[HN Gopher] Our plans for Thunderbird on Android
___________________________________________________________________
Our plans for Thunderbird on Android
Author : HieronymusBosch
Score : 541 points
Date : 2022-06-13 13:15 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.thunderbird.net)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.thunderbird.net)
| fartcannon wrote:
| I wish companies like Mozilla offered simple email hosting.
| Something I could use with a custom domain. Cheap, like tutanota.
| mxuribe wrote:
| Most days I'm 50/50 on that approach...On days when i support
| that, i would be so happy to pay them which would sustain their
| dev efforts, enable open source to persevere, etc. And, i trust
| them tons more than other providers. But honestly on other
| days, it would begin to feel like too many eggs into one
| basket...maybe not as bad as Microsoft level...even still,
| whether i would use them or not, i would certainly welcome a
| world where there would be another, solid (trustworthy) email
| provider - even if only to give folks an option beyond just
| Microsoft, Gmail, etc.
| pmontra wrote:
| As a Thunderbird and K-9 user this is 51% good news and 49%
| possibly bad new.
|
| Good news because it should increase the chances that the two
| products will live a longer life.
|
| Possibly bad news because I'm one of the crowd that went back to
| K-9 5.600 because the new version destroyed the UI that was the
| primary reason why we picked K-9 over other apps. 100% self
| selection bias here. There was maybe an ongoing effort to offer
| the old interface as an option. I'm not sure Mozilla's going to
| invest into that. On the other side, the way I'm using
| Thunderbird is very close to the old K-9.
|
| A wish: an IMAP server backed by Thundebird's local storage and
| K-9 as client.
| decrypt wrote:
| May I ask what Thunderbird local storage means? Does that mean
| that emails are delivered and stored on the device, vs on a
| cloud server?
| dylan604 wrote:
| Yeah, to me, it sounds like a confusion in understanding what
| IMAP and POP email accounts are and how they work.
| jacooper wrote:
| Honestly I'm totally the opposite. I had a very negative
| impression on k-9 when I tried to use it a long time ago
| because of it's old interface.
|
| However I recently needed an email app, I tried Fairmail but it
| has so many options, and its UI is very weird. I switched to
| K-9 and its perfect!, yes its not fully modern looking but its
| easy to use and simple to get started with. If K-9 stayed with
| the holo UI I probably wouldn't have used it.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| I actually stopped using K9 because it stuck to the
| ridiculously outdated, and honestly quite ugly, Holo interface.
| Holo worked as long as the entire system was consistent, but as
| soon as material design got fixed in Android 7 (took them a
| while to cut down on the margins!) I was over Holo.
|
| I don't feel like setting up my mail client again but looking
| at the current design I'm pleasantly surprised. I'll probably
| give it a go as soon as the Thunderbird team and the K9 team
| have joined forces for an actual release.
| throwaway0x7E6 wrote:
| rollcat wrote:
| How I miss Holo. It was simple, consistent, basic but still
| elegant.
|
| Personally, it was the transition from Holo to Material that
| drove me off Android entirely. There was no such thing as
| dark mode at the time Android 5 dropped; you had to set
| brightness very low to stand a chance at reading anything in
| the dark, and with many (almost all?) apps still using the
| dark Holo, looking at and using the device was jarring. I
| switched to Jolla, and later to iOS.
|
| I'm happy Android users didn't have to suffer through another
| platform-wide redesign in the meantime, but I personally
| don't find Material appealing.
| jeroenhd wrote:
| I think Material done well looks quite attractive.
|
| The problem is that very few developers seem to read the
| Material Design guidelines on offsets and such and the
| offsets often look cobbled together. Not even Google
| themselves can consistently follow their own design
| guidelines.
|
| To be fair, as long as I can keep basic features (i.e. an
| app drawer and placing my icons and widgets wherever I'd
| like) I'd be fine with a Cupertino styles phone as well, as
| long as the damn thing is consistent. Back in the Holo days
| everybody but the game devs followed Holo because it was
| quite easy to follow, there weren't a lot of subtle details
| if you used existing components. Looking back at screenshot
| it looked a bit clunky, but every app looking nearly
| platform native was a huge plus that we don't seem to get
| on Android anymore.
| fnord123 wrote:
| > A wish: an IMAP server backed by Thundebird's local storage
| and K-9 as client
|
| Isn't Thunderbird using some weird file based system? Wouldn't
| an SQLite backed client be a better idea in general? What would
| the advantage of thunderbirds local storage have aside from
| maturity?
| mook wrote:
| The old format was basically "concatenate all mail together
| in one giant file". I believe newer versions support Maildir
| ("pretend you're an IMAP server"), partly to support
| antivirus better (i.e. when things get quarantined under you,
| hope only the bad message gets moved instead of all your
| mail).
|
| They do have a weird database format ("mork"), but that is
| for state tracking, address books, etc. and not the actual
| messages, I believe.
| danShumway wrote:
| I'll say that I personally thought the old interface was pretty
| outdated and clunky, and I regularly wished it could be a bit
| better. But, I do sympathize.
|
| I guess it kind of depends on (sans acquisition) whether that
| old UI would have actually been offered as an option. If so,
| then yeah, this is probably bad news for you. If not, then...
| at least there should be some new features coming out, and
| maybe the eventual interface they go with won't be quite as
| generic as the new one.
|
| But yeah, I sympathize, I'm just not sure that with any long-
| term OS project on Android that you'd be able to indefinitely
| get away with having no interface changes regardless of whether
| the project gets sold or not. Even though I do think it's
| reasonable to want to stick with the existing interface.
| cookiengineer wrote:
| Note that Mozilla has nothing to do with Thunderbird anymore.
| They abandoned Thunderbird and it's a totally separate
| community project these days.
| Fnoord wrote:
| P=P is based on K-9 and had a material design UI long before
| K-9 had it.
|
| Postbox is based on Thunderbird with a more modern UI, but
| its Windows and macOS only (does work in Wine).
|
| I stick with FairEmail on Android for now. Its completely
| FOSS and in active development.
| brnt wrote:
| I've seen P=P (or pEp) and even used it, but I've never
| heard anyone mention it till now. Visually it's clear its a
| fork of K9, but you can't find any trace of that on their
| website or repo (it's self hosted). Seems to be no
| community around it, while it seems a solid choice,
| especially if you use openpgp. Have you used it?
| mqus wrote:
| I probably know less than you, but at least the linked
| donations page https://give.thunderbird.net/en-US/k9mail/ has
| heavy mozilla branding and also talks about "Mozilla
| Thunderbird"...
|
| thunderbird.net states at the bottom: Thunderbird is now part
| of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary
| of Mozilla Foundation.
