Mozilla Seeks New Home For Email Client Thunderbird 294
Reader chefmonkey writes: In a report commissioned by Mozilla to explore the next home for Thunderbird, two potential new hosts have been offered: the Software Freedom Conservancy (host to git, boost, QEMU, and a host of other projects) and The Document Foundation (home of LibreOffice). At the same time, the report discusses completely uncoupling Thunderbird from the rest of the Mozilla codebase and bringing in a dedicated technical architect to chart the software's roadmap.
Given that the two named organizations are already on board with taking Thunderbird under their wing, is this a new lease on life for the email program Mozilla put out to pasture four years ago?In December last year, Mozilla Foundation chairperson Mitchell Baker had argued that the organization should disentangle itself from the Thunderbird email client in order to focus on Firefox. It appears the Firefox-maker is all set to part ways with Thunderbird.
Given that the two named organizations are already on board with taking Thunderbird under their wing, is this a new lease on life for the email program Mozilla put out to pasture four years ago?In December last year, Mozilla Foundation chairperson Mitchell Baker had argued that the organization should disentangle itself from the Thunderbird email client in order to focus on Firefox. It appears the Firefox-maker is all set to part ways with Thunderbird.
Firefox on Android Is Where Its At (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Pale Moon
It's Firefox before they buggered it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Pale Moon is Firefox for those who like slower, crappier browsers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It has the adblock built in and it starts loading the pages as soon as click on the links, so you don't have to wait for redirections and all the stuff to be downloaded while you keep on reading other stuff
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not brave enough for Brave. When it comes to proprietary browsers, I'm a coward. Source or GTFO. Web browsers are too damned important to taste-test some secret sauce
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not brave enough either, which is why I'm testing in in SandboxIE on windows.
But to your point about it being open source, it seems open source to me.
Is there something in particular that is missing from its github repo that disqualifies it?
https://github.com/brave/ [github.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only reason I prefer Opera on Android over Firefox is that it lets you zoom a web page like Slashdot and it rewraps the text as it resizes it.
Firefox for some reason binds the layout and resizing just pushes text outside the margins.
Re: (Score:2)
I prefer AdBlock for Android, because it blocks ads in all apps.
Re: (Score:2)
Adblock. No other mobile browser has add-ons like Firefox.
Except for the Samsung adblock plugin for the default internet browser. You know the default browser of some 23% of all smartphones on the market, a market share which makes Firefox disappear in a rounding error.
Re: (Score:2)
Great for all 0.1% of rooted devices out there.
I used to use ThunderBird (Score:2)
But now I use SeaMonkey for eMail .
It has the added advantage of being a browser as well
Are they going to drop SeaMonkey too?
Re: (Score:2)
The "composer" is the reason I always install SeaMonkey. Don't all email clients do threading properly, like sylpheed and Claws-mail do, now?
Re: (Score:3)
You're citing two e-mail clients that have the same origin.
I am aware of that, I used Sylpheed before moving to Sylpheed-Claws. I also know that OTHER e-mail clients also have proper threading, though I'm not as familiar with them these days as I am with Claws-mail. IIRC most 'nix clients do, I'm know Kmail and Thunderbird do.
Webmail interfaces that support a threaded display are a rarity.
Hmmph, thats another reason why people should user a proper client and not their web browser. Gmail does have a "Conversation view", I don't know about Yahoo.
Thunderbird and IMAP (Score:3, Insightful)
I haven't used Thunderbird for a few years, but... it always seemed to me to be the best IMAP client out there - doubly so if you had more than one IMAP email account, which has been the case for me.
But while Mozilla hasn't mucked up Thunderbird to the same degree they have Firefox, a couple years back I decided to cut ties with any and all Mozilla products because of all Mozilla's little political and philosophical dramas.
Re: (Score:2)
Mind sharing what you switched to?
Re: (Score:2)
Mind sharing what you switched to?
It may not be particularly helpful, but sure.
Our campus moved to Google Apps a number of years ago, so for work I'd just been using the Gmail app on my phone and the Gmail web interface when I'm on my computer.
