If they are who? I figure in the days of webmail, pop3, cell phones, black berry and whatever many would not be using Pine anymore. I still use it at times. Its very handy with old computers with dialup accounts in remote locations. In these environments webmail is simply out of the question.
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------- SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
"The president didn't go into Iraq because the polls told him it was popular. As a matter of fact, the polls said just the opposite. But leadership isn't about polls. It's about making decisions you think are right and then standing behind those decisions. That's why America is safer with George W. Bush as president" (Arnold Schwarzenegger, 2004).
Matthew 7:12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Luke 9:23 Then he said to them all: If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Big Brother asked if people still use pine.
I use pine all the time. It is my preferred mail client and news reader.
And I make my wife and kids use it too.
;-)
- Rob
--
Rob Brown b r o w n a t g m c l d o t c o m G. Michaels Consulting Ltd. (866)438-2101 (voice) toll free! Edmonton (780)438-9343 (voice) (780)437-3367 (FAX) http://gmcl.com/
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Big Brother wrote: > If they are who? I figure in the days of webmail, pop3, cell phones, black > berry and whatever many would not be using Pine anymore.
POP3 is actually older technology than Pine; and I would consider moving from Pine to POP3 to be a step backwards.
The replacement for POP3 is IMAP. Pine was (and IMHO remains) the best IMAP client implementation.
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
> If they are who? I figure in the days of webmail, pop3, cell phones, black > berry and whatever many would not be using Pine anymore. I still use it at > times. Its very handy with old computers with dialup accounts in remote > locations. In these environments webmail is simply out of the question.
Webmail would be my last choice in any environment. I'm on DSL, with a reasonably fast computer (1.6GHz P4), and prefer Pine to all other mail clients I've tried.
-- Chris F.A. Johnson, author | <http://cfaj.freeshell.org> Shell Scripting Recipes: | My code in this post, if any, A Problem-Solution Approach | is released under the 2005, Apress | GNU General Public Licence
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:31:42 +0000, Big Brother <jo...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote: > If they are who? I figure in the days of webmail, pop3, cell phones, black > berry and whatever many would not be using Pine anymore. I still use it at > times.
I use it all the time; well except for news reading. Greatest virture is the absence of JavaScript and automatic derefencing of URLs.
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Big Brother wrote: > If they are who? I figure in the days of webmail, pop3, cell phones, black > berry and whatever many would not be using Pine anymore. I still use it at
pop3 is an old thing, imap should be preferred (and the same team which provides pine, provides an easy to use imap daemon). I use pine locally on my workstation at work, but my institute provides also several imap servers. I had an imap server of my own in one case I was away on the chilean Andes for several week for business. And I have a private account on a public provider which still uses pop ... and I access it as a secondary incoming folder from pine.
cell phones, black berry, webmail
I'm one of the rare italians who do not own a cell phone, and I'm likely never to use cell phones or black berry. Beside the fact I do not NEED to be called at all times (10 odd hours I spend in the office are enough), I'm getting older and do not see very well tiny displays.
Strangely enough you do not quote other graphical clients in addition to webmail. Some of our staff here hate pine and prefer graphical clients for local use, and webmail for travel. One of them even uses webmail locally.
Personally I hate those sort of clients, I like pine because : (1) it's fully RFC standard compliant ; (2) can be easily driven with few keystrokes ; (3) is highly configurable ... and in a smart way which is very close to my feeling ... almost all the times I wanted to do something I found a way to do it in the config.
When travelling for a long time, I prefer to take with me a machine with pine installed, and activate an imapd on my workstation. If travelling for a short time, assumed I could not just avoid reading my e-mail for a couple of days (which I can), I prefer ssh'ing to my machine and use pine to the usage of a web mailer.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- nos...@mi.iasf.cnr.it is a newsreading account used by more persons to avoid unwanted spam. Any mail returning to this address will be rejected. Users can disclose their e-mail address in the article if they wish so.
I would agree. I use Outlook 2003 locally, webmail for traveling, and also use Pine on occassion.
John
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, LC's NoSpam Newsreading account wrote:
> Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 16:36:58 +0100 > From: LC's NoSpam Newsreading account <nos...@mi.iasf.cnr.it> > Newsgroups: comp.mail.pine > Subject: Re: Do people still use Pine? > nos...@mi.iasf.cnr.it is a newsreading account used by more persons to > avoid unwanted spam. Any mail returning to this address will be rejected. > Users can disclose their e-mail address in the article if they wish so.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org
"The president didn't go into Iraq because the polls told him it was popular. As a matter of fact, the polls said just the opposite. But leadership isn't about polls. It's about making decisions you think are right and then standing behind those decisions. That's why America is safer with George W. Bush as president" (Arnold Schwarzenegger, 2004).
Matthew 7:12 Therefore, whatever you want men to do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.
Luke 9:23 Then he said to them all: If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me.
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Henning Hucke wrote: > On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Rob Brown wrote:
>> [...] >> And I make my wife and kids use it too.
>> ;-)
> You cruel thing you %-).
> But to become serious again: What do they say about the usability of > pine?
They don't complain. They find it easy enough to use. They never want to do anything complicated, so how hard can it be?
In direct answer to your question: They don't say anything. ;-)
- Rob
--
Rob Brown b r o w n a t g m c l d o t c o m G. Michaels Consulting Ltd. (866)438-2101 (voice) toll free! Edmonton (780)438-9343 (voice) (780)437-3367 (FAX) http://gmcl.com/
Rob Brown <mylastn...@gmcl.com> wrote: > They don't complain. They find it easy enough to use. They never > want to do anything complicated, so how hard can it be?
Of course they do complain - e.g. see my thread with subject "Pine Shortcomings" which deals with attaching emails to a reply.
Big Brother <jo...@sdf.lonestar.org> wrote: > If they are who? I figure in the days of webmail, pop3, cell phones, > black berry and whatever many would not be using Pine anymore.
I am a developer in the Unix world, and I use Pine all day long because I'm used to work in Console windows. Graphical stuff is nice, but mostly degrades your performance because the most GUI makers don't pay attention to keyboard shortcuts.
This doesn't mean Pine is perfect - it has its shortcomings - but it is the best Console based Mail User Agent I've come to see yet.
> I am a developer in the Unix world, and I use Pine all day long > because I'm used to work in Console windows. Graphical stuff is nice, > but mostly degrades your performance because the most GUI makers don't > pay attention to keyboard shortcuts.
> This doesn't mean Pine is perfect - it has its shortcomings - but it > is the best Console based Mail User Agent I've come to see yet.
I concur with this. I use pine as my primary mail program on the Linux machine I inhabit at work *and* on my Windows XP laptop (under Cygwin). It is generally faster than the graphical clients I've played with and far faster than web mail clients. For example to delete a message I type 'd'. How much easier can it get?
I also like the fact that pine has good conformance to the RFCs. When a particular message has some strange issue more often than not pine handles it properly.
Also pine is plenty powerful enough for my current needs. It is true that I can't compose pretty HTML messages in a WYSIWYG manner. But then, I never did that when I was using graphical clients either. Pine is relatively immune to malicous email and that's a plus too. For example, I know it's not going to try to execute any JavaScript in an email message (due, say, to a misconfiguration) because it just can't. I see that as a feature. I don't really want people sending me JavaScript in email anyway.
There are some things that could be better. Pine's method of displaying complex attachments (nested multipart messages, for example) can be a little confusing at times. Also... is there a raw message view option? There have been a number of times when I've wanted to see the message exactly as it was received by SMTP so I can review the its MIME structure. I've resorted to looking at the mail folder file directly; pine always seems to want to summarize the structure for me.
