It's easier if past messages are not truncated, so a clarifying (or simply repetitive) reply can be quickly and easily made just by selecting "Reply," rather than going through old correspondence looking for the error. So, ease of reading, and more information right at hand are why I choose to ignore others' netiquette.

      --
      I am not an animal! I am something worse!
    20. Re:top posting by carlmenezes · · Score: 1

      The reason I prefer top posting is that I do not need to continually scroll down to the bottom of a message thats been quoted and re-quoted in all the replies. I'm already familiar with the discussion and I would like to get straight to the present point of the discussion.

      I mean, look at GMail's approach. Within the message, everything is top posted. However, the message itself is "bottom posted" in the conversation, BUT all the older messages are collapsed and the browser takes you straight to what you want to read. I think that's the way it should be done. The function of an email/news program should be to make it as convenient as possible for its user to get access to information.

      Sadly, this approach has not been taken by 99% of the email/news clients out there (which is one of the reasons GMail has been so successful). That's what has given rise to top posting.

      So, in summary, eliminate the need for me and all the readers in a discussion to continually scroll to the bottom of the message and I believe you will eliminate the need for anyone for anyone to top post.

      --
      Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
    21. Re:top posting by Genom · · Score: 1

      Top posting is bad because, as others have stated, we read top-bottom. If you reply at the top, we have to scroll down to get context. That's silly, and wastes the reader's time.

      Top-posting is common because people are freakin' lazy. Too lazy to properly prune their quotes to only what's necessary for context. Too lazy to position their reply to the quoted text below it to ensure the reader is able to read it properly, and in order.

      And top-posters defend their practice by admitting they're lazy! Apparently it's too much work for them to scroll down to read a reply.

      News flash: If folks would *properly* prune their quotes, there'd be less to scroll through. There's rarely a need to quote the entire email you're replying to. Generally 2-3 lines or a paragraph before each point you're responding to is enough. Oh, but that takes effort. Silly me.

      Outlook is indeed partially to blame, because it *defaults* to quoting the entire message, and positioning the cursor above the quoted message. Since so many folks are forced to use Outlook, and never touch the default settings, they're *trained* by Outlook to think top-posting is proper.

      However, placing the blame solely on Outlook is rather silly as well. We've become a lazy society. Lazy in our actions. Lazy in our communications. If it's effort, we eschew it in favor of convenience. Who cares that it's inconvenient for someone else when it's convenient to you, right? Since properly quoting and responding to an email takes more effort than top-posting and quoting the entire thing, that's what folks do. Outlook just compounds the problem by making it look like that's the way it's supposed to be.

  9. Sloooooooo.....oooow by mwvdlee · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I've recently tried Thunderbird 2 on a WinXP system, where I'd like it to replace Outlook Express. Feature-wise Thunderbird 2 seems to offer everything I need and it wasn't too hard to find them. However, Thunderbird 2 seems a lot slower than Outlook Express. Another annoyance was that Thunderbird 2 orders mails by send date, not received date: Spam often has a bullshit received date, making them pop-up all over my inbox, instead of neatly at the end where I can filter them out more easily. Even though I block well over 90% of spam, I still get a few hundred each day, so it's of some importance to me that I can manually filter spam easily.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    1. Re:Sloooooooo.....oooow by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Well, you should work on training the built in spam-filter, then.

      Moreover, while it doesn't have a "recieved date", it does have an "order received" field, which means you can sort by that with the same results as sorting by recieved date.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:Sloooooooo.....oooow by cloudnin · · Score: 1

      Yeah, Thunderbird 2 was pretty slow on Windows XP for me too. Since I didn't notice any major improvements over version 1.5, I switched back. I did the same thing after trying Firefox 2 for awhile since it always wanted to open up javascript links in the same new tab instead of separate ones like with Firefox 1.5, and I couldn't figure out a way to change this. I was hoping that they'd fix this by the time they ended support for version 1.5 (April 24 - yesterday), but I checked the most recent version and they still haven't. Hopefully they'll update Thunderbird 2 so it's speedier before support for 1.5 ends in October.

    3. Re:Sloooooooo.....oooow by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      So 1.5 is faster than 2.0? I'll downgrade to 1.5 then.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re:Sloooooooo.....oooow by elinenbe · · Score: 1

      Lets say "well over 90%" is 97%, and you say you are getting a few hundred spam messages each day... lets say 300. That means without a spam filter you would be getting TEN THOUSAND (10,000) spam messages each day. I call your bluff. My email which is ALL over the internet gets maybe 100/day. Time to get a REAL spam filter.

      --
      -eric
    5. Re:Sloooooooo.....oooow by QuickFox · · Score: 1

      Another annoyance was that Thunderbird 2 orders mails by send date, not received date There's a menu with several options for sorting: View -> Sort by.
      --
      Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
    6. Re:Sloooooooo.....oooow by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Actually it's roughly 20.000 each day, the last time I checked (over a year ago).

      I run SpamAssassin, blacklist, a few procmail rules and anti-virus on the server as well as local anti-virus, crappy anti-spam and a couple of mail rules which I have yet to convert to procmail.

      The cause of this is a quite popular domain for which I used to publish a whole bunch of different e-mail addresses. Now imagine using a unique e-mail address (due to forward-all account) for each site you register with, so you can identify which of those sells your address (which is a lot more and from a lot "better" companies than you would think). Imagine getting a few hundred spam mails each day on each of those accounts and you get to 20.000 easily.

      I switched my site to use a form which leaves no e-mail addresses in the HTML, deactivated the forward-all and once in a while I remove a few of the old e-mail addresses, which really seems to cut down. It may well be that I'm down to 10.000/day right now if I disable all filters. Still, with over 50 valid e-mail addresses remaining, I'm still guarenteed my daily dosis.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  10. wake up editors. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    how on earth did this dire article make it through the editors process?
    Its of abysmal quality and precious little substance.

    1. Re:wake up editors. by Aladrin · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "how on earth did this dire article make it through the editors process?
      Its of abysmal quality and precious little substance."

      When grammar/spelling-nazi'ing, please be sure your own post is correct first. At the very least, -1- of your 2 sentences could have been correct.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:wake up editors. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the AC is probably on about the quality of the article, not the quality of the grammar.

  11. Re:KMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I tried Thunderbird 1.5. (on Windows XP).
    What it really lacked was integrated back-up/restore functions. (Outlook has this - export/import.)
    I am not saying MS Outlook is the best, only that mail/account export/import functions should be present in e-mail program and you should not look for some extention or dig in support pages for this, it shoud just work.

    By the way, does anybody now if thisis solved in TB 2.0.? (I would really try it once more if it has it)

  12. 2 in a row? by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 4, Funny

    Taco are you trying to feed the trolls?

    Slashdot : news for nerds, payed fpr by Mozilla and Google.

    --
    I like muppets.
  13. Forget about extensions... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...make it faster. For whatever reason, Thunderbird is dog slow for me. When I use my Outlook on Windows for work - that is much faster at processing email.

    Thunderbird just sits there for 30+ seconds when attempting to view a new message.

    Rather than create a bunch of extensions hardly anyone would use... improve it's existing features first

    1. Re:Forget about extensions... by metamatic · · Score: 1

      Maybe the fault is with your mail server? I have tens of thousands of e-mails on my IMAP server, and going to any random message is less than a second.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  14. Because it sucks? by thsths · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry to be so blunt, I'll try to explain what I mean. Whichever way you look at it, Firefox is the gold standard of browsers. It is more standard compliant and easier to use than IE, more compatibly than Konqueror, and much more extensible and better looking than Opera. While you can find better browsers for niche applications (lynx on telnet), there is no general purpose browser that comes even close to Firefox.

    Thunderbird on the other hand is just a lot of promises. It still uses folders, while labels are obviously the way to go. Threading is poor. Integration between different message sources is basically non-existent. The search function sucks really badly. There is no integration with any reasonable calender (and don't call sunbird reasonable). And it is actually difficult to use, certainly compared to the competition (Gmail, Yahoo Mail, Outlook, Opera, KMail...).

    I mean seriously: can Thunderbird even sort threads on the date of the most recent message in a thread? Last time I tried it could not. GMail does that by default, and it is by far the most sensible way to order messages. Make Thunderbird not suck, and I will give it another try.

    1. Re:Because it sucks? by neutrino38 · · Score: 1

      Who has moderated the parent as flamebait ?

      The parent post points out obvious flaws that prevent TB to be the same success as FF.
      I would add:

      - closed address book with no proper import function.
      - on Mac OSX : no integration with system adressbook and system calendar as well as Keychain.
      - no contact and calendar synch with mobile device.