For personal email, I've defaulted to using Apple's Mail app. I've recently started using this for my work email as well, because 1) there appears to be no way to add GPG to Gmail, and 2) while Gmail is better than other web mail apps, once you get past that you start to realize it's not very good com
Re: (Score:2)
1) there appears to be no way to add GPG to Gmail,
There are TWO ways!
1. Use gmail via IMAP/POP3 with a proper desktop client with gpg support. Which is what people SHOULD be doing anyway. Claws-mail and Thunderbird with Enigmail can do this. You can also do this on phone/tablet with K9 mail and OpenKeychain/APG.
2. Mailvelope add-on, if for some reason you use a web browser to read gmail
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks! I will take a look.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Try out Sylpheed [sraoss.jp].
It's available for about any operating system. I first started using it when I was running NetBSD on the desktop. The code is packaged for any freenix out there, and there's also a Windows binary.
Re: (Score:2)
I always suspected that most vocal Slashdotters went insane the moment Firefox "betrayed" them by changing the UI a bit a couple years ago, and now here's proof. Godwin and all. What a vitriolic niche of hatred this place is becoming...
Sure, if that fits your internal narrative, have fun with it.
I had been getting annoyed with Firefox long before this, but I stopped using it when they decided they weren't going to support h.264. While they claimed it was for licensing concerns, both Windows and Mac offered native support for h.264 they could've leveraged without having to worry about licensing. The more people asked about it, the more obvious it became it was a political choice rather than a pragmatic one.
Good (Score:2, Offtopic)
The Mozilla Foundation has screwed everything up the had in their clutches, except Thunderbird, possibly because they lacked the money to do a number on it too. If Thunderbird gets new maintainers that actually have a clue and are not just following the latest UI-hype or waste all their money on worthless gender-related projects, it has a bright future. Firefox is dead though, and the only reason for that is incompetence and mis-management by the Mozilla Foundation leadership. Talk about wrestling failure f
Re:Good (Score:4, Informative)
Keep in mind, The Foundation set up a whole sister company to Mozilla Corp., called Mozilla Messaging, to work on Thunderbird. They even got a nice office in Vancouver. But then David Asher, the Messaging CEO, and several other engineers just decided they'd rather work on something else. The decided to run a Lab, without telling the actual Mozilla Labs, until they released something.
Moreover, until TBird was officially booted, the 4-5 employees who were really dedicated to TBird (like standard8), were at the mercy of the Browser engineers to fix Gecko bugs. Browser engineer are brilliant, but basically dicks. They ignored Thunderbird, and they also trash talked the Services group, when things like FF Sync were being developed.
Then of course the Boot2Gecko project spawned out of nowhere with Andreas' post, and the new corporate heads decided to "streamline." They had hired a lot of business folk, including the new CEO, and they were all about handy-wavy visions and cohesive narratives encompassing everything Mozilla does. Tbird just didn't fit that narrative, despite its success and user base.
Women, children and good email clients first. (Score:2)
Thunderbird gives a sigh or relief from the lifeboat as it watches SS Firefox go down.
New start, or the end of email? (Score:2)
Maybe it will be an opportunity to have a well maintained Thunderbird, but if not, it's worrying for email. I don't want to replace email with Facebook/Whatsapp/orWhatnot.
For now, there is Apple Mail which only runs on Macs,
Outlook which only runs on Windows (and is a terrible IMAP client, probably to force you to get an Exchange server)
And Gmail which only runs on... Google. And only if you have an Internet connection.
I feel Thunderbird is essential, and hope it finds someone to take care of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple Mail is pretty limited. Oulook does actually run on OS X BTW.
LibreOffice could use an eMail client (Score:5, Interesting)
Somewhat off-topic: embedding video in email (Score:2)
The first emails were text-only. Then at some point email became a much more versatile communication tool, because we gained the ability to embed images. (When did that happen? I'm guessing about 24 years ago.)
Now, we are long overdue for email clients that let you easily embed video. I'm not talking about
- linking to a video file hosted on some third-party server, or
- video file attachments, or
- having to figure out usage of ungainly templates [wistia.com],
but the convenience of honest-to-goodness embedded videos: w
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. I don't want spammers send me videos. No video for me.
