Non-gui Email clients - alternatives to Pine

  • Thread starter Thread starter Howard Schwartz
  • Start date Start date
H

Howard Schwartz

After a long time using PCpine as my email client, I recently noticed its
executable weighs in about about 6 megs, for text only console application.
Also, I am starting to mind the unnecessary steps for getting things done
in Pine.

Any recommendations for a Text only, console email client, like Pine, that
I or you like better?
 
Mike Williams said:
an you tell me why you want text only?
is this a 386 you are working on?
Click to expand...

No I can run irfanview and firefox etc. when I need constant pictures.
Pine is not strictly speaking a console, text only client: It calls
appripriate external programs to show pictorial attachments, html, etc.

Email clients are not really supposed to be all purpose message exchange
systems, although they can be used that way by attaching attachments.

90% of the time I just want to read and write the information in email
with text. Do not see the need for the gui layer. Usually console
applications are faster, smaller, more efficient when they need not
include all the stuff to make everything on the screen a picture of
sorts (e.g., raster image). Pine is a mostly text console program, so
since I am looking for something like that only better for my needs,
I asked for something like that. If I got unhappy with Eudora, I would
probably ask about programs like Eudora.

It is persistently amazing that whatever the field, one has to defend one's
personal choice to use something earlier or somehow different that whatever
is the prevailing style.
 
hello... you must have lots experience with linux then...
most windows only users like GUI programs only....
 
No I can run irfanview and firefox etc. when I need constant pictures.
Pine is not strictly speaking a console, text only client: It calls
appripriate external programs to show pictorial attachments, html, etc.

Email clients are not really supposed to be all purpose message exchange
systems, although they can be used that way by attaching attachments.

90% of the time I just want to read and write the information in email
with text. Do not see the need for the gui layer. Usually console
applications are faster, smaller, more efficient when they need not
include all the stuff to make everything on the screen a picture of
sorts (e.g., raster image). Pine is a mostly text console program, so
since I am looking for something like that only better for my needs,
I asked for something like that. If I got unhappy with Eudora, I would
probably ask about programs like Eudora.

It is persistently amazing that whatever the field, one has to defend one's
personal choice to use something earlier or somehow different that whatever
is the prevailing style.
Click to expand...

I don't know about "better" but a google search using "dos email"
turned up quite a few links, including this one:

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~jchap/tvde.htm

"DOS Email - The BareBones DOS email system"
 
John said:
hello... you must have lots experience with linux then...
Click to expand...

Emacs! The One True Editor.

I have a VDS account, and I like emacs the best when it comes to reading
my email over a console.
 
Craig said:
Mark Carter wrote:
Click to expand...
Emacs is Latin for "amateur." vi, otoh, means "virile."
Click to expand...

Bah. Any editor that can't play space invaders is no editor at all ;)

Interestingly, I heard about as company that, when doing job interviews,
basically asked "emacs or vi"? If you answered "emacs" then you didn't
get the job, on the basis that emacs users were likely to be "too
perfectionist".
 
Mark said:
Bah. Any editor that can't play space invaders is no editor at all ;)

Interestingly, I heard about as company that, when doing job interviews,
basically asked "emacs or vi"? If you answered "emacs" then you didn't
get the job, on the basis that emacs users were likely to be "too
perfectionist".
Click to expand...

The preferred answer these days is "vim". :-) (Hey, it's freeware, so
it's on on-topic!!!!)

And let's not get into another round of editor wars, I waded through all
that crap back in the 1980s, along with the shell wars.

BORING!!!!!!

BORINGER!!!!

BORINGEST!!!

Cheers,
Gary B-)
 
I prefer artificial intelligence, 3d virtual worlds, voice recongnition and
thought pattern recognition.
 
Gary said:
The preferred answer these days is "vim".

And let's not get into another round of editor wars, I waded through all
that crap back in the 1980s, along with the shell wars.
Click to expand...

Oh ain't that the truth! Happily, ksh won /that/ one!

<g>
-Craig
 
Craig said:
Oh ain't that the truth! Happily, ksh won /that/ one!
Click to expand...
Oh, what's /ksh/? Some new variant of "csh"? I've never heard of that
one (whistles innocently...)

Cheers,
Gary B-)

P.S. Nah, the shell wars _I_ recall were between sh and csh. The
others are all greenhorns.
 
I don't know about "better" but a google search using "dos email"
turned up quite a few links, including this one:

http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~jchap/tvde.htm

"DOS Email - The BareBones DOS email system"
Click to expand...

Yes there are many dos email clients and I am aware of this one. You bring
up a specific I should have mentioned: Dos email requires what they
call ``packet drivers'' instead of winsock.dll to transfer data over
the internet.

I do not even know if one can load a packet driver dos TSR and not have
some kind of conflict with winsock.dll in terms of using both dos and
windows internet clients. Certainly it would be double jeopardy.

Pine is unique, in that it uses the windows OS's methods of internet
communication, not dos packet drivers, but is itself a console application.

There may not be very many clients with a text only dos-like interface that
are, functionally, windows programs. And pcpine is definitely a windows
program!
 
Howard Schwartz said:
Any recommendations for a Text only, console email client, like Pine,
that I or you like better?
Click to expand...

Maybe mutt, but I've never tried it. The description says several separate
programs must be set up to support it (sendmail for your smtp, fetchmail
for pop...), yet other docs say smtp and pop support are now built-in.
Very confusing. If you like a challenge (!):
http://www.geocities.com/win32mutt/
 
Back
Top