On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 12:59:11PM -0500, Daniel Taylor wrote: > I know that it is configurable (and knew then), I just feels like the > writers of mutt don't _want_ people who are used to pine switching over. > It is easy to avoid software when you feel that the writers don't want > you to use it. "I know Linux is configurable but I just feels like the writers don't _want_ people who are used to Windows switching over." Hellloooo... The writing on the wall is "There is more than one way to do it". Nobody forces you to use the defaults. All the options are clearly documented in the manual, FAQ. Tons of examples exist on the Internet. _You_ haven't paid a cent for the program, and haven't coded a line: why do you whine about the default configuration? Argue it, change it, pay somebody - _DO_ something about it, if it's not up to your "expectations". Sorry for the rant. > Pine may have a crappy license, but it has been written since day 1 to > be easy to use (for tenured English profs and the like), and still > have features that experienced users want. It isn't perfect, but I like > it. Not again - "emacs is easier to use than vi"... You like pine, fine. Use it. > On Sun, 1 Jul 2001, Nate Straz wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 01, 2001 at 10:31:55AM -0500, Daniel Taylor wrote: > > > I still prefer Pine to Mutt, this may be because the people who made Mutt > > > made 'x' with no modifiers "quit now without asking and forget all mailbox > > > changes" where in Pine it is "eXpunge deleted e-mails, ask first". You spent more time explaining why you don't like mutt that looking in the manual for the configuration... florin -- "you have moved your mouse, please reboot to make this change take effect" 41A9 2BDE 8E11 F1C5 87A6 03EE 34B3 E075 3B90 DFE4