4 ms·

I still miss pine, tbh (If this reference is too old: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_(email_client) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_(email_client) )

Splines 8y ago
You can use the basic html version of gmail: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/h/1pq68r75kzvdr/?v%3Dlui https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/h/1pq68r75kzvdr/?v%3Dlui I use this - it's way more responsive and faster than the current gmail UI. My only gripe with the basic html version is that the back button is broken when you're trying to go back to search results after clicking on an email (you need to click on "Go back to search results").
ars 8y ago
> I still miss pine, tbh So use it then. alpine (the successor to pine) is my daily email client. I currently have 161,210 messages in my inbox, it handles it just fine. It's still supported, and has new features like UTF-8 support and viewing HTML emails (without the images). It's better than any other email program I've used with one exception: No images in HTML email (although you can view an HTML email in your browser, the attachments don't come along).
aidenn0 8y ago
offlineimap and mutt work just fine for me...
- jacobsenscott 8y ago
  It might work well for you, but are you sure your recipients aren't seeing emails that look like this? Sending plain text emails that look good when nearly every email client is mostly only tested with html emails is actually very difficult, and sometimes simply impossible. Format=Flowed doesn't always fix this. Plain text emails are defacto deprecated just because a lot very popular email clients don't handle them well. One major problem with plain text emails is the standard was created when nearly everyone had a screen wide enough to display at least 78 characters per line (or whatever it was). Today people spend most of their time on screens much narrower than that. FF is a half assed solution to that problem html was designed to work on a much wider variety of screen sizes so it works much better for email. I say this as an offlineimap/mu4e user who knows some of my recipients are seeing bad formatting and doesn't really care.
  - aidenn0 8y ago
    > I say this as an offlineimap/mu4e user who knows some of my recipients are seeing bad formatting and doesn't really care. This basically describes me (though substitute "bower" for "mu4e"). [edit] It occurs to me that it would be relatively simple to write a filter that converts text e-mails to a multipart with an html e-mail having the same text. Still no solution to replying to html e-mails inline, but the intersection of (Doesn't topost) and (uses html e-mail preferrentially to text e-mail) is relatively small.

Splines 8y ago

You can use the basic html version of gmail: https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/h/1pq68r75kzvdr/?v%3Dlui https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/h/1pq68r75kzvdr/?v%3Dlui I use this - it's way more responsive and faster than the current gmail UI. My only gripe with the basic html version is that the back button is broken when you're trying to go back to search results after clicking on an email (you need to click on "Go back to search results").

ars 8y ago

> I still miss pine, tbh So use it then. alpine (the successor to pine) is my daily email client. I currently have 161,210 messages in my inbox, it handles it just fine. It's still supported, and has new features like UTF-8 support and viewing HTML emails (without the images). It's better than any other email program I've used with one exception: No images in HTML email (although you can view an HTML email in your browser, the attachments don't come along).

aidenn0 8y ago

offlineimap and mutt work just fine for me...

jacobsenscott 8y ago
It might work well for you, but are you sure your recipients aren't seeing emails that look like this? Sending plain text emails that look good when nearly every email client is mostly only tested with html emails is actually very difficult, and sometimes simply impossible. Format=Flowed doesn't always fix this. Plain text emails are defacto deprecated just because a lot very popular email clients don't handle them well. One major problem with plain text emails is the standard was created when nearly everyone had a screen wide enough to display at least 78 characters per line (or whatever it was). Today people spend most of their time on screens much narrower than that. FF is a half assed solution to that problem html was designed to work on a much wider variety of screen sizes so it works much better for email. I say this as an offlineimap/mu4e user who knows some of my recipients are seeing bad formatting and doesn't really care.
- aidenn0 8y ago
  > I say this as an offlineimap/mu4e user who knows some of my recipients are seeing bad formatting and doesn't really care. This basically describes me (though substitute "bower" for "mu4e"). [edit] It occurs to me that it would be relatively simple to write a filter that converts text e-mails to a multipart with an html e-mail having the same text. Still no solution to replying to html e-mails inline, but the intersection of (Doesn't topost) and (uses html e-mail preferrentially to text e-mail) is relatively small.