      Note : I am a TB user.

    2. Re:Because it sucks? by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      I use TB as well and regularly switch between it and Kmail on the same machine (I keep my mail on my IMAP server) and I'm not too happy with TB either. Granted TB is just a mail app and not a piece of a groupware suite (like Kontact is) but a bit of openness would indeed help it (beyond LDAP which is a pain to setup just for that purpose).

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    3. Re:Because it sucks? by owlnation · · Score: 1

      I agree, the parent is valid criticism - not flamebait. Please mod parent up.

      I too use TB. But honestly the only reason I do is because I have a certain sense of loyalty to Mozilla, and I want to believe that TB will be the app for mail.

      However, I'm not sure how deluded that idea is. I converted to Firefox because it just was so intuitive as to the way I needed to browse. The extensions helped that even more. It was a night and day epiphany in browsing for me. It offered me more (much more) that I was getting with Safari and IE.

      TB is a different story - it has less features than most of its competition. It is of little use in small business environment. It is slow, it is volatile, is even worse on a Mac, and I find the whole filter UI experience to be unintuitive and prohibitive. To work out strong filters on TB you need to pretty much sit down and plan with a piece of paper first. (and why no ability to filter out attachments?)

      Extensions, and the choice of which, seem to be the least priority with TB. Seems that many of the extensions available are essentially adding features that are common in most other programs.

      Sorry to bitch Mozilla chaps, I do intend to continue to use TB. I do think there's talented people at Mozilla and that TB's shortcomings are understood. I hope you get there in the end. You just have to understand that right now it's a frustrating piece of software. Extensions aren't going to that fix anytime soon.

    4. Re:Because it sucks? by pebs · · Score: 2, Informative

      Thunderbird on the other hand is just a lot of promises. It still uses folders, while labels are obviously the way to go.

      Thunderbird 2.0 has tags, which if I understand correctly is the same as labels, except you get to (or "have to") use folders in addition to tags. It doesn't appear to store the tags on the IMAP server, though, which is bummer and makes it useless for me (haven't tried it myself, but read some forum posting that said it didn't). IMAP is of course still folder based, so eliminating folders altogether is not possible.

      The reason I mention IMAP is because I couldn't imagine someone would use POP3 instead of IMAP (unless you're one of those fools who use a webmail provider that doesn't support IMAP *cough*Gmail*cough*)

      There is no integration with any reasonable calender (and don't call sunbird reasonable)

      I think you mean "Lightning". Lightning isn't that great, but at least I can understand those damn Exchange invites I get from time to time.

      --
      #!/
    5. Re:Because it sucks? by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Tunderbird V2 adds tags but frankly I like folders. I do not see how tags are obviously the way to go. In fact that is the one thing I don't like about Gmail.
      Yes you can sort however you like. It really isn't a problem.
      And so far the search works well for me.
      Kmail and Evolution only run on Linux and I have to use Windows.
      Outlook has caused me more grief with blown PSTs and other issues than I can shake a stick at and it only runs on Windows and I have to use Linux.
      Gmail and Yahoo mail? They are not bad but I need to access my office email server.
      Thunderbird while not perfect.. Get a good calander interface going guys. Is a good email client. It just isn't a good calender client.

      I have yet to see as complete of a solution as Outlook+Exchange yet. I am just not willing to pay the price to use Exchange.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    6. Re:Because it sucks? by garett_spencley · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's just because I have no personal reasons/need for using a calendar program, but what does a calendar have to do with e-mail ?

      I understand that Outlook merged the two and a lot of people who used to use (or currently use) Outlook got used to it. But I really don't see how calendar / scheduling and e-mail is related and why Thunderbird (or any e-mail client) should feel pressed to integrate a calendar application.

      Wouldn't you be better served using a stand-alone calendar / scheduler and stand-alone e-mail application that each does it's job extremely well and has all the features you need then a mashed together combination of the two that's bloated and sacrifices features because they're focusing on doing too many unrelated tasks ?

      Please enlighten me as to how calendar / scheduling is related to e-mail and what functionality is gained by merging the two that wouldn't otherwise be present using standalone applications.

    7. Re:Because it sucks? by afidel · · Score: 1

      The reason they are integrated is that in order to invite someone who is not on your system you need a method of transferring the invite. Since we already have a reliable method for transporting messages between parties on separate systems it makes sense to use SMTP as the transport mechanism rather than reinvent the wheel.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    8. Re:Because it sucks? by shokk · · Score: 0

      So... how does that email tagging work out with IMAP? It doesn't.
      Extensions like Tag The Bird (https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/thunderbird/addo n/1832) will place the tags in an X-Tags header but this is not available directly by Thunderbird. Useless.

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    9. Re:Because it sucks? by Dionysus · · Score: 1

      Tunderbird V2 adds tags but frankly I like folders. I do not see how tags are obviously the way to go.


      The thing about tags is that you can have multiple tags for a given message. Very useful if the boss write about different topics in the same email, and you usually sort by topics. You could fake the same functionality by copying the same message to the different folders, but it's somewhat a waste of space, and if you delete the message, it won't all be deleted.

      I faking tags in kontact these day by dumping all my email into a single archive folder and then use search folders to imitate tags. It would be much easier if it had been possible to tag a given message as belonging to a given topic, though
      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
    10. Re:Because it sucks? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      The simplest reason is that invites tend to be sent as emails so having them integrated make life easy. I guess it could be possible to create a mime type that is of the type invite and have it call whatever ca lander program you use.
      The long reason is that your contact list in pretty much at the center of email, your calender, and your todo lists.
      An email client and a Personal information manager are very closely related now.
      Lets say you going to schedule a meeting. You then check your calender and put it on your calender and if your on a good system you can check the people you need at the meetings calenders. Then you send invites to everybody that needs to be at them meeting, Then you may one ore more things you need to do for the meeting so you you add them to your todo list. Then of course ideally you sync that with you cell phone.
      A home user may not need a calender as such but it is nice.
      However imagine a college or high school student with a good calendering system. The school could put events and assignments. I know that we have iCal and webdav but even I have not found a good way tie them all together. A good open standards calendering system could be great tool. The trick will be how to keep it spam free. Imagine the abuse if Crazy Billy's discount underwear warehouse could push the date of their sale to everyones calender!

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    11. Re:Because it sucks? by Noksagt · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that tagging works with IMAP. Everything looks the same with different TB profiles that have the same tags defined in prefs.js (for color, etc.).

      Even before 2.0, thunderbird supported virtual search folders. This seems to be as good as labels in most cases--most gmail users I've observed have filters to auto-apply labels to their messages & few manually tag posts.

    12. Re:Because it sucks? by Rodness · · Score: 1

      Ok... I also use TB on all of my machines (Mac, Linux, 2xWin), have used it since the 0.1 release, and before that Mozilla (and before that Netscape 4/6/7) Mailnews. I use it with SMIME digital certificates issued by my company and I'm eagerly awaiting the next blessed release of Lightning for the Google calendar functionality. In general, I think TB is the best mail client out there.

      Having established that (potential lack of) credibility, I have to say that I completely agree with everything that the parent and grandparent have said. TB does have its quirks and issues which do drive me a little nuts sometimes.

      But you guys have to bear something in mind, and no one else has touched on this: Firefox is the Mozilla flagship product. FX, not TB. FX gets the bulk of the resources to develop the XUL platform/toolkit and Gecko layout engine. TB just uses those components. The main amount of TB development is done by like two guys (mscott and bienvenu). Compare that to the army of people working on FX, and it's something of a major accomplishment that TB is as great as it is.

      Now, instead of whining on /. about how TB sucks and you wish the developers would make it better, you guys COULD always log into the Mozilla forums at forums.mozillazine.org and add to the discussions in Thunderbird Builds with your ideas about making the product better. You could give that 5 minutes a day instead of endlessly clicking refresh on the /. main page the whole time... :)

      All kidding aside, mscott _DOES_ read those forums, and he's also very receptive to (constructive) user feedback, so if you want to put your thoughts in the lead developer's ear, that's the best way.

    13. Re:Because it sucks? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I tend to use filters to sort email into folders then I use the search to looks for specific subjects or authors. If I am working on an important project all email related to that project goes into that folder. If I want to find one from my boss I do a search.
      I didn't say tags where useless but I like folders and I guess others feel the same. What is nice about Thunderbird is that now you have BOTH.
      Use what works best for you.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    14. Re:Because it sucks? by thsths · · Score: 1

      > what does a calendar have to do with e-mail?