Thunderbird deserves support, modernized features (Score:2)
The lapse in Mozilla support for Thunderbird since 2012 has been frustrating and saddening to me. I've used Thunderbird (with its Lightning calendaring and Enigmail for OpenPGP/GnuPG, among other extensions) since just about its inception and I still do today. It has always been the only cross platform and open source, user focused/privacy respecting, newbie-to-guru accessible, full featured and extensible email/PIM client I've found.
Unfortunately , I admit that its age has begun to show since Mozilla stopp
Am I smelling astroturf? (Score:3)
Seems like there's been an awful lot of hate exploding against the Mozilla folks lately, and it seems that a lot of it is politically motivated. Politics aside, there have certainly been missteps, but Firefox has worked well and I don't have much to complain about. I'm not especially happy about the recent bloat (I've never once used Pocket, for instance), but at least it has stayed out of my way.
Well, what do I switch to, then, haters? Do you have a better solution? I need a browser that offers this:
* A rich selection of add-ons (adblock and script controls are security features these days, and there are other useful extensions I use)
* Cross-platform (I use Windows, Linux desktops, and Android)
* Open source (even if I never have occasion to build or modify the browser, I want to be able to)
* Address bar is separate from the search bar (when I type in an intranet URL, I don't want a search query going out, FFS)
* Performs well enough for me (I've never seen the horrible performance that some people allege)
If someone comes up with something significantly better and offers all of the above, I'd consider giving it a try, but for now I'll stick with Firefox.
As for Thunderbird, I'm glad to see it being picked up... yes it works, but there are a few things that have long needed fixing (like the mystery progress bar on IMAP accounts).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It is a surprise. There are numerous browsers, but few (non-web) email clients. It's pretty much just Outlook.
Seems they have chosen to compete in the saturated browser market, rather than the email client market that has little-to-no competition, and is ripe for a new product that would help every business efficiently manage their day-to-day tasks.
Re: (Score:3)
You might argue you do not need HTML in e-mails, that the message is the important thing. However, that is a discussion for another time, like ten years ago.
Re:Surprise! (Score:4, Insightful)
It is unsafe to view HTML emails from unknown sources.
Re: (Score:2)
It is a surprise. There are numerous browsers, but few (non-web) email clients. It's pretty much just Outlook.
Wow. The complete opposite is true.
Perhaps if you add a bunch of qualifications such as "with XYZ features" and "with user bases larger than X" and "with built in support for calendaring" and "with native exchange support", then maybe there are few native email clients matching your criteria. However, "non-web email clients" is a very large category, and I'd bet money there are more than there are unique web browsers.
MD 20/20 (Score:2)
I'm more of a Night Train man myself...
What software does Mozilla have left?! (Score:4, Interesting)
So if Mozilla gets rid of Thunderbird completely, what software will they have left that has actual users?
Firefox is the obvious one, but its users are fleeing left and right. The latest stats show Firefox is down to about 7% of the market [caniuse.com] on all platforms, across all versions.
Firefox for Android is basically not used at all. It's at 0.4% of the market [caniuse.com]. Yes, that's less than half of 1%!
Seamonkey probably has seen much less use than even Firefox for Android.
Firefox OS has probably seen much less use than even Seamonkey.
Persona never got anywhere at all.
Bugzilla is ancient tech, only used by legacy users.
Servo is a joke. Even for an "experimental" rendering engine, it's damn near useless.
Rust is nothing but hype. Its only major user so far has been Mozilla, and some high schoolers who tried it out on a weekend and put their mostly-incomplete libraries on GitHub to rot.
So with Thunderbird out of the picture, and their other software seeing minimal to no use, Mozilla will pretty much have no user base once the remaining Firefox users flee.
How do they expect to get lucrative search details when next to nobody is using their products?
How do they propose to survive as an organization with limited incoming funds?
Re: (Score:2)
Google wants to eliminate competition to gmail.
People need to be reminded that Mozilla gets the largest share of its money from Google.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Interesting)
One major advantage is that Firefox for Android allows ad-blockers. Chrome doesn't.
And yes, I know desktop Chrome allows ad-blockers. But there is a value in having both desktop and mobile in sync therefore I use Firefox on both.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it does.... when I install a blocking hosts file....
Oh shit... here comes APK claiming he invented it! Everyone scatter!
