Re: [9fans] mail client; general question web vs command

[dexen deVries <dexen.devries@gmail.com>]

On Sunday 31 July 2011 22:00:57 Rudolf Sykora wrote:
> I've been using a gmail account with the usual access via a web
> browser for quite a while.
> Sometimes I get little angry when using it, for various reasons, often
> due to the firefox's slowness to render the page (scrolling a longer
> thread is often pain for me).
> I'd like to ask you. Do you use some client like e.g. mutt / heirloom
> mailx / some plan9 client, and find its utility superior to a
> web-based way? Do you e.g. use imap to connect to gmail and read mail?
> I wonder if one can use such thin clients and not loose to much of
> comfort / lucity / clarity / ease of use.
>
> What do you generally consider the 'sucklest' way of reading mail?
> (except for not reading it...)


i'm using gmail's IMAP in cached (`disconneted') mode; operations are
performed on local files. that's fast (low latencies). my (linux) mail client:
kmail does threading and has comfy in-line search of title, author etc.
somehow i always end up disabling threading thou.

i assume firefox renders HTML pixel-by-pixel, which causes general slowness
over network. some VNC servers have automatic scroll decetction heueristics
and send scroll events rather than full redraws if client supports that, but
that's a hack. networked X11 seems to work well with scrolling, but firefox's
chrome (widgets) over networked X11 are still damn slow.

--
dexen deVries

> It's called trolling. It's been done since there were bangs in people's
email addresses.

thaumaturgy, on HN