      Everything. Number one: you want to be able to send and receive formal appointments, and this usually involves email. Sure you can do that via an attachment, much like you could use an HTML editor to edit HTML mail you send in mutt, but that is not very convenient. Using manual invitation is just too error prone in my experience.

      Number two: a smart system will even generate the responses and interpret them. For example, Google Calender can interpret responses for your invitation directly, so you always know how many people are coming to the meeting. It is not perfect in its implementation, but the idea is excellent.

      Number three: tell me a calendar application that does its job extremely well. I know that everybody recommends Outlook, but I need something that will work on Windows and Linux, and synchronise between them.

    15. Re:Because it sucks? by Dionysus · · Score: 1

      Oh, I like folders too, don't get me wrong. All my mailing lists go to different folders.

      In my experience, filtering doesn't really work as well as tags. In Gmail, once you tag a message with a given tag, all replies to that message gets that tag. That's very useful. Problem with filtering is that the same person might be associated with different projects. so unless some tags are introduced (say in the subject line) then the filtering can't properly filter to the right folder. But these tags are decided by the sender and if you are going to tag the message anyways, why not do it properly.

      Since I spend my time in Linux, and I'm relatively happy with Kontact, I haven't really bothered to test the new Thunderbird. One thing I really don't like when I've tried it, is that you can't thread messages in search folders. Pretty annoying.

      --
      Je ne parle pas francais.
    16. Re:Because it sucks? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      I didn't say tags where useless but I like folders and I guess others feel the same.

      I don't understand. Tags offer a proper superset of the functionality of folders. How can you like folders more than tags when tags enable you to do the exact same things, plus more?

    17. Re:Because it sucks? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      I suspect the point was that nothing you've listed intrinsically requires e-mail. It just happens to be a convenient conduit for sending specially formatted messages representing meeting invitations and accept/decline responses, and if you're going to use e-mail to send/receive such messages, then obviously your calendaring UI has to be integrated with your e-mail system somewhere along the line.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    18. Re:Because it sucks? by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Because tagging UI is more complicated than folders, particularly if you usually organise with subfolders and need to emulate the relationship using multiple tags? Simple as that, I suspect...

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    19. Re:Because it sucks? by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

      Ahh, good point about subfolders, I forgot about that. I've never stored email in more than a one-level hierarchy, so I tend to forget that usage pattern.

      UI's, however, can be fixed... then again, it's open source we're talking about. ;)

    20. Re:Because it sucks? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      It all comes down to the UI. I have never found a UI that is as intuitive as folders. Not only that but I use folders for an aid in reading more than an aid in searching. Email from people at my office go into one folder and then some of those go into a sub folders. Email for a few lists I am on go into my lists folder then into a sub folder per list. Emails from vendors goes into a projects folder then into a folder per project.
      Yes a tagging system could be made that did all that but I haven't seen it yet. If I could have filters that applied tags and then have different views on my mail space based on those tags that would be great.
      Thunderbird V2.0 has both tags and folders so both camps are happy.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    21. Re:Because it sucks? by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      I would like to see Thunderbird have automatic folder creation. Thunderbird supports folders based on saved searches. I think Thunderbird could automatically create dynamic folders based on my contacts, common *popular* strings in subject lines ( this would cover most mailing lists ), conversations ala gmail, yesterday, today, last week, etc ( Yes, I know Thunderbird already has this capability, but I would like to see it in the folder navigation pane). What do you say, Thunderbird community?

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    22. Re:Because it sucks? by pebs · · Score: 1

      It seems to me that tagging works with IMAP. Everything looks the same with different TB profiles that have the same tags defined in prefs.js (for color, etc.).

      Good to hear that...

      --
      #!/
    23. Re:Because it sucks? by thsths · · Score: 1

      > Ahh, good point about subfolders

      There is no reason why you could not implement subtags. But somehow Google choose not to, so we seem to be stuck without them for the time being. My list of tags is getting pretty long nowadays!

  15. A ways to go... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You know that Thunderbird has a ways to go when the #1 extension is minimize to tray??

  16. Where's redirect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How could they overlook the redirect extension? Come on people, its a feature that we've had in most other mail clients since at least the 80's. But yet its an extension for thunderbird.
    Its always the first thing I install for thunderbird, and comes in handy many times.

  17. Re:KMail by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    While we're slightly off-topic, my vote goes to sylpheed

    I use it at home on my linux box, and it runs just fine as a portable app (sylpheed --configdir=foo) from the USB stick when forced to use somebody else's computer on the road (IMAP over SSL along with SMTP Auth and SMTP with Starttls to my home server).

    A very nice lightweight mail client, with some good improvements to the UI in the 2.4 version that was recently released.

    If you enjoy having more crap built-in (like rendering HTML), check out claws, which is a fork of sylpheed.

  18. Order by send date. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

    Isn't that a feature, not a bug? The malformed date tag is a spam indicator. So it is good Thunderbird will put it at the top of the list, out of sight. Just mark the folder read. If you have legitimate correspondent using legal software has wrong dates, it is because his/her machine is riddled with viruses. So dont want to read their mail either. For a long time Outlook express used to mess up the subject tag and in Thunderbird (older versions) the subject line was missing, and thus filed in spam folder. A few of my collegues bitched, but I held firm. The problem is in Outlook or they way they have configured Outlook. All mails from yahoo, gmail, hotmail were coming through correctly. I will not work around the bugs of Outlook just because it is ubiquitous. I refused to edit my filter rules or whitelist them. I dont know what/when/who fixed it. Now a days Outlook is sending mails correctly. I think so. I have not looked at the spam folder for a long time. May be they just gave up on me and stopped bitching.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:Order by send date. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't that a feature, not a bug? The malformed date tag is a spam indicator. So it is good Thunderbird will put it at the top of the list, out of sight. Just mark the folder read.

      It's neither a bug nor a feature. It's a mis-feature. Evolution does this too, and it's a pain in the ass. I want to delete spam, not leave it lying around in my mail folders. Not being able to see it is a royal pain in the ass.

      Of course if Evolutions spam filter worked, it wouldn't be half the issue it is.

    2. Re:Order by send date. by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      How can you say Thunderbird is right sorting e-mails the way it does, when I want it differently? Is that the level of user-friendliness one is to expect of Thunderbird; "my way or the high way"? Besides; it's not uncommon for legitimate e-mail to have old dates. For instance when it has been sitting in somebody's outbox for a number of days. I guess if Thunderbird thinks it should force it's ideas on me instead of letting me work the way I want, I'll just not use Thunderbird any more.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    3. Re:Order by send date. by thsths · · Score: 1

      > Is that the level of user-friendliness one is to expect of Thunderbird; "my way or the high way"?

      That is the impression I get, too. I was a regular user of Mozilla Mail, but since they cut up the suite, there is really no reason to use Thunderbird anymore.

  19. Features: messages/account back-up and restore by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does back-up and restore works on TB 2.0 out of the box (like some function in file or tools menu)? Or you need some extra add-on or browse in support pages to fing out how.

  20. Enigmail. by saintlupus · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I was surprised that Enigmail wasn't listed; for GPG integration into email, it's a great tool, simple to use. I've even got some of the departments that deal with sensitive data at work using it, and they are _not_ technical people by inclination.

    --saint

  21. Anyone know of an extension by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That allows message filters to run on the body of IMAP messages? That's pretty basic functionality for Thunderbird to still be missing, given how long it's been a known issue. And yes, I've tried the "might work-arounds", and they don't.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Anyone know of an extension by onecheapgeek · · Score: 1

      When I'm using an IMAP server, I do all my filtering on the server so that I'm not dependent on my client running to handle filtering. Seems that would be the best method for handling filtering when the mail doesn't end up on my local machine.

    2. Re:Anyone know of an extension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I'm using an IMAP server, I do all my filtering on the server so that I'm not dependent on my client running to handle filtering. Seems that would be the best method for handling filtering when the mail doesn't end up on my local machine.
      It may be the best method, but it isn't available for all accounts. I have procmail filters set up on one of my accounts, but that isn't an option for others. A client side solution has drawbacks, but it may be the best one can do if one only has access to the client side.

    3. Re:Anyone know of an extension by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Me me, blah blah me. If you don't know, then feel free to just STFU, m'kay?

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  22. A True Must Have by fishdan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I agree, and in fact for me the article lost credibility for recommending against Enigmail -- Enigmail is a must have. If we're ever going to have digital signatures become the norm (something I'd like to see) then the advanced users are going to have to model it for the neophytes. Digitally sign every email you send, and when people ask why you do it, spoof an "I'm joining a cult" email from them to their friends. I'm pretty confident that eventually only signed emails will be delivered -- be ahead of the curve!