Re: (Score:2)
Blocking host file is nowhere near to be as convenient (can't be disabled on the fly or for a specific site), plus you need a rooted device.
Re: (Score:2)
Why block on a file per device when you could just block at the router instead?
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Funny)
You must be new here. Beware: Dangers lurk beneath the surface and certain words should not be uttered lightly.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Interesting)
Palemoon is a thing that exists. If you're a Windows user, it's clearly the best way forward for those seeking refuge from Mozilla's mismanagement.
I'm not sure what Thunderbird needs. As far as I can tell, it's fine. It's not buggy and all the features I want to use work. Other than security fixes, what more do I want out of a mature mail client?
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Informative)
Yes. I use Thunderbird at home and have used it for many years. It works, i.e., it allows me to send and receive e-mail, and doesn't seem to be terribly buggy. What more do you need?
There's very little maintenance or development that needs to be done. Which is probably why Mozilla is in a hurry to get rid of it. They can't figure out a way to fuck it up like they did Firefox.
Re: (Score:2)
How's maildir doing these days? They've been talking about it for so long that I have no idea whether it's safe to use.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. I use Thunderbird at home and have used it for many years. It works, i.e., it allows me to send and receive e-mail, and doesn't seem to be terribly buggy. What more do you need?
Same here. Switched from Eudora to Thunderbird over a decade ago and have had very few problems with it. I use it to access 2 gmail accounts, I like having all my email on my local machine and I think gmail's idea of tagging vs folders is brain dead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is NOW but Eudora used to be a real awesome mail client with no relation to Netscape Mail. I used the hell out of it on my 68K Macs back in the old days. Was great, even on a 25MHz 68030 with 32MB of RAM.
Re: (Score:3)
They can't figure out a way to fuck it up like they did Firefox.
To be fair to Mozilla, they watched Chrome usage sky-rocket with its someone horrid user interface so it probably made some sense to replicate it.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
For any business user, Thunderbird needs integration with a calendar. At the very least, it would need to be able to send and receive calendar invites. There were a number of attempts to add a calendar to Thunderbird, but as far as I can see they all failed, some miserably so.
Re:Surprise! (Score:5, Informative)
Lightning has been integrated into Thunderbird for some time now.
Re: (Score:3)
And Lightning is buggy, prone to crashes, and scarfs up resources over time. It's horrific. I've tried it many times, on many platforms, and never had any success except, oddly, Mint. I think it was Mint? It came with Thunderbird and was pre-installed. That one worked just fine. I'm not about to switch my OS just to have an email client with built-in calendaring.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Surprise! (Score:4, Interesting)
They need to just integrate some of the already available cloud calendars.
Why would I want to share the details of where I'm going and who I'm seeing with anyone else?
A client-based calendar is exactly what I want. The only thing better would be a trivially installed calendar server I can host on my own systems with negligible effort, so multiple devices could more easily share the same details.
If I didn't want that sort of independence and control, for both calendar and mail, why would I still be using a product like Thunderbird in the first place?
Re: (Score:2)
Client based calendars ARE needed (Score:2)
They need to just integrate some of the already available cloud calendars.
The problem with cloud calendars are just how many of them there are.
- You might be using Google Calendars.
- But your friends organise your group's events over facebook
- And your local pen and paper RPG club coordinates over doodle.
- Then your work uses an MS-Exchange server
- and there's a couple of RDF-exported calendar you need to take into account too.
In this context: you DEFINITELY need 1 single calendar platform that is able to coordinate between all the above.
Palm's (then later HP's) webOS with its Sy
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It does, but its buggy, incomplete, and not suited to a business. We seriously tried using it because Thunderbird as a mail client with IMAP servers worked so much better for us than Exchange. However, the calendar is just not up to it. Sharing calendars, shared calendars such as rooms, its just difficult, buggy, incomplete.
If, the calendars were fixed up to properly support caldav, and in a way that would suit business, Thunderbird could be a rival to Outlook. But its not - Sogo and the like is trying, but
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use it, but I see your point. The Taj Mahal isn't shit because nobody built an extension on it this century. Horses aren't shit because they've still got only four legs.
Re: (Score:2)
Palemoon is a thing that exists...
