KMail vs. Evolution vs. Thunderbird? 115
Deemo asks: "I use Mozilla Thunderbird on the Windows machine. Recently I installed kUbuntu, on a separate computer. Since I'm using KDE, the obvious choice is to use KMail as my default mail application. However, I tend to like Evolution's interface better, and I like Thunderbird in general from extensive use of the Windows version. I was wondering what the advantages/disadvantages are of each, and which one Slashdot users recommend for everyday use."
In all honesty (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm a thunderbird user. Not because it's better or cooler, it's the one I'm used to using and I like it.
If you like Evolution, good for you. If you like Kmail, good for you. If you like Outlook, gasp, good for you!
reasons I like kmail (Score:5, Insightful)
None Of The Above. Webmail only. (Score:4, Insightful)
Use IMAP? Use KMail. (Score:4, Insightful)
Finally I had enough. I tried KMail. It has superb offline IMAP support: operations happen quickly and in the background, and are queued as well, letting me continue to do things while KMail syncs it. It has nice little features like automatically changing addresses from "someone at somewhere dot org" to "someone@somewhere.org". It also seems faster than Tb.
I still like Tb; it has a good interface, and is pleasant to use. I will try 1.5 when it comes out. But I am also disappointed in the Tb's team not fixing old, simple, outstanding bugs that have been in the bug db for years. There are some important ones that are breaking Tb for people, but they don't seem to care. Those people would be glad to help test and debug...but the Tb team has more important things on their list, it seems.
So, I highly recommend KMail.
Re:It's very simple (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Use IMAP, try them all. (Score:3, Insightful)
For my mail server, I run IMAP (specifically Cyrus IMAPD) with server-side filtering rules (using sieve). These rules basically filter things caught by spamassassin and messages from mailing lists into their appropriate mail folters.
On the client side, I can use whatever the heck I want. I use KMail on my desktop, Mail.app on my laptop (it's a PowerBook), pine when I ssh in remotely, and RoundCube for Webmail (new AJAX thing, still heavily development/featureless, but very nice and clean look/feel).
It is so nice that my e-mail is not tied to my e-mail client in any way, shape, or form.
I prefer KMail (Score:1, Insightful)
(1) KMail is mature. It can handle a variety of mail delivery systems properly. In particular, it handles my setup extremely well. (The others do equally well, however.)
(2) KMail integrates well into the KDE platform. If you're using KDE, you'll probably like KMail. If you're not, then it probably won't work for you.
(3) KMail seems to be snappier and less memory hungry than Evolution and Thunderbird. (I haven't used recent versions of Thunderbird, so this may not be true.)
(4) KMail handles HTML and Outlook mail reasonably well. It doesn't try to pressure me to use HTML format, but it does pretty well with it anyway.
(5) I tried for a while to use the command line MUAs. Mutt was my best fit, but it had weaknesses where KMail had strengths. I think KMail does a reasonable job of keeping the UNIX philosophy in that it doesn't try to do everything, just reading and delivering mail.
(6) KMail seems more intuitive. The keyboard settings seemed to fit my style, whereas the others don't quite match well.
(7) KMail has reasonable support for mailing lists. The others may have good support to, it's just that I haven't been able to get them to work together too well.
Ultimately, it comes down to choice. I don't expect many people to have similar experiences to mine.