    --
    Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
    1. Re:A True Must Have by Threni · · Score: 2, Interesting

      > If we're ever going to have digital signatures become the norm (something I'd like to see)

      Most email users have never had anyone try and fake messages from them to other people. I can see the advantages, but non-nerds aren't going to jump through hoops to add the required encryption subsystem to their email systems when it offers no advantage. I can see encryption itself being marginally more popular, but not much so.

    2. Re:A True Must Have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a day and age where the US government wants to monitor everything I say and do, you are insane if you wouldn't want encryption. Of course, this is used far more in business where companies do it to ensure confidentiality of information. It is a hell of a lot better then sending e-mail in plaintext.

    3. Re:A True Must Have by Threni · · Score: 1

      > In a day and age where the US government wants to monitor everything I say and do, you are insane if you wouldn't want encryption.
      > Of course, this is used far more in business where companies do it to ensure confidentiality of information. It is a hell of a lot
      > better then sending e-mail in plaintext.

      Ok - but that just means you need to write an extension which makes Thunderbird users start to want to use encryption/digital signing. Most of my friends are computer literate, but none of them can be arsed to install the required software. It's a pain in the arse - they all have 2 or 3 email addresses on different platforms.

    4. Re:A True Must Have by keithius · · Score: 3, Informative

      Most email users have never had anyone try and fake messages from them to other people. Errr... what? People get spam emails all the time with the "From" address faked - often from people they know, and sometimes even from themselves! (There's a strange feeling when you get an obviously junk/spam email and it claims to have been sent by... you!)
      --
      "Programming is the fine art of making a machine that has absolutely no intelligence act as though it does."
    5. Re:A True Must Have by mpe · · Score: 1

      Most email users have never had anyone try and fake messages from them to other people.

      With the "obvious" exceptions of spam and viruses spread by email.

    6. Re:A True Must Have by CheShACat · · Score: 4, Informative

      "Most email users have never had anyone try and fake messages from them to other people" Having spent some time working at an ISP and ICANN domain registrar, I know that pretty much anyone with a domain name has had their email spoofed at one time or another, if not all day every day. While this might not actually cover "most email users", the rest run the risk of their email domain (e.g. hotmail.com) being spoofed by spammers. In the case of spoofed emails, it's often the recipient that is at most risk, digital signatures that allow a recipient to verify that a mail's source was actually the domain it claims to be from are a great help in combatting spam.

    7. Re:A True Must Have by gad_zuki! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your friends probably dont need military grade public key cryptography along with a confusing install. Enigmail is pretty much the GUI for gpgp for thunderbird. Most users wont get past the point of "where do I click to make this email magically unreadedable to George bush!?!?" Its probably a lot easier to use the buit-in s/mime support in thunderbird than to add more confusing crypto products.

      Oh course, considering the number of people who have shifted to webmail, its going to be interesting to see if any of these big webmail providers begin to support crytopgrahy. Are people going to trust google, yahoo, or hotmail with their private key? Do they even know what this means?

      Sadly, the encrypt email revolution never happened (poor phil zimmerman) and thanks to webmail and an apathetic public it probably never will.

    8. Re:A True Must Have by Threni · · Score: 1

      > considering the number of people who have shifted to webmail

      I certainly have. I lost all my email upgrading Thunderbird once and thought `why am I doing this again, when Gmail gives me all the space I need and is accessible anywhere (including my phone)`? I have an old version of Thunderbird which I use to backup my Gmail once a month or so (I just load it up, click `get all mail`, wait 5 mins or so, then exit) - fitting punishment under the circumstances.

    9. Re:A True Must Have by jonadab · · Score: 1

      > Are people going to trust google, yahoo, or hotmail with their private key? Do they even know what this means?

      Couldn't they just generate a keypair specifically for that webmail account?

      Sure, it doesn't prove "I'm the same guy as has this _other_ email account", but it _can_ demonstrate that you're the same loser9843894@yahoo.com as you were last week, i.e., that some random third party didn't just get your address and start using it in From: fields.

      However, I can't see the major webmail services (with the _possible_ exception of Google) adding such a feature until a much larger percentage of users become aware of the fact that the From: field is untrustworthy. One would think, with all the phishing scams out there, that this would be starting to sink in, but all the evidence I have seen so far indicates the contrary.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    10. Re:A True Must Have by digitalchinky · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Then why not use IMAP instead? It's frustratingly slow at times, just like web mail, with the added convenience that your messages are stored safely on a server somewhere out in the world.

    11. Re:A True Must Have by Nebu · · Score: 1

      (There's a strange feeling when you get an obviously junk/spam email and it claims to have been sent by... you!)

      Really? Happens all the time in Soviet Russia.

    12. Re:A True Must Have by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      If spammers start encrypting their email, does that mean that the servers can no longer filter it because they don't have the aggregate information to draw upon?

    13. Re:A True Must Have by fishdan · · Score: 1

      That would be very sweet indeed, because they'd have to have a public key for masses of emails, that people would have to get -- once that key is flagged as being malicious, the spam doesn't get read.

      --
      Nothing great was ever achieved without enthusiasm
    14. Re:A True Must Have by burns210 · · Score: 1

      The advantage of widespread email encryption is that when most/all of your contacts encrypt your email by default, you can start marking plain text email as more likely being spam. Or the entire class of emails viruses that mail everyone in your contact list goes away... Or you could realize that personal information is arbitrarily easy to read because of email, and that using encryption to secure private communication from the world should be a brain dead simple decision.

  23. Re:KMail by jimstapleton · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I'll second this...

    After thunderbird destroyed my local mail store once a week (admittedly I could go in and fix the mailbox files by hand with some effort, trial, and error), I went back to KMail in KDE and Outlook Express in Window, both of which have never had corrupted mailboxes in my use of them, and I have been using both much longer.

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  24. Re:KMail by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

    you can just copy what you want out of the profiles folder/mail store folder and paste it back in if you need to.

    --
    (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
  25. Can someone fix that Webmail extension for firefox by BRUTICUS · · Score: 1

    Id love to be able to sort and delete all my damn hotmail someday... i'm waiting for a hotmail client. Or Thunderbird to do it up. Thunderbirds apparently used to work but not anymore..

  26. gmail by prockcore · · Score: 1

    After fighting with Evolution and Thunderbird, I've given up. I just have gmail pop all my mail. Not only does this eliminate the hassle of checking my mail from multiple machines, but gmail actually handles meeting requests properly. (Evolution never seems to recognize the timezones of any meeting requests I get... so all the meetings were scheduled for the wrong time, and Evolution wouldn't even let me change them).

  27. Whats wrong? by Bob54321 · · Score: 1

    I use the webmail extension to check my hotmail account. The only time I have had problems in the last year was when hotmails interface changed but that was fixed in a day.

    --
    :(){ :|:& };:
    1. Re:Whats wrong? by BRUTICUS · · Score: 1

      I could not get it to work at all. Do you know where to find good instructions for setting it up?

      Is it faster to work with than the actual hotmail website or do you have to wait just as long for everything you do?

  28. Virtual Identity by ccarr.com · · Score: 4, Informative

    Virtual Identity is essential if you, like many of us, maintain more addresses per inbox than can be conveniently managed via Thunderbirds's stock identity manager.

    --
    I don't know half of you half as well as I should like, and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve. BB
    1. Re:Virtual Identity by oyenstikker · · Score: 1

      This is fantastic. I don't think I'll ever set up identities, but the ability to manually type the From: is all have been wanting from Thunderbird/Icedove for a long time.

      --
      The masses are the crack whores of religion.
    2. Re:Virtual Identity by RandyOo · · Score: 1

      Thanks for pointing this out! I've been wishing for a feature like this for a long time, and wondered if there might be an "add-on" that might implement that functionality, and this does the job perfectly!

    3. Re:Virtual Identity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or Folder Account,which does something similar but is more intuitive for me. But then again, I am the author.

  29. Re:KMail by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've used Thunderbird for years... and it quite regularly corrupts my local mail store. I have a bag of tricks for dealing with it. It is always in very minor ways though: Can't delete attachments, can't find an email via search even though it is there. A few messages that sort wrong, etc. The problem with most of these is they are intermittent so I can't reproduce them reliably any more.

  30. Order by is configurable by sidney · · Score: 4, Informative

    You can order by receive date. Click on the icon on the right side of the column header of the preview pane to see all the column headings that are available, and select "Order Received". That adds a column to the display which is a message number that is incremented as each message is received.

