--On 3 July 2009 01:02:35 -0400 "Greg A. Woods" <woods-cyrus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > At Wed, 01 Jul 2009 21:26:16 -0000, "julian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" > <julian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Subject: Re: Automatically moving marked > mails? >> >> In the present commercial environment - they are more likely to "learn" >> (with the not so subtle help of certain consultants), >> that their MUA works perfectly well with an Exchange server - and that >> their current server provider is probably using some dodgy free >> system... so the client should change email providers. It's not always >> easy to counter that sort of thing. > > I really don't know anyone, neither amongst home-based users nor > corporate e-mail users, who truly believe they're better off with an > MS-Exchange server handling their e-mail, Outlook users here don't like the fact that some of their MUA functionality is greyed out. I'd like to hear of some OSS solution. We're currently using Cyrus-IMAP and Meeting Maker with an Outlook connector. Unfortunately, the types of recurring meeting that you can create don't overlap - both Exchange and Outlook support types that don't map to the other software. There's pressure here to move to Exchange because it supports Outlook better. > especially if they've > previously used a decent IMAP client connected to a Cyrus server. Most > folks put up with it because they don't have any choice and that's > because their IT guy got a good free game of golf or similar from the > sales guy who sold him up the creek on using Exchange. > > BTW, I find telling folks that Cyrus was built to satisfy the needs and > demands of tens of thousands of picky but highly intelligent users in an > academic environment where e-mail is arguably even more important than > it often is in corporate circles, and where the developers really > couldn't pull the wool over anyone's eyes usually makes the nay-sayers > think twice, or at least hopefully shows them one tiny inkling of a clue > that their own experience may not be at the true centre of the e-mail > universe. > >> Switching to thunderbird is likely to be a >> harder change for some departments or companies than changing service >> providers. (especially if they have existing business processes or >> integration with other office products etc) > > Well, as many have said, Thunderbird is hardly the pinnacle of > perfection when it comes to IMAP clients. Sadly many of the other > common, and especially other free ones, are not ideal on all fronts > either. > > For me Apple OS X Mail has been better than some, but it also has some > very annoying traits, My biggest annoyance is that it creates non-compliant message headers when mailing to Address Book groups. I use Mulberry at work, and Apple Mail on my laptop. > and it lacks the one feature I earlier suggested > is ideal for handling IMAP 2-phase deletion and expunge. Mulberry mail > was on the right track, but it seems to have died. Yes, I'm convinced that's for the absence of a simple user interface. 90% of it's features should be hidden from 90% of users. The cross-platform thing doesn't seem to work very well, either. > Maybe the Qualcomm folks will do something better with Thunderbird with > their Penelope extensions. > > As always, the best thing is to choose the right tool for the job. > > >> It can hardly be accidental that Microsoft's flagship email clients >> don't quite interoperate nicely with standards based IMAP servers. >> Seems to me it's a driver towards sales of Exchange server services. > > Indeed -- it is no accident, and it's not just about MS-Exchange, it's a > whole philosophy and business methodology engineered to put the screws > to open standards and open source. -- Ian Eiloart IT Services, University of Sussex 01273-873148 x3148 For new support requests, see http://www.sussex.ac.uk/its/help/ ---- Cyrus Home Page: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/ Cyrus Wiki/FAQ: http://cyrusimap.web.cmu.edu/twiki List Archives/Info: http://asg.web.cmu.edu/cyrus/mailing-list.html
