I HATE Evolution ! Thunderbird ?

Aaron Konstam akonstam at sbcglobal.net
Tue Jun 10 13:41:06 UTC 2008

On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 18:42 -0700, Craig White wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 11:56 -0700, Dan Thurman wrote:
> > On Monday 09 June 2008 11:08:46 am linuxguy wrote:
> > > I've been using Evolution as my email client since RH8.  I hate it
> > > because it seems to get confused if one opens up an email or changes
> > > [snip!]
> > > Is anyone using Thunderbird like this ?  How does it compare ?  How hard
> > > is it to move over to it ?
> > > Thanks
> > 
> > 1) I have had the same sort of problems (and more) with Evolution
> >     and I got tired of it.  The hard part is getting it all configured
> >     correctly. But even then, it is a resource hog as you mentioned,
> >     but what pissed me off mostly was bugs, crashes, and manually
> >     killing the processes when things go wrong with evo.
> > 
> > 2) I have tried Kmail and again, it has it's own set of problems,
> >     one involving threads, and it is SLOW depending on your MB.
> >     I am using an Intel dual-proc Core-Duo w/2GB ram and it is slow
> >     only because it needs to sync and process each email messages
> >     if you enable thread support.  It seems faster without threading
> >     enabled. By threading, I mean email threading.  I LOVE the versatility
> >     of configuring the Fonts for each gui panes.  Very nice.  This is my
> >     current email client. As with Thunderbird, when you click on a folder,
> >     it is at this point where synchronization to the server gets updated and
> >     you have to wait until it is finished - the CPU hits hard, slowing things
> >     down, so you are somewhat forced to wait before beginning the next
> >     step.  I wish that this process is done automatically, is niced, and
> >     happens transparently, but it is what it is.
> > 
> > 3) I have successfully configured and tried Thunderbird and I do like it
> >     but it is not as versatile/configurable as Kmail, imo.  I ran into trouble
> >     initially with configuring since it was 'different' than what I was used
> >     to and had to get used to the idea of 'expunge' and emtpying the 'trash',
> >     a two-step process.  With Kmail, I just have to empty the trash but then
> >     I set the configuration to empty the trash on exit.  Pretty minor.
> > 
> > In all three cases above, my biggest problem was connecting to M$ exchange
> > as my main email server - I had to configure exchange to ALLOW connections
> > but once I got through this correctly, it all worked well.
> > 
> > FWIW,
> ----
> FWIW - I use Evolution and have used it for years and I get A LOT of
> e-mail.
> The only issue I have ever had with Evolution and slow/crashing was when
> I turned on 'junk mail filtering' as that tends to really drag it
> down...perhaps they've improved that aspect because I haven't used it
> for years.
> If I was dealing with Exchange server, I surely would be using Evolution
> and the Exchange connector.
> Craig
I agree with Craig. I have never had the above problems with evolution.
But I havwe never tried to manage 150,000 e-mails locally.
It's no use crying over spilt milk -- it only makes it salty for the
Aaron Konstam telephone: (210) 656-0355 e-mail: akonstam at sbcglobal.net

More information about the users mailing list