    You can sort messages by the contents of any column by clicking on the column header. Click again to sort in the opposite order. So once you have an Order Received column, click on its heading to have messages sorted by the received date instead of the Send Date. The sort order you select is remembered when you exit and restart Thunderbird.

    1. Re:Order by is configurable by Cow+Jones · · Score: 1

      Again with the "Order Received" column...

      IT IS NOT a replacement for sorting by the date parsed from the Received headers. I love Thunderbird, but this issue is really very annoying, for a lot of people. For one thing, the "Order Received" column contains only numbers, which adds noise to the interface and reduces the area that's available for real information. Second, it doesn't always do the right thig! Try importing mail from another MUA: the imported mails get the highest numbers, thus making them the "newest" messages, even if they're from 1997.

      Before I moved to Thunderbird, I used KMail for a while. IIRC KMail had an interesting solution for the different ways to sort dates. The Date column header had 4 states (as opposed to the usual 2): sort by Date header ascending, Date header descending, Received header ascending, and Received header descending. Wish there was something like this in Thunderbird...

      Oh well. Version 2 still can't sort my messages the way I want, but at least now it should be possible to make extensions that add sort columns.

      --

      Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
  31. Oh, to have a mobile client that would sync. by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

    I like tbird - really. I like it more than outlook, for certain.

    However, I wish there were a WM(5/6) client that would sync through activesync. Call WM any names you want (I've used most of the profane ones at some point in the past 5 years) - but it's on practically all poratble devices that aren't named after a small fruit or body part (hmm, well it does have significant marketshare, even if I coulnd't say "most").

    I'm tempted every now and then to want to switch to outlook for the simple reason that it Just Works (TM) with my mobile device. Then I remember how much I hated outlook for email when I used it, and I decide it's better not to have email at all than to use outlook. (I'd switch entirely to mozilla if they had a decent calendar and contact program which would sync with my mobile...but I've resigned myself that that will never happen)

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    1. Re:Oh, to have a mobile client that would sync. by obijywk · · Score: 1

      Try BirdieSync... it's not free, but it works pretty well for me.

      http://www.birdiesync.com/

  32. autorewrap by spoonyfork · · Score: 1

    Bless the heart of the David Perry for autorewrap. I detested having manually rewrap when replying in Thunderbird. This worked great under 1.5 but now no longer works with 2.0. Please update for 2.0 David!

    --
    Speak truth to power.
    1. Re:autorewrap by zoomosis · · Score: 1

      Presumably the current version of autorewrap is disabled in Thunderbird 2.0 because the maxversion setting in the .xpi file is set to only allow it to run in Thunderbird 1.5.x. You can use the "MR Tech's Local Install" extension to force other extensions to essentially ignore that setting. This works in both Thunderbird & Firefox.

      https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/421/
      http://www.mrtech.com/extensions/local_install/

      - ozz

    2. Re:autorewrap by sdowdy · · Score: 1

      Does anybody know of something as elegant and extensible as the OpenWindows "Text Extras Menu" function for the OW Deskset tools for manipulating text in your compose window?  (something i greatly miss from my old 'mailtool' days)

      Through click-drag selection and right-click context menu you could pass the selected text through ANY arbitrary filter you defined in your ~/.text_extras_menu.  E.G.

      "Format"        fmt
      "Hanging rewrap"        par -h1 -w78
      "Insert Brackets"    MENU
          " ( )"    insert_brackets ( )
          " [ ]"    insert_brackets \[ \]
          " { }"    insert_brackets { }
          "`` ''"    insert_brackets \" \"
      "Insert Brackets"    END
      ...

  33. Obligatory end-to-end commentary by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 4, Informative

    Before some random dork starts spouting about how Thunderbird sux0rs because open source doesn't have an end-to-end Outlook/Exchange replacement...

    Thunderbird+Lightning connected to a Citadel server does the job quite nicely. Mail, calendar, contacts, all server-side and end-to-end, 100 percent open source.

    Thanks for asking. :)

    --
    Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    1. Re:Obligatory end-to-end commentary by metamatic · · Score: 1

      How's Citadel's integration with LDAP for Apple Mail and Apple Address Book?

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    2. Re:Obligatory end-to-end commentary by IGnatius+T+Foobar · · Score: 1

      Citadel will populate an LDAP store if you so choose. Then you can point your favorite LDAP client at it.

      --
      Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
    3. Re:Obligatory end-to-end commentary by throx · · Score: 1

      Except the calendar and contacts *aren't* server side. They are client side with replication to/from the server using SyncKolab - an extension that I've found actually deletes more contacts and calendar entries when used across multiple clients than it does distribute them.

      All I want to do is natively store my Calendar and Contact information in an IMAP folder. I don't want to replicate it to the client. I don't want to have to manage merge conflicts. I just want it running directly out of IMAP. Nothing does this, and to get the same functionality you have to use Notes or Exchange.

      --

      Fear: When you see B8 00 4C CD 21 and know what it means

  34. My favorites by chroma · · Score: 1

    I'm using:
    Show InOut: adds a column to the thread pane which shows whether you or someone else wrote the message. This is useful if you want both incoming and outgoing messages in the same folder
    Mnenhy: Among other things, allows you to have different columns shown in the thread pane, depending upon which folder you're viewing.
    GMailUI: Among other things, improved searching of your folders.

    --

    Your design to a real part online: Big Blue Saw
  35. Re:KMail by thsths · · Score: 1

    Thunderbird uses the mbox format, which is not really a suitable way of storing more than 10 emails. IMAP would be a better alternative, if the IMAP support wasn't as pathetic as it is.

  36. TB thread sorting (was Re:Because it sucks?) by cspruck · · Score: 4, Informative

    can Thunderbird even sort threads on the date of the most recent message in a thread? If I understand the above: View > Sort By > choose Date, Descending (or Ascending if you want), and Threaded

    Options usually work if you just try them. :-)
    1. Re:TB thread sorting (was Re:Because it sucks?) by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but send date != recieve date. Thunderbird's "Date" field is the send date.

      What the user wants, in TB parlance, is "Order Recieved", he just couldn't figure it out and so complained that TB couldn't do it.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    2. Re:TB thread sorting (was Re:Because it sucks?) by thsths · · Score: 1

      > If I understand the above: View > Sort By > choose Date, Descending (or Ascending if you want), and Threaded

      Interesting, that actually works. It used to sort threads by the date of the head of the thread only, and now that has been changed to the last message in a thread. I am impressed.

    3. Re:TB thread sorting (was Re:Because it sucks?) by gauauu · · Score: 1

      Is there also a way to make threads collapse properly? My threads only collapse enough to hide one or two emails, but leave the rest open....

    4. Re:TB thread sorting (was Re:Because it sucks?) by aztektum · · Score: 1

      Except that option doesn't work PROPERLY. Check out my Inbox, it shows messages from last week as old mail, messages from two days ago being from last week... I thought there was just something wrong with the copy of the Inbox I'd been takin' with me for the last long while. Nope, friends report the same problem when I asked them to sort by label to check if it was just me.

      It is still a problem with version 2.0. Mozilla puts out some good software, but in the case of both Firefox and Thunderbird it always seems to be about 85-90% "complete". That's just my opinion.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
  37. Enigmail, PGP Encryption of Email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Enigmail is a must, it's PGP encryption of email.
    If you've never been a sysadmin, then you don't know what us sysadmins do all day, WE READ YOUR EMAILS AND LAUGH AT THEM. Sometimes we make the equivalent of blooper reels to send around to each other at Christmas.
    "Ahh, John in accounts is cheating on Wendy his wife with Doris in Marketing. Here's the email where he accidently forwards to the wife instead of the girlfriend".

    The only thing I'd like in Enigmail is automated key exchanges, so that email sent between two Thunderbird users that have Enigmail automatically causes the public keys to be exchanged.

  38. TagZilla by T.E.D. · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The only add-on I use is TagZilla, which adds a randomly selected tagline from a file to every email. I'm so attached to this that I won't upgrade to newer versions of Thunderbird until TagZilla supports them.

    I have people ask me all the time how I get those randomly selected tags on my emails. Of course the answer starts with "First off, you have to be using Thunderbird..." :-)

    1. Re:TagZilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      claws attaches the output of a given command as tags. Beat that tbird.

  39. I'm using... by zoomosis · · Score: 1

    I don't use a lot - just the Auto Copy, Image Zoom and MR Tech Local Install extensions.

    Auto Copy, so I can copy text to the clipboard just by highlighting it (no need to press Ctrl+C).