| password4321 wrote:
| Ha, Firefox should move out too!
| conradev wrote:
| Thunderbird operates independently within Mozilla:
|
| > There was a time when Thunderbird's future was uncertain,
| and it was unclear what was going to happen to the project
| after it was decided Mozilla Corporation would no longer
| support it. But in recent years donations from Thunderbird
| users have allowed the project to grow and flourish
| organically within the Mozilla Foundation. Now, to ensure
| future operational success, following months of planning,
| we are forging a new path forward. Moving to MZLA
| Technologies Corporation will not only allow the
| Thunderbird project more flexibility and agility, but will
| also allow us to explore offering our users products and
| services that were not possible under the Mozilla
| Foundation
|
| https://blog.thunderbird.net/2020/01/thunderbirds-new-home/
| folkrav wrote:
| Still a far ways from having "nothing to do" with it
| rjzzleep wrote:
| Mozilla Foundation and Mozilla Corporation are not the
| same thing.
| [deleted]
| dizhn wrote:
| It's still part of mozilla the company and has a special
| advantage in that they can actually receive donations
| directly, unlike the browser project.
| zerocrates wrote:
| Though they aren't tax deductible. So I wonder how much
| they actually get.
|
| Having decided to just look while writing this comment,
| apparently it was a couple million last year? Which doesn't
| seem bad.
| MatthiasPortzel wrote:
| Yeah, the 3 million that Thunderbird specifically got in
| donations last year is absurd. I suspect it's more than
| any other user-facing non profit open source application.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| > that they can actually receive donations directly, unlike
| the browser project.
|
| I would love to donate to the browser, while my small
| donation won't make it independent from Google's money it
| might be a small step towards it.
|
| I don't especially mind their political agenda, however
| that's not what I want to donate to, I have other political
| orgs I prefer.
| avian wrote:
| > Note that Mozilla has nothing to do with Thunderbird
| anymore.
|
| Mozilla the non-profit owns the for-profit corp who owns
| Thunderbird.
|
| In their own words from the footer of
| https://www.thunderbird.net:
|
| > Thunderbird is now part of MZLA Technologies Corporation, a
| wholly owned subsidiary of Mozilla Foundation.
| cookiengineer wrote:
| ... which is in conflict with the Thunderbird FAQ [1]:
|
| > Who makes Thunderbird?
|
| > Thunderbird is developed, tested, translated and
| supported largely by group of dedicated volunteers, plus
| paid staff. Thunderbird is an independent, community driven
| project. Therefore its paid staff, budget and fundraising
| are entirely managed and overseen by the Thunderbird
| Council, which is elected by the Thunderbird Community.
| Thunderbird development is made possible by funds donated
| by the Thunderbird community. (Mozilla Corporation, the
| makers of Firefox, and Mozilla Messaging no longer develop
| Thunderbird. But Mozilla still supports Thunderbird by
| hosting many of the Thunderbird resources.)
|
| [1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/thunderbird-
| faq#w_who-m...
| bobajeff wrote:
| I wonder if the future of Firefox is becoming primarily a
| community driven project. I kind of hope so.
| Groxx wrote:
| Given how SMS on Android is basically just a database that's
| shared between all SMS apps... it does seem like there should
| be an email equivalent. Not having to plug my password into
| every email app would be a good thing.
|
| Or does IMAP cover that sufficiently well, e.g. not requiring
| duplicating a ton of data? I haven't dug into the spec before,
| I've just always used it with "download everything all the
| time" configs, but I know it has remote searching and a few
| other things that'd fit reasonably well with a content
| provider.
| tjoff wrote:
| So that more apps can snoop on your email? Why would you want
| to use more than one email-app _for the same accounts_? (I
| get that you might want to use the gmail app for a gmail
| account, but then using the same account in K9 doesn 't make
| much sense to me)
| kroltan wrote:
| As far as I understand, there is still exclusive access to
| 1 app at a time, it's just that the accounts and
| sending/receiving is handled by the OS, and apps call into
| the OS to do operations, rather than maintaining their own
| credential stores and talking POP/IMAP/whatever directly to
| servers.
| tjoff wrote:
| Not being forced to enter your credentials in android
| itself is a feature.
|
| Back in early android-days many email-apps actually added
| an android account for IMAP/POP accounts. Which felt
| quite awkward. And I suspect that it was trivial for any
| app to list your accounts and get all of your registered
| email-addresses.
| Groxx wrote:
| Yeah, android's "accounts" thing really has not worked
| out in practice. It always felt half-complete and
| strange, and it's still a very rough experience.
|
| In principle it... might make sense? A system-provided-
| and-presumably-more-secure login method isn't inherently
| a bad idea. But without a deeper commitment from them / a
| better way to _actually_ trust it / more consistent
| updates from OEMs (lol, yeah right), apps really have
| ended up generally better and more trustworthy.
| Groxx wrote:
| Content providers can require app signatures, approval,
| whatever they want. So... no? Unless you build something
| that allows everyone to read your email. But don't build
| that if you don't want that.
|
| As far as "why": why not? Some apps do some things better
| than others. You can already do this with IMAP, it'd just
| be deduplicating the download cost / connections / etc,
| which is generally a good thing for mobile use.
| johntony678 wrote:
| darkwater wrote:
| Oh I was just going to finally configure K9 on my Android to
| replace the "native" Fastmail client, which sucks A LOT when you
| don't have internet connection, so this is great news. I really
| don't understand why it cannot work without internet connection,
| I'm no Android developer but locally caching the last month /
| 500MB of messages can't be that complicated.
| 0des wrote:
| Completely off topic, but did anybody spot the actual fed in the
| comments? Didnt know people just post on random nerd forums
| trying to sell drugs. That's wild.
| longrod wrote:
| If there was one product where Mozilla could have really shined,
| it was Thunderbird. There's nothing like it in the FOSS world.
| Sadly they deprioritized it over Firefox resulting in the death
| of both.
| javajosh wrote:
| As an aside, Thunderbird occupies that uncomfortable space of
| software that is libre, but seems so bloated and complex I don't
| want to install it, let alone work on it. I'm not sure if that
| perception is "accurate" (which of course depends on how you
| define things). But think of OpenOffice/LibreOffice. It's a huge,
| classically written C++ blob that is hard to check out hard to
| build and hard to contribute to. Yet, its very existence
| undermines the motivation to start something new.
