Claws or Sylpheed?

Responding to Mikhail Zotov:

> On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 22:17:18 GMT
> Mike Jones <Not.DeleteThis@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>
>
>> Currently using Claws-mail simply because it was on the Zenwalk install
>> I was playing about with, and Sylpheed seemed to have become bogged
>> down in the GTK1, GTK2, or FLTK merry-go-round.
> ...
>> Anybody got any "Ooh mate! Ya don't wanna do that!" stories or just
>> grapevine comments regarding Sylpheed versus Claws for general domestic
>> purposes?
>
> When I last used Sylpheed, it was keeping passwords in plain text.

Ooh! Thats a project killer! :(Needs investigating before using 2.5.0!


> Claws-mail is able to encrypt them. Besides this, Claws has a number of
> useful plugins. On the other hand, Claws-mail seems to start slower and
> slower with any new release.
>

I've noticed that the default installation of Claws is quite ambitious in
what it is set up to do. Compiling with some of the bells and whistles
disabled may very well regain the speed there, and avoid having to
install too many extras just to get it to compile. (I'm a fan of the "one
app per job and do it well" school of thought.)



--
*===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/
*===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
*===( http://www.zenwalk.org/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 2008-12-11, Mike Jones <Not RemoveThis @Arizona.Bay> wrote:
> Anybody got any "Ooh mate! Ya don't wanna do that!" stories or just
> grapevine comments regarding Sylpheed versus Claws for general domestic
> purposes?

It's been a long time since I used Sylpheed. Back then, Claws was the
alpha development branch of Sylpheed, but they've since parted ways
somehow. I vastly prefer Claws Mail to any other GUI e-mail client I've
ever used. I find it to be lightweight and fast (once you configure it
properly at least) and much more powerful than anything else available.

- --
It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise,
Than for a man to hear the song of fools.
Ecclesiastes 7:5
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAklCtToACgkQkT+yo0QBUBsNlACfdqkgYHF0NZTt/GOr1J5MYCRO
DnYAnRUxrq6GJ0WfuHqLEhZsufeg7tyF
=CwnR
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Responding to +Alan Hicks+:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 2008-12-11, Mike Jones <Not.DeleteThis@Arizona.Bay> wrote:
>> Anybody got any "Ooh mate! Ya don't wanna do that!" stories or just
>> grapevine comments regarding Sylpheed versus Claws for general domestic
>> purposes?
>
> It's been a long time since I used Sylpheed. Back then, Claws was the
> alpha development branch of Sylpheed, but they've since parted ways
> somehow. I vastly prefer Claws Mail to any other GUI e-mail client I've
> ever used. I find it to be lightweight and fast (once you configure it
> properly at least) and much more powerful than anything else available.
>


I still find Claws a tad over-featured compared to the simpler Sylpheed,
but if Sylpheed is still sending plain text passwords, its a non-starter.

I've a feeling I'm going to stick with Claws because it can be compiled
down to a simpler install with less dependancies, that, and my mail
archives are already "Claws ready".


--
*===( http://www.400monkeys.com/God/
*===( http://principiadiscordia.com/
*===( http://www.zenwalk.org/

On 2008-12-12, +Alan Hicks+ <alan RemoveThis @lizella.netWORK> wrote:
>
> I vastly prefer Claws Mail to any other GUI e-mail client I've ever
> used. I find it to be lightweight and fast (once you configure it
> properly at least) and much more powerful than anything else available.


Agreed.

Of course, you are the person who shoved me in the direction
of claws-mail

-RW

On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:59:35 +0000, Mike Jones wrote:

>> It's been a long time since I used Sylpheed. Back then, Claws was the
>> alpha development branch of Sylpheed, but they've since parted ways
>> somehow. I vastly prefer Claws Mail to any other GUI e-mail client I've
>> ever used. I find it to be lightweight and fast (once you configure it
>> properly at least) and much more powerful than anything else available.
>>
> I still find Claws a tad over-featured compared to the simpler Sylpheed,
> but if Sylpheed is still sending plain text passwords, its a
> non-starter.
>
> I've a feeling I'm going to stick with Claws because it can be compiled
> down to a simpler install with less dependancies, that, and my mail
> archives are already "Claws ready".

Maybe you should give them both a try (and btw, try Sylpheed 2.6.0, just
released).

From time to time, I check most "mainstream" MUAs (including text-based
like Alpine and Mutt) and for my specific usage habits, Sylpheed is my
personal favourite since its 0.4 version (that should be about 2001, I
don't even remember). It's the fastest one for all of my accounts (IMAP,
POP, and local) by a huge margin, and indeed lightweight (it stays "up"
for several days/weeks until I decide to upgrade to a newer version).

But again, just because it works great for me it doesn't mean that you'll
miss feature Y only available on MUA XYZ.

Good luck.

--
Ricardo Nabinger Sanchez http://rnsanchez.wait4.org/
"Left to themselves, things tend to go from bad to worse."