    Image Zoom, so Thunderbird will reduce the size of images to fit the message view pane. Without it, you have to scroll around a lot for large images.

    MR Tech Local Install so I can force extensions to ignore the maxversion setting in the .xpi file, if necessary. Useful for when you upgrade either Firefox or Thunderbird and your extensions suddenly stop working - you can force them to work. Or at least try to work. I had to use that to get Image Zoom working in Thunderbird 2.0, although I think it's not necessary any more with the most recent version of Image Copy.

    http://autocopy.mozdev.org/
    http://imagezoom.yellowgorilla.net/
    http://www.mrtech.com/extensions/local_install/

    - ozz

  40. What about Morecols? by cwilly · · Score: 1

    Thunderbird doesn't natively have the ability to import vCards mailboxes (Come on Mozilla!), but Morecols allows you to import and expert vCards. It should be on everyone's list, although the developer doesn't list it on Mozilla's Add-ons site (get with it Kaosmos!).

  41. Re:KMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That works. Or you can use MozBackup: http://mozbackup.jasnapaka.com/

  42. thunderbidrn is not a success like fire because by cinnamon+colbert · · Score: 1

    it ain't as good as other mail programs
    Firefox was clealry superior to other browsers; thunderbird is not clearly superior to outlook (the only program i am familiar with) and, imo, is markedly inferior in many ways
    which brings us to the central truth of open source software: most users use software as tool to get something done; when they are free to choose (as in the browser or mail program used at home) they will willing ly select open source if it is better; they will not if if aint better
    If someone wants to have a discussion of why tb ain't so good, great - it might acutally lead to something.

    1. Re:thunderbidrn is not a success like fire because by the_womble · · Score: 1

      thunderbird is not clearly superior to outlook (the only program i am familiar with) and, imo, is markedly inferior in many ways

      You could say the same with regard to Thunderbird vs Kmail. I recently switched back to the latter.
  43. Re:KMail by TristanGrimaux · · Score: 1

    I use Thunderbird with IMAP and it works without problems... it's the best IMAP mailer I've found. I'll take a look at Sylphe, do you know if it has IMAP notification? KMAIL is really slow on IMAP and even when I try it once in a while, it takes a long till I get the new mail notification.

  44. Find/Remove Duplicate Messages! by david.emery · · Score: 1

    A must-have from 1.5 that the last time I checked had not moved to 2.0 (at least not for T-Bird on the Mac.)

  45. Group by 'From' by xot · · Score: 1

    I don't know if its already in Thunderbird but I couldn't find it. I want my Inbox mails to be group by the 'From' field. Is it possible or is there any extension to do it?

    --
    Lord of the Binges.
    1. Re:Group by 'From' by alexgieg · · Score: 1

      Just click que "From" column title. One click set it from A to Z, another from Z to A.

      --
      Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
    2. Re:Group by 'From' by richlv · · Score: 1

      after you've done what the other poster suggested, hit 'g' ;)
      or use menus, i think it is in "view" menu.

      --
      Rich
  46. Weak.... by slayermet420 · · Score: 1

    This article really is pretty fuckin weak. I only downloaded one of the big bad 4 "best" extensions. Seriously, be a little more inventive. Four extensions does not equal "OMGZ best EVAR!!!11111!!!1!" list.

    --
    Geeks strike again 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  47. External Editor by crabbz · · Score: 3, Informative

    No one mentioned the External Editor extension yet? Nice to be able to kick off your favorite editor without cut-n-pasting. Something every mail client should have, but maybe I'm just old fashioned.

  48. Must Haves? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Thunderbird add-ons have gone largely unnoticed... For Thunderbird to be worthy of having "must have" extensions, Thunderbird itself should be a "must have". It's not. There's still too many little annoyances.
  49. need Enigmail, but also user-friendly Key Servers by KWTm · · Score: 1

    Regarding popular use of Enigmail and GPG, one thing I've come to realize is that there needs to be an easy-to-access public key infrastructure. By this, I mean not just the existence of GPG key servers, which already exist, but an easy and user-friendly way to get anyone's key.

    For example, the other day I was composing an email message, and thought, "I should encrypt this." But I didn't have the recipient's public key. (I think the recipient was a software developer of a program I had just downloaded.) I told my software, Kgpg, to get the key, but it couldn't find it on the default keyserver. So I went to another keyserver, but it timed out, and yet another keyserver didn't have the key. So then I Googled for it, and finally found the guy's public key.

    I thought about how encryption worked for web sites and services like Hushmail. When I go to the bank's website, I don't need to Google for my bank's "public key" --the SSL certificate is already on file at the certificate authority, Verisign or whatever it is. You just say, "I want the Royal Bank website" (or whatever bank it is) and your browser already comes built-in with the ability to go to the right place to get the right key. When people sign onto Hushmail, Hushmail will keep track of the OpenPGP public keys.

    In the same way, there needs to be, not just one or more keyservers, but a publicly recognized need for one central key repository or network of cross-mirrorring key repositories, that programs can just go to. When I set up Kgpg (or Enigmail or whatever), I shouldn't have to choose which keyserver to go to; it should come with a default (which it does) that works (which it doesn't). Note that this is not the fault of any one program, but the fact that no one keyserver has achieved critical mass, so that everyone will put his/her key on that one server and expect other people to find it.

    I used to think that this one server would be the MIT keyserver, at pgp.mit.edu. But in the recent years, I've found that most keys you can't find on there. The keyserver has been timing out, and if this has been the norm, then I can see why people don't want to put their keys on there. You can put your key on more than one server, but then which "more than one" server do you choose? Kgpg is set up to query pgp.dtype.org and wwwkeys.us.pgp.net; is that what the rest of you have been using as well?

    Of course, the whole point of having something like GPG is that there is no one central authority to turn evil and bring down the entire infrastructure, and to that end I love having the trust ratings on the GPG keys. But there needs to be more access to GPG keys so that some flag can come up on people's email software: "Encryption available for this recipient --want to use it?" As it is, I would have to somehow find out that the recipient has heard of GPG, say, "Hey, you know about GPG? Do you use it? I do! What's your public key," etc. etc.

    Enigmail is a great boon for promoting GPG, but we need more infrastructure before we can get it to the same popularity as, say, MySpace or even just Slashdot.

    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]
  50. still needs better. by svallarian · · Score: 1

    I've found that this is a pain-in-the ass when migrating from 1.0 to 2.0. It seems like they changed the folder structure now, so it's no longer "New TB folder" = "New folder on disk".
    (either that or I don't know what I'm doing with 2.0)

    It still kills me that it can import from outlook / mozilla suite, but it can't do something simple like import from an older version or a flat mbox file.

    Steven V>

    --
    I patented screwing your mom. But it got revoked for "prior art."
  51. Re:KMail by Billhead · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Its jigawatt, not gigawatt!

  52. Forget the extensions, improve the app! by MidnightBrewer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I recently downloaded Thunderbird 2.0 and was surprised to see that it was basically the same application as before, except that the icons were slightly prettier and I could no longer find the junk mail controls. Address book handling is still obsolete, as well as editing entries (editing a person's name is awkward, as typing a first and last name may actually require you to edit *three* fields - go figure.) One particular annoyance is that you can only store two emails for each contact. Many of my close friends have work, home, and cell phone, so this is a bit of an annoyance for me. Rule editing is also crufty; you cannot move rules across mail accounts, and there is no way to base a new rule off of an old one - also, basing a rule off of a message is only useful if it is set to filter based on that particular sender's address. Threading is over-complicated, split across two sub-menus, and rife with unnecessary options that usually end up with new users unintentionally hiding their emails.

    I have always had a soft spot for the children of Netscape, but Thunderbird hasn't seen a serious reworking since it was split off from the original program. Let me know when the developers release a serious update, and I'll take another look. Until then, I will continue to use the PortableApp version of Thunderbird to check my email at work; it's not that it doesn't work, it's just that it lacks elegance.

    --
    "Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
    1. Re:Forget the extensions, improve the app! by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      "(editing a person's name is awkward, as typing a first and last name may actually require you to edit *three* fields - go figure.)"

      I think this may be about maintaining horizontal compatability with other address books -- some have two or three fields for the name, while others just have a single field. So, to cover all the bases, Thunderbird does does all the options.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
  53. I miss Entourage for Mac 9 by ElvisGump · · Score: 1

    Well I don't exactly miss it because I still have it on my old iMac, but it has all sorts of stuff I liked like customizable email alerts so I could assign sounds to each email recipients much like custom ringtones. The filtering had so many wonderful options and I really liked the signature randomizer feature where I kept all those bon mots I gleamed from /.