|
| Surely there is a space for minimalist office suites and email
| clients, written starting with a _browser_ as a jumping off
| point, rather than a compiler? I guess I 'm arguing for an
| Electron-based docs/sheets/email/calendar using modern software
| best practices, and great components. An email client should be a
| webview + sql-lite, no? And (for office docs) maybe with a more
| thoughtful file format, like a simple html subset. Does this
| exist? And if so where do I get it? (And maybe there are better
| "jumping off points", like VSCode, which is itself a
| specialization of Electron).
| jcranmer wrote:
| > Surely there is a space for minimalist office suites and
| email clients, written starting with a browser as a jumping off
| point, rather than a compiler?
|
| As far as email clients go, Thunderbird is _literally_ what you
| are suggesting. Thunderbird is essentially the Firefox web
| browser, with all of the browser front-end code stripped off,
| and an email client dropped in its place.
| mempko wrote:
| Thunderbird is built on top of a browser. Most code for it's
| functionality isn't C++. Correct me if I'm wrong.
| mook wrote:
| Last I checked (which was a while ago), while the UI is in
| XUL / JavaScript, the bulk of the mail handling
| (POP/IMAP/SMTP, MIME parsing, etc.) was still in C++ that was
| extremely complex and hard to port to JavaScript. There was
| an attempt to rebuild a mail client in JS for FirefoxOS (the
| mobile phone thing that is now mostly KaiOS), but that's not
| used in Thunderbird as far as I know.
| jcranmer wrote:
| The backend stuff is being (slowly) ported to JS from C++.
| SMTP should be implemented in JS now, I don't know about
| the other parts.
| gspr wrote:
| > Surely there is a space for minimalist office suites and
| email clients,
|
| FWIW, my email life improved massively when I left the likes of
| Thunderbird and KMail behind for the simplicity of mu/mu4e [1].
| I hear similarly stellar things about Notmuch [2]. I'm never
| going back to an email client that even thinks about itself in
| relation to "office suites".
|
| (For casual reading, and very rare composing, on a phone, k9
| works passably well for me [3])
|
| [1] https://www.djcbsoftware.nl/code/mu/
|
| [2] https://notmuchmail.org/
|
| [3] https://k9mail.app/
| [deleted]
| throwaway892238 wrote:
| I will not use an Electron app if I can find literally any
| other kind of app. Bloated, slow, buggy, difficult
| desktop/Linux integration.
| will0 wrote:
| Arguing for electron on hn? Brave.
|
| (I like electron fwiw, it's enabled me to have a desktop
| experience with applications that would've otherwise never come
| to linux)
| ape4 wrote:
| Email clients need to display full html/css/js now
| subsection1h wrote:
| Which email clients don't block JavaScript by default? I
| quickly searched just now and couldn't find any.
| javajosh wrote:
| _> Arguing for electron on hn? Brave._
|
| Thank you for recognizing this. I admit I had a moment of
| doubt before pressing "submit". :)
| viraptor wrote:
| Keep in mind electron is just one way to go. There's Tauri
| for example, offering a very similar solution.
| subsection1h wrote:
| > _An email client should be a webview + sql-lite, no?_
|
| I strongly prefer Maildir.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maildir
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| Maildir vs mbox is like emacs vs vim.
| mxuribe wrote:
| I'm not a Thunderbird expert...but I seem to recall hearing
| some where that some desktop mail clients - especially
| Thunderbird - who use Maildir tend to also leverage sqlite
| (as an over-layer) to aid with content indexing and
| search...? If my recollection is right, that's kinda the best
| of both worlds: separate files (maildir) but speedy content
| search. :-)
| TheFreim wrote:
| > but seems so bloated and complex I don't want to install it
|
| I don't use thunderbird currently, but have for /very/ short
| amounts of time in the past. What seems bloated about it? For
| reading and writing e-mail it worked fine and other features
| seemed to stay out of the way in menus I didn't need to use.
| e12e wrote:
| > Surely there is a space for minimalist office suites and
| email clients
|
| It might be interesting to try and port/rewrite siag/scheme in
| a grid to racket (or Julia...)?
|
| It's the only "light-weight" office suite that comes to mind...
| uneekname wrote:
| I agree with you. It seems like the self-hosting community is
| getting a decent bit of attention right now, and the ability to
| deploy browser-based applications is the way to go for many
| FOSS projects.
|
| I think NextCloud [0] has a few apps that do G Suite-type
| stuff, but I don't have experience using them. Etherpad [1]
| also seems really good, I've used it in a few Zoom calls and
| the experience was smooth. Personally, I'm looking for a Google
| Photos alternative that's stable enough for my parents to use.
|
| [0] https://apps.nextcloud.com/
|
| [1] https://etherpad.org/
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| > Yet, its very existence undermines the motivation to start
| something new.
|
| Does it? There was just an article about claws mail on HN. Or
| on the office side, gnumeric and abiword seem decent enough.
| the__alchemist wrote:
| How about a minimalist office suite and email suite written in
| modern C++ or Rust? Performance and responsiveness are
| important!
| javajosh wrote:
| Sure, it's just there's a lot of distance between compiler
| and browser. I'd argue the first thing to do is write a
| browser in Rust (I know Firefox has real components in it).
| lkxijlewlf wrote:
| > I guess I'm arguing for an Electron-based
| docs/sheets/email/calendar using modern software best
| practices, and great components.
|
| Nope. Totally not interested in anything Electron...
| ssl232 wrote:
| I don't personally find Thunderbird to be bloated, especially
| compared to e.g. KMail (which even a few years ago was still
| buggy and unstable for me). "Complex" might be reasonable but I
| expect a lot of that comes from email protocols themselves
| being convoluted and weird. In fact, I think email's own
| complexities are what destroy most peoples' motivation to make
| a shinier, more modern tool.
|
| I will say I do have a massive, single gripe about Thunderbird,
| and while it's a trivial thing it's also - and in part because
| it would be so easy to fix - massively infuriating: the default
| keybindings for archiving, deleting, marking read emails etc.
| are, astonishingly, single characters. I've lost count how many
| times I didn't correctly highlight the filter textbox and
| started to type a search query, which instead had the effect of
| randomly archiving, deleting and marking read the top N emails
| in my inbox before I notice. This is literally why we have
| control characters, so I find it incredible that this is not
| only the default behaviour but _unchangeable without a plugin
| [1]_. I still find the tool very useful in every other way but
| I can 't believe something so obviously wrong has not yet been
| fixed after what must be at least 20 years of this software
| tool being available.
|
| [1] https://addons.thunderbird.net/en-
| GB/thunderbird/addon/tbkey...
| zasdffaa wrote:
| Same (edit: no permanent damage done yet but now I keep tbird
| minimised to prevent this kind of bad stuff from
| keybindings).
|
| And I went back to webmail for 6 weeks because when tbird
| upgraded itself, the new OAuth (I think) stuff needed
| cookies, which I didn't allow so just couldn't connect and
| just kept failing without any explanation. That took half a
| day of chasing down.
|
| And if I get a calendar invite it just tells me "all
| calendars are currently disabled. Enable an existing calendar
| or add a new one..." without 1) saying why or 2) saying how
| (and why would it not just use the one it's literally showing
| me while saying they're disabled).
|
| And it doesn't recognise domains correctly, and it strips out
| inline attachments (yes, really), and fucks up formatting
| (turns html mails into messed up plain text), and it's caused
| me so much grief since its install, can anyone suggest a
| competent, reliable email client that has a focus on quality
| and not a focus on stupid UI crap that makes it feel like
| someone's personal side-project. I'd gladly pay .
| xg15 wrote:
| > _Surely there is a space for minimalist office suites and
| email clients, written starting with a browser as a jumping off
| point, rather than a compiler?_
|
| As a user, I'd prefer a minimalist office suite that still
| doesn't have the browser as a starting point.
|
| I think a browser is actually not a good UI for an office
| programs, because it really awkwardly competes with your own
| document model: HTML at its core still wants to be a document,
| except probably not the document you want to have. So you have
| to reimplement document APIs on top of already existing
| document APIs.
|
| E.g., tracking and working with selected text is extremely
| important in office programs, but a browser already has built-
| in management of text selections: Except, the built-in
| management doesn't know which part is your chrome and which is
| your document, making you to either implement your own
| selection mechanism in addition to the browser's or handle all
| kinds of really weird special cases.
|
| And so on...
| javajosh wrote:
| It _is_ interesting how people serious about text editing
| always seem to end up throwing away most of the DOM and use
| Canvas or SVG (e.g. CodeMirror). But even then the browser
| brings a lot to the table in terms of a common runtime.
| mid-kid wrote:
| > written starting with a browser as a jumping off point
|
| That's thunderbird for ya.
|
| Really the only web-browsery thing a mail client needs is
| rendering of the email itself (if it's not just plain text,
| HTML email is an extension!), for which, sure, it's a better
| idea to use an existing webview. But for the rest of the
| interface and logic? No.
| sph wrote:
| To be fair, if you're bundling a web browser to render
| emails, you might as well write your whole UI out of it. Of
| all use cases of Electron, an email client is probably the
| least offensive.
| rvz wrote:
| So adding two disasters together makes it magnificent news? Oh
| dear.
|
| I don't think Thunderbird is that relevant today since that it's
| essentially abandoned and still no Android or iOS app for
| decades. I'd say that ship has already sailed and it would be a
| long way to go to support iOS.
|
| It has gotten this bad that they needed something like K-9 to
| have Android support, and you would have thought that even with
| Google's money they would have already funded an effort like this
| on their own. Well now lots of Mozilla fans are going to realize
| that their 'donations' _don 't_ actually go to Firefox, or
| Thunderbird, etc but are really wasted on other schemes.
|
| An opportunity thrown away for years and now they come back again
| with this announcement decades later and coming very late to the
| party after Thunderbird getting deprioritised.
|
| A giant mess.
| dang wrote:
| Can you please stop posting snarky/fulminatey comments? It's
| against the site guidelines, and unfortunately nearly
| everything you've posted recently has this quality.
|
| HN is for _curious_ conversation.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| ekianjo wrote:
| Not thrilled. I use K9 and I don't really want Thunderbird to
| have anything to do with it :/
| prmoustache wrote:
| You realize it is the same developer and can leave thunderbird
| whenever he is not happy with the direction it takes?
| wallmountedtv wrote:
| Yeah but they cannot take Thunderbird mobile back. Its now
| Mozilla property, which is the actual scary part.
| goodusername wrote:
| Thunderbird mobile will be open source, so they, or anybody
| else can fork it, and continue development independently of
| Mozilla, using a different brand. It will not be "Mozilla
| property".
| Qub3d wrote:
| As a user of Thunderbird on desktop and user/donor to K-9 on
| Android this is incredible news.
|
| Super excited to see cketti's work get a major FOSS organization
| behind it. Contrary to some other comments, I have actually been
| really happy with the new interface updates and I think giving
| K-9 a light thunderbird skin would be fantastic.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| I hope that someday I will understand why people like
| Thunderbird. It is unequivocally the _worst_ e-mail client I have
| ever used, excepting some early, extremely buggy versions of
| alpine. I tried it again recently as it is only one of only 3
| e-mail clients I found that could do exchange oauth2[1].
|
| It's possible that its interface isn't as objectively terrible as
| it seems, but it is gratuitously different; if you are going to
| be different, it should be to some purpose, but after 6 months of
| using it I still don't see any purpose. There are still some
| vestiges of its previous Eudora-like interface, but everywhere it
| is different from Eudora, it is to no purpose I can fathom.
|
| 1: The other two I could find are Evolution and davmail (which
| bridges EWS to imap). There may be more now; I last looked about
| a year ago. I can unreservedly say that using Evolution is better
| experience than Thunderbird, though its underlying architecture
| is a bit bizarre.
| miedpo wrote:
| Hmmm... let me try and answer this, as someone who likes
| Thunderbird quite a bit (and is cool with people not liking it,
| but just wants to provide their own perspective).
|
| For traditional business email, you are pretty much stuck with
| two options - Outlook or Thunderbird. You can try and use
| webmail of various types - and there are some decent webmail
| clients out there - but it's just not quite the same as using a
| good Desktop client.
|
| For the newest Outlook versus the newest Thunderbird, Outlook
| wins feature wise - it does a lot of things and all of it is
| pretty well integrated. But if you don't need all the bells and
| whistles, Thunderbird, in my opinion, is oftentimes better than
| Outlook.
|
| For example, I find that Thunderbird has a better search than
| Outlook, and better conversation capabilities (threading and
| open message in conversation) than Outlook. It's tagging system
| and archiving system are better than Outlook's. It's add-on
| system is easier to use then Outlook's (partly because most
| everything is free). It also allows much more manipulation of
| the UI than Outlook does as far as I'm aware. All of these
| things add up, and Thunderbird becomes a much more efficient
| email client than Outlook for me, which is important if I need
| to deal with 100 or so emails a day.
|
| On top of these things, in my opinion, Thunderbird is really
| good and not causing issues down the line. Part of my job is to
| manage workplace computers (probably no where near as many as
| some folk here on this site, but not a really small amount
| either), the amount of trouble Thunderbird gives me compared to
| the amount of trouble Outlook gives me... well, it makes me
| want to make everyone use Thunderbird. There are only two
| things I really have to worry about with thunderbird (they
| relate to the calendar and mass moving large amounts of
| emails), but with Outlook... well... I've had to repair
| people's email enough that I never want to do it again. It
| sucks. I hate repairing .pst files.
|
| Mmm... I personally have never tried Evolution or davmail, so I
| can't speak to them, unfortunately. I will have to try them
| later probably. As for Exchange OAuth, yeah, I can see you
| having some troubles with it in Thunderbird. I was having
| Microsoft 365's IMAP implementation give us trouble (ended up
| dropping it). On the other hand, it was also giving older
| versions of Outlook trouble... so I'm not sure I can put the
| blame solely on Thunderbird for this one. I do hope you find
| something that does what you want it to though.
| jraph wrote:
| I don't know. I've been using it since 2005. Its UI is stable
| and efficient. Gets the job done and does not get in the way.
| And it's free software.
|
| You are not actually saying what you don't like about
| Thunderbird so it's hard to oppose anything to your comment.
| Why Thunderbird should change its UI if it works okay?
| Gratuitously different from what by the way?
|
| And to me, the UIs of Evolution and KMail don't seem that much
| different from Thunderbird's and from what I've seem from
| Outlook, same thing. There's a pane listing inboxes and
| folders, there's a pane showing the content of the selected
| folder and there's a pane showing the selected email's content.
| ?
| oblib wrote:
| I've been using it for a few years now. The UI is outdated
| and a bit clunky but it's worked great for me on my old Mac
| Mini and the old Apple Mail app is pretty much unusable now.
| My next best option is Roundcube Webmail, and it's pretty
| good too.
|
| I have a hard time with complaining about free software. I
| either use it or don't, but I won't complain about it.
| sph wrote:
| People do not appreciate good UIs enough. I think many
| software engineers might be UI-blind, actually.
|
| Thunderbird is ugly, atrocious on 4K screens, does not group
| messages by conversation like mail client have in the past 20
| years, and insists on listing emails in side-by-side columns
| instead of using a more compact and space-effective layout
| like many mail clients in the past 20 years. It's got a
| menubar, 3 level of toolbars and a burger menu; unnecessary
| tabs, cramped spacing, and two search fields. It offers XMPP
| chat and in-browser junk filtering when the former is pretty
| much dead, and the second is not needed anymore since GMail
| and its modern competition.
|
| Someone mentioned LibreOffice elsewhere in the comment, and
| both projects seems stuck in the 2005 UI, UX and feature
| wise. I actively avoid using them even if I have to resort to
| using subpar web applications.
| krylon wrote:
| I like Thunderbird's UI. It doesn't get in the way, and
| more importantly, I have used it for a long time, so I know
| my way around it quite well. A lot of attempts to "improve"
| UIs end with things like Microsoft's Ribbon interface
| (which I really dislike).
|
| > does not group messages by conversation
|
| Thunderbird _can_ group messages by conversation. One has
| to ask for it specifically in the Sorting menu, which
| admittedly is annoying and should be the default. But it is
| there.
|
| > [client-side spam filtering] is not needed anymore since
| GMail and its modern competition.
|
| It kind of is, though. Not everyone is using GMail, and my
| idea of what does or does not count as Spam might differ
| significantly from what some email provider thinks.
|
| I'm sure there are prettier mail clients around, and by all
| means, if you prefer one of those, use it. I used Apple's
| Mail.app when I using a Mac, because I needed to access an
| Exchange mailbox at the time, which sucks on Thunderbird.
| The UI looked shiny, I never got upset about it (UI or
| functionality), but I happily went back to Thunderbird when
| I got back to Linux.
| sph wrote:
| > Thunderbird can group messages by conversation. One has
| to ask for it specifically in the Sorting menu, which
| admittedly is annoying and should be the default. But it
| is there.
|
| It's not a unified conversation view like Gmail or
| Fastmail. There's a plugin that does that, but it's not
| very pleasant either.
|
| I'm on Linux, all other email clients are pretty bad or
| similarly stuck in 2005 in appearance. I am very happy
| with the Fastmail webapp, but Mozilla is against PWAs so
| I have to resort to using Chromium to keep it around as a
| standalone app. I would like to use Thunderbird, but I
| have tried getting comfortable with the UI a dozen times
| in as many years, and I uninstall it in frustration 30
| minutes later. These days it is also very sad to open its
| extension store and see that most of its plugins are
| unmaintained and haven't been updated in years. There's a
| true feeling of abandonware every time I give it another
| chance.
| [deleted]
| Macha wrote:
| Have you used the gmail web interface?
|
| How do you do bulk actions on emails? Clicking a checkbox for
| every single one? Having to write an run a query for each set
| of emails you want to operate on in bulk?
|
| Here's how I do it in thunderbird. Sort by sender (or other
| thing). Click first email. Shift click last email. Do whatever
| I want (usually archive or move to a folder).
|
| My employer turned off IMAP access a few years ago and I've
| basically given up managing my github/jira/mailing list spam.
| Filters turn out to be surprisingly fragile.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| I used the Gmail web interface once in 2005 I think? I didn't
| include webmail in my assessment, or the office 365 mail
| client would have "won" this award.
| forgotpwd16 wrote:
| >Here's how I do it in thunderbird. Sort by sender (or other
| thing). Click first email. Shift click last email. Do
| whatever I want (usually archive or move to a folder).
|
| This is pretty basic functionality for an email client to
| have. In GMail (Proton and Yandex too; probably any modern
| web client) works by clicking the checkbox. Click first
| email's checkbox. Shift click last email's checkbox.
| Macha wrote:
| Great, speaking of basic functionality, how do I sort?
|
| I don't believe gmail supports this.
| mixedCase wrote:
| Geary is too buggy/lacks e-mail refresh, KMail is also too
| buggy although I haven't tried it in a few years, Evolution
| assumes too many GNOME parts, Mailspring is electron-based,
| TUIs are right out, Claws is even more 90s than Thunderbird.
|
| So yeah. For handling multiple e-mail accounts, Thunderbird
| works best.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| > Geary is too buggy/lacks e-mail refresh, KMail is also too
| buggy although I haven't tried it in a few years
|
| Indeed, my reaction to Geary was "wow, they managed to make
| KMail look good!"
|
| > Evolution assumes too many GNOME parts
|
| I don't like this about Evolution either; I haven't run a
| GNOME desktop for at least a decade, and (depending on the
| distro) it can be a tiny bit fiddly getting Evolution working
| without a GNOME desktop. It "just works" on recent NixOS
| versions though. Once it's installed though, it's a joy to
| use, while Thunderbird feels like a drag. I'm not a UI
| expert, so I can't put my finger on what the difference is.
|
| > Mailspring is electron-based
|
| I hadn't heard of mailspring previously, but I suspect we
| have similar views of what at typical electron-based app is
| like...
|
| > TUIs are right out
|
| I have no problem with TUIs, I use a TUI along side a gui
| mail client, but the latter is necessary when dealing with
| non text-only messages (particularly responding to).
|
| > Claws is even more 90s than Thunderbird
|
| Maybe I'm just old, but Claws is _way_ more usable than me
| than Thunderbird. The only thing it lacks for me is an html
| e-mail editor, which is necessary for responding and quoting
| to non text-only e-mails. There are plenty of good TUIs that
| can handle text-only e-mails, so claws isn 't really
| something I currently have a use for.
| jraph wrote:
| That's my experience as well. And I would like to use KMail
| since I use KDE anyway. I haven't tried Mailspring but I
| don't feel like running another Electron app when Thunderbird
| does the job amazingly well.
| thepangolino wrote:
| I fully agree with your comment. Thunderbird is just plain
| terrible.
|
| Over the weekend I migrated to a 100% Linux/open-source
| environment. So of course I went through a series of
| alternative apps. While you'd never find feature parity (eg.
| with MS Office and the Adobe Suite) existing alternatives are
| mostly good enough.
|
| Thunderbird has been tooted to me as THE alternative to MS
| Outlook. What I found was a total mess of a software stack
| needing countless addons and customization to even get close to
| Outlook. Then I discovered Evolution. It was certainly
| different but worked pretty much flawlessly out of the box.
| jraph wrote:
| I vouched for your comment.
|
| Congratulations and good luck for your migration!
|
| It's good you found a solution in Evolution. I don't use many
| extensions in Thunderbird, just one to show different colors
| in the new mail window depending on the account used to send
| the mail. I'd be interested in knowing which specific
| features of Outlook you needed that required extensions in
| Thunderbird (and that Evolution has by default).
| danielEM wrote:
| Been waiting and asking for it for years!!! Need this and desktop
| version of Firefox for Android to be able to use phone for work.
| FollowingTheDao wrote:
| Hoping it will be on F-Droid...
| zecg wrote:
| I'll be certain to use whatever fork of K-9 is available rather
| than anything Mozilla. WHERE'S THE SAVE TO PDF OPTION on mobile
| Firefox?
| Vladimof wrote:
| The worst thing with Firefox Mobile is that they still force
| you to use addon collections to use the most basic addons.
| gnomewascool wrote:
| You'll be happy to know that Thunderbird is for better or worse
| now mostly independent Mozilla's leadership.
| prophesi wrote:
| Same way you have to do it on Chrome iOS; Share the page,
| select print, and zoom in on the thumbnail to have it generate
| a PDF you can save.
| Vladimof wrote:
| I don't see that option on mine...But I use Fennec from
| Fdroid, so maybe that's why.
| smdotdev wrote:
| who_is_mr_tux wrote:
| My favorite mobile email app now working with my favorite desktop
| email app. Love it!
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| It does not support IMAP at first glance. The wizard has only
| POP3 config option.
| sam_lowry_ wrote:
| Ah, nope. Manual config has it. I wonder whether IDLE command
| is supported, but we'll see.
| danShumway wrote:
| I get skeptical about acquisitions, but from what I can tell this
| actually seems like decent news.
|
| Thunderbird isn't acquiring K-9 to kill it or merge with an
| additional product, they're buying it so they can increase its
| development speed and then put their name on it. That seems to me
| like about the best acquisition goal that they could have --
| basically saying, "what exists is good, instead of building our
| own thing let's just pour resources into what exists."
|
| It doesn't seem that conceptually different from what companies
| do with products like Blender, where sponsoring more development
| on an existing product is better than rolling an in-house
| version. The main difference being that K-9 is not independent
| now, the companies that do this with Blender don't end up owning
| Blender.
|
| So with any acquisition there's some cause for caution, but
| overall I am inclined to be pretty optimistic about this. I use
| K-9 today, and I would like to see K-9 get more resources and to
| get more parity with other clients. I'm a little bit hesitant
| about my primary email client on my phone entering an
| experimental phase where its interface is going to change a lot.
| Again, concerns, but overall this seems like actually pretty good
| news.
| II2II wrote:
| If anything, the merger makes Thunderbird more accountable for
| the future of K-9 than they would be if they sponsored it. It
| is probable a net positive.
| ycombinator_acc wrote:
| I hope they get rid of the dreaded hamburger menu and other
| Gingerbread-era design patterns and just generally make the app
| less ancient-looking and more usable on modern gesture-based
| Android.
|
| Fairemail is much better in that regard, which is why I stick to
| it, but still quite dated.
| Macha wrote:
| My one wish for K-9 is swipe-to-archive (or like the fastmail
| app, swipe to custom selected action).
|
| Other than that, while it's generally just... a bit ugly, it
| functions fine for me.
| imalerba wrote:
| Long time Thunderbird in Linux user, had to switch to Mutt a few
| months ago. Having 3 inboxes configured was taking, for some
| reason, +10Gb of disk and several Gb of RAM, plus being painfully
| slow and freeze pretty often.
| abdullahkhalids wrote:
| Disk space is as much as you have mail. If not, there is
| something wrong with your profile.
|
| I have 15 GB of mail across 5 email accounts and Thunderbird is
| currently sitting at 350 MB RAM. Rarely crosses 500MB, I think.
|
| I am encountering some freezes and occasional crashes which are
| annoying, but on linux there is nothing better.
| sillystuff wrote:
| With several 10s of thousands of messages (~70 GB) in my
| accounts, I also had issues with TB using tons of disk space
| even when set to not copy messages locally. The issue was TB's
| global search index. If you disable global search indexing in
| your config, then manually delete the global-messages-db.sqlite
| file, you can free up those 10+ GB.
|
| My fix for most annoyances was to copy mail locally, and run
| dovecot locally on the same box as TB (TB doesn't support
| standard maildir). I also added a wrapper script that does a
| VACUUM on all the sqlite dbs in the profile when starting TB.
|
| With the above, TB has worked well for me.
| alyandon wrote:
| I eventually had to switch off Thunderbird as well for similar
| reasons and just live with mutt. TB just really didn't perform
| well at all on large mailboxes (dozens of folders, thousands of
| messages per folder) without freezing the UI, gobbling
| gigabytes of ram, etc - it is obviously not targeted at my use
| case.
| andrewshadura wrote:
| Can we please have JMAP support in both? Thanks!
