Slashdot Mirror


Replacement For Mozilla Thunderbird?

maxcelcat writes: I've used Thunderbird for about a decade, and Netscape Mail before that (I have an email from 1998 from Marc Andreessen, welcoming me to Netscape Email, telling me different fonts can add impact to my emails). Thunderbird has served me well, but it's getting long in the tooth. Given the lack of development and the possibility that it's going End of Life, what should I use instead? I have multiple email accounts and an archive of sixteen years of email. I could get a copy of Outlook, but I don't like it.

Things I like about Thunderbird: Supports multiple email accounts; simple interface; storage structure is not one monolithic file; plain text email editor; filtering. Things I don't like: HTML email editor; folders are hard to change and re-arrange.

20 of 388 comments (clear)

  1. Replacement?? by Kludge · · Score: 5, Funny

    I was just thinking of switching to Thunderbird from pine.

    1. Re:Replacement?? by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The last time I used pine was 20 years ago. Those were the days. A 56K dial-up account on a UNIX server to browse the Internet in a text-based web browser called Lynx. The Internet was blazingly fast back then. No need to wait for Flash content, every social media icon, and the kitchen sink to load.

    2. Re:Replacement?? by al0ha · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I still use Mutt - never been a reason to change, though it can be kind of annoying these days since many mail clients no longer adhere to the RFC and only send HTML; of course then it also makes it easy to identify the spammer/marketer emails and trash them with a quick macro. :P

      Mutt rules!

      --
      Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
  2. End of life? by maeka · · Score: 4, Insightful

    1 - What does "end of life" mean in this context?

    Nothing.

    It is a mature (pretty) full-featured email client with a plugin architecture which is good enough.

    2 - Lack of development.

    See point #1

    1. Re:End of life? by erapert · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And no doubt someone will fork it if/when Mozilla cuts it loose.
      But for now why bother when it's still supported and works pretty well?
      Very few people are forking the Linux kernel. Why? Because all the momentum, support, community, and features are already present under the current kernel project so why bother?

      Don't prematurely optimize.
      Don't fix what isn't broken.
      Don't fork what isn't defunct.

  3. An ever changing system is an unstable system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An ever changing system is an unstable system

    The fact they do not require frequent updates, is maybe a good thing. Loook at Firefox. look at the bloat that has become.

    SMTP /POP/ IMAP is just that, it has been defined years ago.

    Any admin will tell you, a stable system does not need to be baby sitted or changed often. A stable system is just that. Stable, that includes the code.

    1. Re:An ever changing system is an unstable system by JMJimmy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The problem isn't the client itself, it's the fact that it needs a built in browser for HTML emails, which requires security updates.

  4. Claws Mail by LichtSpektren · · Score: 5, Informative

    Claws Mail is a good option. It might not have all the features that Thunderbird does, but the important things are that it's FLOSS, supports encryption, and "just works".

    Alternatively, just use webmail. These are the best options: https://www.privacytools.io/#e...

    1. Re:Claws Mail by fnj · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Second the recommendation for Claws Mail. If I leave my Thunderbird open and exercise it for several days it grows to 6 GB RAM use and beyond. There does not appear to be any way to set an upper bound. That is unacceptable, inexcusable, and an incompetent and moronic design. Watch your PC get driven into thrashing the page file and I guarantee you will know what rage is. For a while I thought I could run with no swap (I have 16 GB RAM), but behavior is even more pathological and irrecoverable when you run into the memory wall with no paging.

      I have seen Claws Mail grow to around 0.4 GB; no more - even if left open and exercised INDEFINITELY.

      There are some huge, commanding wins for Claws Mail over and above the RAM win clincher:
      1) Threaded view, easily/quickly toggled on/off.
      2) View shows headers in line; I happen to prefer that to a second scrolling pane.
      3) I found the accounts setup to be more rational and well organized than it is in TB. I have a LOT of accounts set up.

      There are a few negatives with Claws Mail:
      1) No HTML support beyond a hokey plugin. Idiots do send me HTML mail. You can't stop them; I've tried.
      2) No Unified Inbox.
      3) Seems really slow to sync hotmail and gmail.
      4) I found the PGP plugin harder to set up than Enigmail in TB.
      5) The accounts setup does not have the cool auto-detect you get in TB. Even if you fine tune the setup, the auto-detect is great for getting you going.

  5. Lack of development? by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't see any lack of development in Thunderbird (38.4 came out not that long ago), and I don't see any indication of it going EOL either. There isn't a lot of core development in the email part because as an email client it's pretty much feature-complete and open-source projects rarely make changes to stuff that's working well. Much of the work's been going on in extensions, and IMO that's a good thing because it makes it easier to concentrate on one piece of functionality at a time and if there's a problem with an extension you can disable it until it's fixed without losing all of TB at the same time.

    I see no reason to stop using it right now. I'm not going to upset the client end of my email unless and until TB stops receiving security updates and bugfixes in a timely manner or someone comes up with a replacement for SMTP/IMAP that I find compelling and that TB won't be updated to support.

    1. Re:Lack of development? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      open-source projects rarely make changes to stuff that's working well

      Please tell that to the Firefox development team.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  6. FossaMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    FossaMail is a Thunderbird fork from the creator of the Pale Moon web browser (Though you don't have to use the one to use the other). The devs have confirmed that they are a true fork that is independently developing each release and will continue on as it has been with future security, stability, and useability improvements no matter what happens to Thunderbird.

    A Thunderbird user would likely find the interface and features very familiar, and I think there is an included migration tool to import settings and such from Thunderbird.

    http://www.fossamail.org/

  7. Thunderbird is not going EOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mozilla is just going to stop supporting it. From the original announcement, basically Thunderbird has its own development group that has diverged from the Firefox clan enough that it doesn't make sense for Mozilla to keep adapting to it. Thunderbird development won't stop, and works fine. No need to switch.

  8. Good changes are still useful and wanted! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem with Firefox isn't that there's change.

    The problem with Firefox is that the changes are fucking idiotic. We aren't talking about one or two bad ones now and then. Far too many of the changes to Firefox are dumb, dumb, dumb!

    Those are the kinds of changes that are unwanted, because they cause problems for users.

    But users still want positive change.

    They want bug fixes. They want performance improvements. They want support for new features and functionality that they desire.

    This is another area where Firefox devs fuck up. They rarely make changes that the Firefox users actually want!

    Firefox's approach to change is upside down. Firefox typically includes lots of unwanted changes, with very few wanted changes. That's what drives users away, sending Firefox's share of the market from the mid-30% range down to single-digits.

    It should be the other way around. Firefox should include lots of wanted changes, and few to no unwanted changes. That would drive Firefox's share of the market up, as existing users would not leave, and new users would use it to get access to the new changes that they want to use.

    1. Re:Good changes are still useful and wanted! by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 4, Informative

      A project can only be considered "open source" if anyone can push changes to its code repo without any oversight at all.

      What the heck are you talking about? You want the Wikipedia version of "open source," the source that anyone can edit? No thanks -- that's asking for trouble. I'll be stuck getting "patches" by random vandals.

      The correct term in that case is "source-available", not "open source".

      Most of what are typically called "open source" software projects aren't open at all.

      No, the well-established definition of "open source" (as even Wikipedia can tell you) is that the source or design for something is publicly available and can be edited/modified freely by end users.

      It simply means the source is "open" (i.e., available to see and edit), as opposed to "closed" (i.e., unavailable and buried in a proprietary binary or something).

      There is typically a small group of maintainers who control all changes, even if anyone can see the source and submit patches.

      And I'm generally grateful for that. Those maintainers serve to check the changes and ensure they might actually improve the product, rather than being detrimental to it.

      I, and most others, can't commit directly to the Thunderbird source repo

      You got a problem with that? You don't think the direction of the project is going in the right way? That's fine -- FORK. That's what open source allows.

      I'll be the first one to admit that there are plenty of projects where I've heard of overbearing or wacko maintainers who have weird ideas about what the project should or shouldn't do. Those people can be a problem, and they can hold things back.

      But if that's so much of a problem as to significantly degrade the quality, then you shouldn't be the only one complaining -- so team up and fork. If people like what you're doing better, they'll go with you.

      Maintainers with too much power can definitely be a problem. And, from what I hear, there can be a lot of dysfunction in the open-source community at times. Maybe widening the pool of active participants and decentralizing power could be useful in many projects. But I *really* don't think the solution is to allow *anyone* to make changes without *any* oversight. That sounds like a recipe for disaster.

  9. Webmail != replacement by fluffernutter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why do people constantly suggest a web console as a replacement to a native application? When you use gmail, the browser gets in the way, there is lag, you have to do things in an HTMLy way.... Web services are far more clumsy, and if I'm deaiing with hundreds of emails it's really nice to not have all those obstacles. Owning your emails is nice too.... my wife lost the last emails that her father sent to her because Microsoft decided she wasn't using her account enough.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  10. Re:gmail by jandrese · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Getting PGP encryption working on a gmail account is a nightmare.

    --

    I read the internet for the articles.
  11. Re:gmail by omnichad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Keep an IMAP client synced. There, now you have local backup.

  12. Answer the goddamn question by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Man, I freaking hate these "Ask Slashdot" questions that people give wonderfully unhelpful answers like, "use webmail", "use the built-in Microsoft client", and "no development, no problem!"

    I have been trying to get rid of Thunderbird for a while now. Every time, instead of saying, "Oh, you should try this client", they come up with brilliant responses like the above. Webmail, seriously? The built-in MS client, really? Why do you need to change, really? Thunderbird is slow as a dog on Windows 8. Yeah, seeing as it's 2015, a text email client isn't an option. All of you who are still on text Linux - I salute you. Now utilize your brain the size of a planet to tell me what the graphical, performance-based, non-bloat email client of today is. Like the man asked.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  13. End of life? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Thunderbird isn't approaching end of life. If anything, it is about to open up. The TB developers were frustrated by having to maintain compatibility with Firefox technologies that don't really apply to TB. They, the developers, were the ones who suggested Mozilla let them go to another entity. This isn't about finding a replacement for a dieing Thunderbird, but for Thunderbird being able to chart its own direction free from Firefox influence.

    This is a good thing, a very good thing!