    I've gone to Firefox/Thunderbird on my PC laptop which I use more often but I miss all those old features when I'm away from my iMac. It sits idling with Entourage open and the sound on so I still get all the alerts, but I await such handy features in Thunderbird.

    I think they'll come though. I love Firefox more than any browser I've ever seen and figure they'll get there.

  54. Does this extension exist? by ibsteveog · · Score: 1

    I've been looking for an extension to sort mail into folders based on a header field. Anyone heard of such a thing?

  55. ROT-13 by afidel · · Score: 1

    I uses Leetkey with Thunderbird for news reading in forums that use ROT13 frequently.

    --
    There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
  56. Interface with Exchange server by xerxesnine · · Score: 1

    It appears there is no way for Thunderbird to interface with an Exchange server which DOES NOT have IMAP enabled. All the docs about Thunderbird+Exchange assume that IMAP is enabled, which is not the case for my company's server (the IT guys refused to enable it).

    Is there really no Thunderbird extension for this? I understand the Exchange protocol is proprietary and thus needs to be reverse-engineered, but Evolution has to a large extent succeeded in doing this. Wouldn't it be possible to make a Thunderbird extension using the Evolution code as a reference? Or maybe the demand just isn't there, as most people just use Outlook or, if they don't, their Exchange server has IMAP enabled. Which means I'm screwed.

    1. Re:Interface with Exchange server by SpammersAreScum · · Score: 1

      Consider this another plea for that capability. My employer has turned off the POP3 server on its Exchange, forcing everyone to use Outlook. They did this in the name of security. (No, really; stop laughing.)

  57. Re:need Enigmail, but also user-friendly Key Serve by cortana · · Score: 1

    IMO it is the top-down, x.500-inspired PKI that needs to change to become more like PGP's system. The current system is fairly useless at the moment, but it is so, so profitable for the lucky few companies who are blessed by having their CA certificates included by operating system and application vendors.

  58. Mod parent up! by ssstraub · · Score: 1

    This *should* be a good thing, if done right.

  59. "just show me my damn mail" extension by amaupin · · Score: 1

    I ask that someone make an extension called "Just Show Me My Damn Mail" that works like View -> Message Source

    Because I still don't know how to turn off all the stupid formatting that Thunderbird insists on. For example, changing

    > quoted text
    > quoted text

    to

    | quoted text
    | quoted text

    (blue bars)

    and *strong* to *strong* ...and so on.

    One might expect that the first, basic function of a mail program is to display the mail...

    1. Re:"just show me my damn mail" extension by clang_jangle · · Score: 1

      It's called mutt.
      I understand why non-geeks use tbird, kmail, etc, but why do so many geeks use buggy, unreliable, memory hogging MUAs anyway?
      I just don't see the "convenience" or "ease of use" in losing email forever, waiting more than 2 or 3 minutes for email to load, tryng to follow fscked up threads, and so forth.
      Mutt still rules, in fact if you invest a few days learning it you'll wonder how you survived the nightmare that is every GUI MUA out there.

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    2. Re:"just show me my damn mail" extension by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      reference to get you started (yep, it takes some work on your userContent.css):
      http://seamonkey.ilias.ca/mailn ewsfaq/StructSymbols

      e.g.
      /* change Mozilla's * bolding to something else */
      b.moz-txt-star { font-style: bold;  color: white;  background: blue; }

      /* This will hide the original '*' characters */
      span.moz-txt-tag { display: none !important; }

  60. Quote Colors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doesn't anyone else use Quote Colors? You know, to fix the broken quote system? If it weren't for that extension, I'd still be using Thunderbird 1.0.8.

  61. Purge Button by drew · · Score: 1

    Why Thunderbird still doesn't have a Purge/Expunge/Compact button by default (at least available, if not already on the toolbar) is a mystery to me. Do they just not care about IMAP users? It's rather annoying to have to hunt down an extension to get that one toolbar button every time i upgrade or install Thunderbird on a new computer.

    --
    If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    1. Re:Purge Button by rawdot · · Score: 1

      Help->Mozilla Thunderbird Help -> http://kb.mozillazine.org/Compacting_folders.

      First paragraph:

      To compact all folders in an account, click the account on the left, and then click "File -> Compact Folders". Compacting an account may take from a few seconds to 20 minutes or more, depending on how much mail you have and how recently you last compacted the folders. If you have trouble doing this and the process stalls, try compacting one folder at a time by right-clicking on the folder and choosing "Compact This Folder".

      Is this too deep...?

      Cheers,
      Richard

    2. Re:Purge Button by cecil_turtle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Are you serious? Thunderbird has better IMAP support than any other client I've used (Outlook / Outlook Express / Evolution / Opera / Sylpheed / Windows Mail / etc.). Set it up to move deleted items to your trash IMAP folder and have it clear the trash folder on exit. Deleted messages get out of your way and there's no extra step.

      I don't understand why every other IMAP client just strikes out "deleted" messages - why would you want messages you DELETED to hang around in your way until you "purge" or "expunge" it?

    3. Re:Purge Button by TristanGrimaux · · Score: 1

      I think the same: Thunderbird is the best mailer for IMAP. The best thing is the IMAP notification which lets you know pretty fast when a message has arrived the IMAP server.

      Thunderbird marks messages for deletion instead of actually deleting them, or moving them to trash. Thunderbird should have a setting to delete immediately or the other mailers should have a way to hide messages marked for deletion.

      It's annoying ONLY if you have to use another mailer.

    4. Re:Purge Button by drew · · Score: 1

      Yes, I know it's in the menu. The point is that I don't want to have to go through the menu to use a common function.

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
    5. Re:Purge Button by drew · · Score: 1

      Yes I'm serious. Overall I think that Thunderbird is great, I just wish that I didn't have to dig up an extension every time I upgrade to add one commonly used button to the toolbar. Perhaps I am in the minority, but I can't stand the "Move to trash folder" approach, and very much prefer to mark messages to be deleted before expunging them.

      As for why most IMAP clients implement it that way, that's the way the IMAP protocol was designed. Marking a message for deletion is one command with very little overhead. "Moving deleted items to the trash" actually requires you to copy the message to a new folder, mark the message for deletion, and then expunge after each deletion. (I think- It's been a while since I poked around with the mail protocols at a low level.)

      --
      If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
  62. filters; virtual search folders by Noksagt · · Score: 1

    Thunderbird ships with "message filters," which do exactly this. (There are various extensions which improve filtering if this doesn't seem to be enough.)

    It also has virtual search folders, which make it easy to find a message based on criteria (including header content)

    1. Re:filters; virtual search folders by ibsteveog · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately filters cannot do what I want - I have to explicitly create a filter ahead of time, and given that doing it manually would result in over 100+ filters, I'd prefer an extension to automatically filter the messages. Virtual search folders don't give me the benefit of sorting *out* all the messages with the header field I'm filtering on.

      Basically, I want an extension to look at a header field and put it in a folder of the same name. Which extensions improve filtering to allow this?

  63. Rotating .sig by samael · · Score: 1

    Is there a thunderbird extension for rotating .sigs? It's one of the few things I miss from my old school email days...

  64. LDAP Support by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thunderbird's LDAP support sucks.
    What could make it suck less?
    - Let me browse my complete LDAP addressbook. Currently you can only search for contacts.
    - Let me add entries. Yes, it doesn't add entries to ldap addressbooks.

  65. Military Grade (Was:A True Must Have) by SJS · · Score: 1

    Your friends probably dont[sic] need military grade public key cryptography along with a confusing install.
    "Military grade cryptography" is one of those security snake-oil warning phrases. There ain't no such thing, and the use of that phrase is an indicator that you're probably being fed a line of BS.

    --
    Pick One: http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~stremler/sigs/sigs.html (Note - disable Javascript first!)
    1. Re:Military Grade (Was:A True Must Have) by Threni · · Score: 0

      > Military grade cryptography" is one of those security snake-oil warning phrases.

      The military (and other branches of government) use one time pads all the time for serious stuff, and it's uncrackable (if properly used).

    2. Re:Military Grade (Was:A True Must Have) by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      BS? No. Hyperbole? Yes. My point is that all these add-ons are not needed and are huge barriers to entry for people who want everyday email encryption. A simple s/mime cert is easy to get and very easy to use with thunderbird. s/mime is supported by many mail clients. The assumption that you need to walk down the gpg + enigmail path just for encrypted email is not correct and is overkill.

    3. Re:Military Grade (Was:A True Must Have) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      aes?
      What do you mean there aint no such thing?