Fossamail is also a thing that exists. It's a fork of Thunderbird, provided by the people who brought us Pale Moon. You can get it here:
http://www.fosshub.com/FossaMail.html
From my preliminary look at it, it's indistinguishable from T-bird. And under Linux it didn't even require installation - just unpacked it, copied over the contents of my Thnderbird profile folders, and fired it up. Works just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
This is why my mother-in-law uses it. It doesn't change without reason, and it just works for her. Too much software changes too often "just because". A long-term stable client is just what she needs.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Thunderbird has gotten a LOT better, but when I was using it (6-7 years ago) it was a royal pain in the ass. I kept Firefox and threw away Thunderbird. Windows Live Mail is way better than that stinking pile.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As far as I can tell, it's fine. It's not buggy and all the features I want to use work.
So what you're saying it needs a ground up re-design with new features and some 3rd party shit added in because the users are unhappy?
Thanks for the advice. We always strive to listen to our customers to deliver the best possible product.
Sincerely
Mozilla Management.
Re: (Score:2)
In response to all the palemoongelists on here, I downloaded it recently to see what all the fuss was about. Couldn't see any restored functionality I would miss in Firefox 45.
So if there's some major UI regression with Australis, I ain't seeing it - I toggle with the menu/title/bookmarks bar settings but can't say I miss the status bar. But I'm not a heavy theme/add-on user, so may I don't appreciate what I've supposedly lost in transitioning away from XUL.
Re: (Score:2)
Firefox is just a clone of Chrome at this point.
Using that logic Chrome is just a clone of Firefox at this point.
Re: (Score:3)
Everything is a clone of Mosaic, if you want to get technical.
I have Firefox and Chrome installed. For no objective reason whatsoever, I prefer Firefox. Don't know why. But I just like Firefox better.
Out of all the browsers, I like Gnome Web the best right now. If uBlock Origin worked with it, and it had good KeePass integration, I'd switch over permanently.
Re:I've got an idea... (Score:5, Informative)
WTF? I've been a happy t-bird usere since practically day one. I'd be curious to know what other unix/linux users are using for mail clients on the desktop. No, I don't do the web-mail thing and i'm not about to start.
Re: (Score:2)
Evolution? Been using it since the beginning, although I have the sensation that version 1.4 was much more user friendly and feature packed.
Re: (Score:2)
Ignore him. Haters do not understand the concept of "facts".
Re: (Score:3)
As I mentioned in an earlier post, have a look at FossaMail. Forked from Thunderbird by the Pale Moon devs. Pretty much indistinguishable from Thunderbird. Download via FossaMail.org, install, (in Linux it's just an unzip-and-move process), copy the contents of your profile folder over, and you're up and running.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I've got an idea... (Score:4, Informative)
Mutt under Linux (often via ssh or Putty). Some things just work well.
Re:I've got an idea... (Score:5, Insightful)
How about go fuck yourself. Thunderbird is an excellent email client. Just because you happen to you gmail through a webpage or some horrid MS client doesn't mean it's not useful to someone else, moron.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, stupid people have no options and they start hating those that do. Then they post about it and make their stupidity obvious to all.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Thunderbird is about the only full featured mail client available.
On top of that it's available on Windows and Linux and it works quite well, regretfully and strange enough there is still no Android client.
Kmail is another nice mail client for Linux users.
I would use it but for the impossibility to select which senders are allowed html.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Just because you don't do something doesn't mean that no one does. It turns out that many other people are not a copy of you.
I use Thunderbird because I prefer POP to IMAP when available. I don't need others snooping my email. But ignoring that Thunderbird is simply the best way to manage multiple email accounts.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Linux is doing fine for email client choice (Score:2)
On Linux there is no substitute for Thunderbird.
It's more like on Windows there's no fully-featured and user-friendly substitute unless you got the Microsoft route (which, fair play, but many of us won't for one reason or another). On Linux there's KMail, Trojitá, Evolution, Geary . . .
Re: (Score:2)
Sylpheed? Is it 2004 again? I thought all the gaijin users of sylpheed had switched to the fork now known as claws-mail back in 2005. I'm a claws user myself.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Email client software? Is this still a thing? (Score:2)
If you want to write a really nicely formatted email you use a client.
IMAP keeps all clients sync'ed so what ever you do on one is the same on the others.
Re: (Score:2)
> I would have to guess most of this audience is, too.
Going by this thread, and many others just like it, you'd be guessing poorly.
For the record, I like Thunderbird quite a bit. Opera's got an email client that I've not used in a while. The sooner Mozilla divests, the better. There's surely no one group that would not be better maintainers. It's feature complete. Leave it. Keep it maintained. Call it good. If I have to, I'll learn the damned base and maintain it myself. I'll rip out any way to browse wi
Re:Email client software? Is this still a thing? (Score:4, Insightful)
People are using email clients all the time, that email client on your phone is using imap to communicate to your mail storage on gmail. I see very few people using their phone's browser to login to the mobile version of any webmail. I see phone specific native clients in wide use. Gmail's webclient is very good, but for certain use cases a dedicated client works better. And since gmail provides standard imap access, thunderbird works with it just fine.
Email client software is far from dead, and it would be nice to keep thunderbird alive.
Re: (Score:2)
Compared to gmail accessed via web...
Great, if you only have one email account. I'm a student, so I have an official university email address that they insist upon using for all correspondence. I'm also an employee, so that's another email account. I have a gmail account for some personal stuff. I also have another free email account. I have an email address on the virtual server that I rent. Each of these accounts has its own web mail interface, different from the others.
With Thunderbird, I can combine all five email accounts into one c
Re: (Score:3)
Compared to gmail accessed via web, email clients offer slower startup,
In which world?
higher bug count
I'd suppose it depends which ones are you comparing.
inferior search tools
That might well be, it's not a feature I use much.
A crazily confusing configuration burden
It's clear that you are about 10 years past using email clients. You'll be happy to know that nowadays, just giving your address usually autoconfigure server options.
, create a deep disincentive to access email from any machine but your own,
True
Re: (Score:2)
> Compared to gmail accessed via web, email clients offer slower startup
Why would you ever close your e-mail client other than to start the latest version with that security bug fix?
> higher bug count
TB is missing newer features like calendaring (lightning is pretty broken) I'll give you, but they haven't bugged it out with new features in years. If nothing else, TB is at least stable and mostly bugfree for the stuff it does support.
> inferior search tools
TB search worked great before we switched t
Re: (Score:2)
Web access is ok when you have only one email address, but when you have an address for your job/university/organisation(s) you belong to, it quickly becomes unmanageable. Not to mention many of those addresses have a bad web UI or none at all. I certainly believe you haven't used an email client in a decade, because most of the problems you mentioned have been solved long ago, at least in Thunderbird anyway. It definitely starts faster and has fewer bugs than a browser. It has a profile system like FF, all
Re: (Score:2)
I'm about 10 years past using email clients. I would have to guess most of this audience is, too.
Um nope.
Compared to gmail accessed via web, email clients offer slower startup,
Compared to launching a browser, clicking on your webmail bookmark, signing in, waiting for your mail to load? Or do you give webmail a headstart be prelaunching the browser? My mail client starts up just as fast as my browser does, if not faster.
higher bug count
Not really, mail is pretty mature after all, it mostly just works. But sure, it does a lot more stuff, and has capabilities the web clients simply don't have at all, so sure some of that has bugs.
, a crazily confusing configuration burden
Its mostly a case of entering your email address and password
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time you didn't have a browser window open? For me, maybe 2002. No need to use a bookmark either, just type the first couple letters of the domain in the address bar and let it autocomplete.
Personally I use both webmail and kmail though -- the former for personal use and the latter for work.
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time you didn't have a browser window open?
About the same time I didn't have my email client open. (Usually for the first few seconds after a reboot.) So yeah, they're both open about 100% of the time. so the advantage goes to the mail client, becuase its easier to find mail windows; since they're a separate icon and group on the dock/taskbars.
No need to use a bookmark either, just type the first couple letters of the domain in the address bar and let it autocomplete.
True, but that's not "faster".
Re:Email client software? Is this still a thing? (Score:5, Insightful)
A local copy of your mail is the only reliable and fast way to access and especially organise mail, even more so for multiple accounts.
Webmail is nice for occasional use on a borrowed computer, for the rest it is a joke.
Re: (Score:2)