I'd compare them as follows:
pine is to pico/nano as mutt is to vi/vim/emacs
Pine (and pico/nano) is/are easy to approach for the uninitiated,
and get the basics done and a small handful of more advanced
features.
Mutt (and vi/vim/emacs) has/have a much steeper learning curve,
but also afford far more power to the user that's willing to
invest the time to learn them. They also allow for far more
customization to your own whims, allowing you to do
crazy-powerful things. To further the analogy, I'd compare Mutt
to vi/vim, and Thunderbird to XEmacs...vi/vim/mutt are svelte but
a bit obscure while Thunderbird and XEmacs hog more resources and
are a bit more approachable for the newbie.
I haven't yet made the jump to Mutt, but not for want to learn
it. I merely haven't had the time to invest in learning it (and
Thunderbird does most of what I want with a few plugins). I have
a feeling that Mutt could do everything I need including a few
aspects of Thunderbird I don't have (even with plugins).
Among mutt's advantages that I'm hoping to eventually win when I
switch over:
- accessibility over a SSH session
- better mailing-list/usegroup management regarding duplicate
posts and threading
- message-bouncing
- killfile/blacklist/kill-thread support
- use of Vim as my message editor
- next/previous unread message scanning (that works...in TB,
the "next" works, but the "previous" is broken)
- using less memory on my poor P800 with its meager 128 megs of
memory (TB is a hog)
- more keyboard friendly navigation
So that's my $0.02 on the matter. If you have the time and
energy to invest in learning it, Mutt should be great. However,
if you just want to get up and running as fast as possible, you
may prefer Pine.
-tim
_______________________________________________
Blinux-list mailing list
Blinux-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/blinux-list