| emodendroket wrote:
| Hate to be a stick in the mud, but I worry about a loss of focus
| when Thunderbird is one of the few in a dying category on the
| desktop, which is much less true on mobile.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| The two work in tandem, though. I use Firefox on mobile because
| I use Firefox on desktop. That and it being the only Android
| browser that runs uBlock Origin, of course.
|
| I currently use Thunderbird on desktop, but use a combination
| of Gmail and Outlook on Android. If Thunderbird picks up K-9
| mail and turns it into a first-class mobile client, I'll
| probably use Thunderbird instead of the Outlook app. People
| like consistency.
| ekianjo wrote:
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| Works great! That's three more than Chrome supports.
|
| Plus, I'm at two now. Your post reminded me to check how
| many add-ons I actually have installed, and I realized that
| HTTPS Everywhere is no longer needed because Firefox itself
| rolled out an HTTPS-Only setting.
| sanitycheck wrote:
| I only need 1: NoScript.
|
| I hate what they've done with Mobile Firefox but it's still
| better than the alternatives.
| maleldil wrote:
| Even if Firefox for Android had only one extension (uBlock
| Origin), I'd still use it. Using an ad blocker is the
| single best thing you can do to improve your user
| experience on the web.
| nvrspyx wrote:
| Why be so condescending?
|
| Also, they could use Firefox on mobile to keep their
| history and bookmarks in sync across devices in addition to
| some extensions they find useful, like uBlock Origin as
| they mentioned. Just because the number of extensions is
| less than desktop doesn't mean the extensions that do exist
| aren't game changers for them.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| uBlock by itself is enough to justify using Firefox on
| Android. Still sucks that they made it so limited, sure,
| but Mozilla's really good at nailing "somehow the least
| awful awful browser".
| pritambaral wrote:
| Hey, 3 > 0.
|
| How many do you enjoy?
| ekianjo wrote:
| You missed the good old days of firefox on android
| supporting hundreds of extensions.
|
| progress, I guess?
| input_sh wrote:
| Ah yeah, back when page load lasted 3x as long as Chrome
| (on a lower end device at least). I've installed the
| rewrite back when it was called Firefox Preview.
| binarysneaker wrote:
| Long time Android Firefox user here, mainly because of
| Ublock. Syncing with my Mozilla account was a plus, I use
| Firefox on desktop because of its container tabs. Lately
| I switched to Brave (Android), which is noticeably
| faster, and supports extensions too.
| jeltz wrote:
| Yes, I enjoy them a lot. They, especially uBlock, are the
| reason I switched to Firefox Mobile from Chrome. No more
| annoying ads for me.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| Most of the recommended extensions on Firefox Mobile are
| also the most widely used and most needed (in particular
| uBlock Origin). But if you _really_ need more extensions,
| you can jump through a bunch of hoops in Firefox Nightly to
| get any extension you want. Some of them even work pretty
| well (I use Privacy Redirect, Stylus, and Bypass Paywalls
| Clean in addition to some of the recommended ones).
| Zak wrote:
| > _That and it being the only Android browser that runs
| uBlock Origin, of course._
|
| There's also Kiwi. It runs pretty much any extension
| available for Desktop Chromium.
| Macha wrote:
| Though once manifest v3 is the only option, it's hard to
| say that'll really be as effective as uBlock Origin on
| Firefox: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/wiki/uBlock-
| Origin-works-b...
| Zak wrote:
| That's an issue. I'm really puzzled my Mozilla's sudden
| aversion to an open repository of extensions on Android.
| woojoo666 wrote:
| I think a lot of Firefox extensions are still broken on
| mobile. For example, I can't find a single tab manager /
| session manager that works on mobile
| Macha wrote:
| Yeah, me too. My best guess is that it's PM's who are
| overprotective of their idea of how it should work and
| feel they don't have to open the box as wide as on
| desktop.
|
| But 20 > 0, all the same.
| longrod wrote:
| Firefox is a dying horse on its last throes before Hades
| claims it for its own. Mythology aside, I find it truly sad
| to see the state Firefox is in. A browser is an incredibly
| complex piece of software and what Mozilla did with Firefox
| is nothing short of brilliant. Alas, they have been left too
| far behind [0] I am afraid they'll no longer be relevant in a
| few years.
|
| Every few months Mozilla tries to overhaul it's UI and
| succeeds only to try again later. What are they trying to do?
| What's the real reason behind their slow descent into
| irrelevance?
|
| Last time I tried Firefox on Android, it was a mess. Crashing
| every few minutes, unpredictable. I hear its a lot better now
| which is great! But why did they ditch the old one?
|
| [0] https://caniuse.com/?compare=firefox+101,chrome+102&compa
| reC...
|
| edit: added link to caniuse.com
| lock-the-spock wrote:
| I find Firefox absolutely marvelous in the state it is in
| now. There certainly is no mystical death.
| itintheory wrote:
| I'm not sure which Firefox you're using, but the
| description you've laid out here doesn't match my
| experience at all. I've been using FF on desktop and
| android for years and have had no issues whatsoever. In
| what way do you feel firefox has been "left too far behind"
| ?
|
| There was a time when Chrome was faster by an ample margin,
| but it's no longer enough to be an important distinction.
| Between the privacy respecting features, and plugin support
| on mobile - Firefox is the best choice.
| longrod wrote:
| A full detailed list: https://caniuse.com/?compare=firefo
| x+101,chrome+102&compareC...
| Phelinofist wrote:
| I find the lack of nonsense API implementations to be a
| good thing
| prophesi wrote:
| I don't think this proves Firefox is dying. A better
| indicator would be Chrome's past decade of 90%+ browser
| market share. It's also worth noting that a good amount
| of the features not implemented in Firefox are either
| Chrome-specific experiments, or features purposefully
| unimplemented for privacy purposes.
|
| If anything, it shows the damage of a browser-tech
| monopoly which Edge and Brave aren't helping with.
| longrod wrote:
| I don't think features such as Web USB, Web Bluetooth are
| privacy invasive. Chrome's huge market share is the very
| reason Firefox isn't trying very hard here. They are
| playing catch up. Take Manifest v3 for example; Chrome
| introduced it quite a while ago and made it mandatory for
| new extensions in 2022. Firefox just started catching up.
|
| This is bad for Firefox because developers will
| eventually (and some still do) will simply stop
| supporting Firefox due it being so slow to catch up.
| Chrome already has such a huge market that a lot of web
| devs already don't care (e.g. Microsoft Teams).
|
| What does this signify? It's the death of Firefox unless
| Firefox pulls a miracle here. Chrome is leading, all the
| devs are following, and they leading by leaps and bounds.
| Firefox is forced to catch up which causes frustration
| among users.