    4. Re:Military Grade (Was:A True Must Have) by digitalchinky · · Score: 1

      The military most commonly use encryption keys delivered by safe hand, as do many other government branches. The few places that OTP's have any big advantage are rare and generally only applicable to agencies that deal in human intelligence gathering (HUMINT)

  66. Excellent email client? oh really? by Brad_sk · · Score: 0

    > praise despite being an excellent email client
    Since when? I have been using Thunderbird since last 3 yrs and its just an average (or below) email client. Even though inline spell checker was introduced in Thunderbird 1.5, its just OK and definitely not comparable to Outlooks's spelling and grammar check. Also lot of times it just seems to download an email forever.

    Cant forget the ugly bug where in it says "The content of this mail can be downloaded on demand"...From where? Theres no 'download now' button'.

    Just because Firefox is a great product and Thunderbird is from same guys as Firefox, doesn't mean Thunderbird is great too. Its definitely NOT!

  67. gmail signing and encryption by arabagast · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://freenigma.com/ - the freenigma plugin for firefox offers encryption and signing of mail with gmail, I think they are planning support for yahoo mail also.

    --
    Doolittle : ...What is your one purpose in life?
    Bomb no.20 : To explode of course.
    1. Re:gmail signing and encryption by Qoroite · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm reading this wrong but, basically I allow http://freenigma.com/ to hold my Private Key; so that it can encrypt/decrypt my webmail via their extension?.

      Call me paranoid but; no thanks ^_^.

  68. Other good extensions by Buckaduck · · Score: 2, Informative
    AutoCorrect not only allows you to fix common spelling errors automatically (using an autocorrect list that works similar to MS Office). You can also use it to define "abbreviations" for long bits of text you don't want to type repeatedly: addresses, instructions, HTML formatting characters, etc.

    Slideshow is extremely useful for people who get a lot of pictures via email, and just want to look at them quickly.

  69. Re:KMail by guanxi · · Score: 1

    it quite regularly corrupts my local mail store

    In fairness, I have used and supported Thunderbird and Seamonkey at many businesses for years, and I've never seen the actual data get corrupted. It uses good old mbox format for the mail store, which is just a simple text file.

    I have seen the indexes, stored in separate files, become corrupted far too often, though they can easily be rebuilt.

  70. Re:KMail by Max+von+H. · · Score: 3, Informative

    Just use MozBackup to backup and restore. Works with Firefox, Thunderbird, SeaMonkey, Mozilla Suite and Netscape.

    It allows you to backup and restore bookmarks, mail, contacts, history, extensions, cache etc.

    Been using it for ages, it's one of the handiest tools I've got.

    Cheers!

    --
    -- It's always darker before it goes pitch black.
  71. Since when by blackjackshellac · · Score: 0, Troll

    Since when did one user's opinion become a must have collection of addons for thunderbird? Oh, I know, since Taco decided to post this ridiculous review of TB extensions, windoze centric, and the guy doesn't think that enigmail is useful for him which speaks volumes, in plaintext, of course.

    --
    Salut,

    Jacques

  72. Must have? by baomike · · Score: 1

    I have yet to find a reason to have thunderbird.

    Happy opera fan.

    1. Re:Must have? by Brad_sk · · Score: 0

      What..? Opera is a browser whereas Thunderbird is a mail client... But even then, Thunderbird is not that good to switch from your current mail client whichever it is. Its too buggy and limited in features.

  73. Re:KMail by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

    Sylpheed is nice if you don't need/want certain features. I wanted to be able to see HTML e-mail (and use dillo a lot anyway) and spellcheck so I switched to claws. I wish they'd kept an option for the separate folder window though.

    But either of them is faster than Thunderbird (I formerly used Thunderbird) and IMHO bogofilter works just a touch better than Thunderbird's built in filtering.

  74. Re:need Enigmail, but also user-friendly Key Serve by lymond01 · · Score: 1

    MS Passport was similar. A centralized authentication area shared amongst not just Microsoft users but affiliates as well. Rather than have a single, central keyserver so you can form a committee to determine who's the least unethical company to run it, why not have the ISPs hold their own keyservers?

    keys.gmail.com
    keys.netscape.net
    keys.ucla.edu
    etc etc

    That way, it's obvious where to look and you can do an ldap search using your cool built-in LDAP functionality in Thunderbird to look up their public keys, which can be stored in LDAP.

  75. Re:KMail by jimstapleton · · Score: 1

    All I know is that once a week I got a complaint of a corrupted mail box. I could only fix it by going in, and deleting a certain message. It varied which message, but I would make a back up, and delete them one at a time until I found the right one, copy the backup to the original, and then go in and delete the correct mail.

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  76. What makes these recommendations noteworthy? by jopet · · Score: 1

    Everyone is entitled to have their own favorite extensions but there is nothing really in the cited article that makes Sal Cangeloso's selection special in any way. Personally I find Enigmail and Spamato4Thunderbird essential for my own personal use, but I would not expect this to be more of a universally valid recommendation than anyone else's.

  77. IMAP quota checker by GaryOlson · · Score: 1
    Absolutely indispensible tool to keep mail from bouncing to a full IMAP mailbox. Especially if you have mulitple IMAP boxen.

    Display Quota

    --
    Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
  78. Reply-to-list by cycoj · · Score: 1

    The only one extension I really use is reply-to-list. Unfortunatly it needs a patch to thunderbird, which fortunatly is in Debian. This was so far the main reason why I was always trying different mail programs. The bugzilla entry is there since the mozilla suite days IIRC, and it still hasn't been addressed. Reading the discussion there it also seems to me like the mozilla developers sometimes put _way_ too much emphasis on "making it simple for noobs" and totally forget that it was the power users who are the ones sticking with them from the beginning. The patch making the reply to list possible has been around for quite a while, so the argument: "if you want functunality code it yourself" does not fly either.

  79. Re:KMail by TristanGrimaux · · Score: 1

    I have installed Sylpheed and it doesn't have anything like IMAP notification... and it's pretty ugly! Thunderbird is the best mailer for IMAP, and if you don't agree, show me the app and I will install it and try it.

  80. Re:KMail by TristanGrimaux · · Score: 1

    Are you using it with IMAP!???

  81. Re:need Enigmail, but also user-friendly Key Serve by TecKnow · · Score: 1

    You just say, "I want the Royal Bank website" (or whatever bank it is) and your browser already comes built-in with the ability to go to the right place to get the right key. Under the current system your browser doesn't contact the certification authority to get a site's public key, the site provides it to your browser at the time of the transaction. The certificate provided by the site is signed by a CA. If the CA's cert is in the browser's trusted roots list, and the provided cert is being used in a way that matches the constraint it describes, the provided cert is accepted. Certification authorities aren't (generally) key repositories, the user's only contact with a CA is to download and install the CA's root cert. The problem you describe is real, but the current infrastructure doesn't address it at all.
  82. That problem may be caused by the Winifred factor. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 0, Troll

    This problem sounds like it is caused by the Winifred factor. Mozilla Foundation is headed by someone who doesn't know or care about technical issues. There simply is very little discipline within the organization; bugs that matter a lot to users don't get fixed. See Firefox development sometimes resembles playing.

    Many problems with Mozilla products seem caused by some kind of overuse of OS resources. I haven't been able to determine more than that. Bugs in Thunderbird and Firefox can actually cause Microsoft Windows to be unstable. (In Linux, you can just kill the Mozilla process and continue using the OS.)

    In 5 or 6 years of discussing this, Mozilla developers have shown no interest in fixing it. Instead, they give at least 20 excuses. (See the list.)

    Weirdly, Thunderbird and Firefox bugs actually interact, sometimes.

  83. Re:That problem may be caused by the Winifred fact by jimstapleton · · Score: 1

    Actually, you can kill Firefox in windows too... But you have to kill the process not the task sometimes (sadly, yes, there's a difference).

    I've had to do it several times, especially when running it with java applets.

    --
    34486853790
    Connection too slow for X forwarding? Try "ssh -CX user@host"
  84. TB 2.0 bug by smiffy1976 · · Score: 1

    I'll be sticking with TB 1.5 until a bug that has been present in all 2.x versions so far is fixed. It is very annoying and applies to IMAP (maybe POP3 too) accounts. It seems like the mail notifier is broken because whenever a new message arrives, any previously unread messages get marked as read. Damn annoying!

  85. Hard to find them! by slapout · · Score: 1

    Last time I went looking for some Thunderbird extensions, they were very hard to find. They were buried in with all the other Firefox extensions.

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad