[kwlug-disc] Does anyone want to take over Thunderbird?

[Bob Jonkman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
>> Google has IMAP and SMTP interfaces. I haven’t done any real 
>> testing but I’m pretty sure they’re adhering to the RFCs.

Then B.S. wrote:
> They don't.
> 
> The very presence of labels instead of real folders demonstrates 
> that.
> 
> I'm not saying labels don't make sense, but not being RFC, and 
> developers wanting to stick with RFCs, not moving target
> googleisms, means that non-google use of gmail will always be
> problematic to at least some extent.

Google's IMAP implementation presents the labels as folders, so as far
as any IMAP MUA is concerned, they *are* folders. The database for the
message store of Google Mail may use labels, and the Google WebUI may
present them as labels, but their IMAP implementation uses folders.

It's been my experience that when Google implements an IETF standard
they do so very well: Google Reader did a really good job with
Atom/RSS, Google Talk did a really good job with XMPP, Google Calendar
does a really good job with iCalendar, and there seems to be nothing
about Google's IMAP that flummoxes any IMAP MUA.  The trouble is that
Google pulls everything into their proprietary world, so Google Reader
no longer exists (and Google Plus has no feeds at all), Google Talk
became Google Hangouts (which is supposed to use WebRTC but I've only
ever got it to work with their proprietary plugin), Google Calendar
doesn't implement CalDAV but requires a plugin to talk to their
calendar API, and I fear for the future of iCalendar and IMAP.

- --Bob.


On 01/12/15 01:57 PM, B.S. wrote:
>> Google has IMAP and SMTP interfaces. I haven’t done any real 
>> testing but I’m pretty sure they’re adhering to the RFCs.
> 
> 
> They don't.
> 
> The very presence of labels instead of real folders demonstrates 
> that.
> 
> I'm not saying labels don't make sense, but not being RFC, and 
> developers wanting to stick with RFCs, not moving target
> googleisms, means that non-google use of gmail will always be
> problematic to at least some extent.
> 
>> Well you could argue that for any MUA; what constitutes right? 
>> There are dozens of workflows, ways to implement filtering, 
>> quoting, spell/grammar check, flagging…
> 
> 
> Right, but what I was referring to there were your comments
> regarding user interface, especially across platforms.
> 
> However, when the underlying e-mail store / platform doesn't adhere
>  to standards, non-google implementations will always be beat.
> 
> Not saying I disagree with your usage / presentment comments,
> merely, be fair. It's not that others can't get gmail right, it's
> that gmail doesn't play nice. That is indisputable.
> 
>> gmail web interface. Millions more use Outlook and are happy.
> 
> I think more likely millions and gmail users just use what's in
> front of them, however it appears or works today, and lives with
> it.
> 
>> It’s us, the unreasonable ones who want the ultimate MUA who are
>>  frustrated.
> 
> 
> Mmm, not entirely. The basic point about this thread is ... it (tb)
>  WAS/is working (sufficiently well) / ain't broken ... leave it be,
>  return to its original purpose, don't abandon it. E-mail is a
> solved problem, stop (mozilla) from morphing it into something
> else. E-mail is what it is, leave it be (mozilla).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Andrew Kohlsmith (mailing lists account) 
>> <aklists at mixdown.ca> To: KWLUG discussion <kwlug-disc at kwlug.org> 
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 1, 2015 1:39 PM Subject: Re:
>> [kwlug-disc] Does anyone want to take over Thunderbird?
>> 
>>> On Dec 1, 2015, at 1:31 PM, B.S. <bs27975 at yahoo.ca> wrote: Be 
>>> 'fair' ... gmail is non-standard, and a moving target. Thus
>>> only
>>> 
>> google will 'get it right' (for their definition of right, == 
>> non-standard), never mind across platforms, like web / chrome / 
>> android / chromecast. And, thus, the web interface.
>> 
>> Google has IMAP and SMTP interfaces. I haven’t done any real 
>> testing but I’m pretty sure they’re adhering to the RFCs.
>> 
>>> By definition, then, others will never be able to 'do it
>>> right.’
>> 
>> Well you could argue that for any MUA; what constitutes right? 
>> There are dozens of workflows, ways to implement filtering, 
>> quoting, spell/grammar check, flagging…
>> 
>> Getting the email from there to here is trivial. The trouble is
>> all about how to present it to the user and allow the user to 
>> manipulate it. Thunderbird was pretty good. I’m suriving with 
>> Mail.app. Thousands (millions?) are fine with the gmail web 
>> interface. Millions more use Outlook and are happy.
>> 
>> It’s us, the unreasonable ones who want the ultimate MUA who are
>>  frustrated. Everyone else just learns to adapt and deal with
>> it.
>> 
>> 
>> -A.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________ kwlug-disc
>> mailing list kwlug-disc at kwlug.org 
>> http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ kwlug-disc mailing
>  list kwlug-disc at kwlug.org 
> http://kwlug.org/mailman/listinfo/kwlug-disc_kwlug.org
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Ensure confidentiality, authenticity, non-repudiability

iEYEARECAAYFAlZeBz8ACgkQuRKJsNLM5epi+gCdElKdac5fg7OcLTSsJvdMMM6c
8OoAoKEu7QE8WeVYomsLFFxAmj24u/Ac
=RzqO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----