|
| How long before Firefox gets tired of playing catch up
| and simply becomes irrelevant?
|
| I am not happy about this. This is clearly bad but
| inevitable. The only other real competitor is WebKit
| which is restricted to Apple only. A huge market still.
| But Google's monopoly over the browsing market will only
| cause harm in the long run. Even though it will make devs
| jobs a lot easier.
| prophesi wrote:
| > I don't think features such as Web USB, Web Bluetooth
| are privacy invasive.
|
| Coincidentally, Brave believes they are privacy-invasive
| and don't support those features either (last paragraph
| in the article)[0].
|
| Firefox, as with all other browsers aside from Safari,
| will remain with less than 5% market share for the
| foreseeable future. But I'd much rather continue
| supporting different browser engines than use a skinned
| Chromium to uphold the status quo.
|
| [0] https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/google-plan-for-
| chrome-c...
| NoGravitas wrote:
| > I don't think features such as Web USB, Web Bluetooth
| are privacy invasive.
|
| Mozilla, Apple, and Brave all disagree (as do I).
| stonogo wrote:
| You are misinformed. Firefox had their own
| implementations of WebUSB and WebBluetooth years and
| years ago -- they were necessary for FirefoxOS.
| Deprecating and removing them was a conscious decision
| because the privacy risks were deemed too great. This is
| also the case for Manifest v3; Mozilla is trying to
| determine the 'safe' (i.e. user-friendly) characteristics
| to implement and ways to mitigate the rest. Some parts of
| v3 directly conflict with Firefox architecture. As an
| example, v3 requires service workers, while Firefox
| permits entirely disabling them.
|
| The overarching theme of your writing on this topic is
| that Chrome can just spit out Web 'features' at random
| and unless Firefox implements all of them immediately it
| is dying. I hope you can try to understand that not only
| is this not an accurate assessment, but maybe also that
| Firefox has value beyond being a copy of Chrome.
| fabrice_d wrote:
| The security model used in Firefox OS to gate access to
| these APIs was very different. We never exposed these web
| bluetooth to the web at large, only to signed apps.
|
| Mozilla needs to step up and find ways to expose such
| APIs though, because they are useful. Just saying "no"
| without proposing a solution is a sure way to lose.
| There's a bit of hope recently with the implementation of
| WebMIDI in Gecko.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >I don't think features such as Web USB, Web Bluetooth
| are privacy invasive.
|
| It's telling that the only browser vendor that feels this
| way has the logo of one of the two most privacy invading
| companies in existence.
| longrod wrote:
| Brave is a way better choice. As for plugin support on
| mobile, yes that's missing but I use extensions mainly on
| desktop. Brave comes with an adblocker built in and if
| that doesn't work, you could use something like Adguard.
| ekianjo wrote:
| its mostly dying because its so poorly optimized it chokes on
| mailboxes that have more than hundred emails and cant do search
| properly. One of the worst FOSS out there.
| jfk13 wrote:
| I have mailboxes with tens of thousands of emails in them,
| and it works pretty well for me.
| aiisjustanif wrote:
| Are we talking about Thunderbird because it performs very
| well.
| tssva wrote:
| Hacker News users are much more likely to have vast email
| archives organized into folders which must be regularly
| searched than the general public. Most people have no choice
| regarding work email. Web email clients and the default
| mobile clients meet most people's personal email
| requirements. In other words 3rd party email clients are
| dying because there is a lack of demand.
| emodendroket wrote:
| The search functionality definitely could use work. But
| that's my point. What other desktop email clients are you
| going to use instead?
| NoboruWataya wrote:
| There are basically two good, actively developed FOSS email
| apps for Android: K-9 and FairEmail. Development of FairEmail
| almost ceased recently, as the developer was having issues with
| Google Play and no longer felt it was worth his time to work on
| the app. Thankfully he ultimately decided to continue
| development. I remember last year there was also a big campaign
| to get more donations for K-9 as the developers badly needed
| more resources to continue development.
|
| The category of FOSS email apps may not be dying, but it is
| small, and never far away from death. Having a large,
| established project with decent resources backing K-9 is
| definitely a good thing for the health of the category IMO.
| Personally I use FairEmail and hope that it will continue to
| thrive as well.
| andyjohnson0 wrote:
| > Thunderbird is one of the few in a dying category
|
| I reluctantly agree. I think that the continuing relevance of
| email is largely a consequence of open standards and
| interoperability - things that Google et al are getting less
| and less keen on. As well as Thunderbird allowing me to have a
| copy of _my_ emails on _my_ desktop /laptop, rather than in
| someone's cloud, I think its good to have an open-standard
| success story to point to.
|
| But in reality I use the Fastmail web client on desktop and
| Fastmail's app on my Android devices. Despite using Thunderbird
| for over a decade, nowadays I really only use it to sync a
| local email archive. I wish it were otherwise.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| In the Free Software space on mobile, though, there are not so
| many usable mail apps. Basically just K-9 Mail and FairEmail,
| as far as I know.
| btdmaster wrote:
| I really hope this leads to an improvement (reduction) to the
| stuff Thunderbird pings[0].
|
| [0] https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/thunderbird/
| [deleted]
| warabe wrote:
| This is a wonderful news! Finally, k9 mail will come with OAuth
| functionality!! or won't they?
| forbiddenlake wrote:
| Yes; this work was started even before the latest FairEmail
| kerfluffle, and is slated for K-9 6.200.
|
| https://github.com/k9mail/k-9/issues/655#issuecomment-113165...
| ephbit wrote:
| K-9 has served me pretty well over the last 8ish years.
|
| It has remained beautifully lightweight (quite an exception for
| apps nowadays) and the biggest (yet perfectly tolerable)
| annoyance has been long lines not wrapping automatically.
|
| I'm 9/10 sceptic about this cooperation and I'll be positively
| surprised if the future versions _do not_ introduce lots of
| unnecessary bloat.
| ephbit wrote:
| Ah, here it's already announced, the bloat:
|
| > Account setup using Thunderbird account auto-configuration.
|
| Perfectly unnecessary.
|
| > Syncing between desktop and mobile Thunderbird.
|
| Duh, what exactly does IMAP do?
|
| *shakes head*
| brnt wrote:
| Thunderbird auto-config just means a domain lookup in a
| database though (even better would be that everybody
| configures .well-known correctly).
| ThatGeoGuy wrote:
| This is fantastic news all around!
|
| I recall the K-9 developer needing additional funding in the
| past, so this is great news for that project [0]. In addition,
| I'd much rather use "thunderbird" on mobile as an extension of
| K9, since it has thus far been my favourite mobile client. Work
| in the most recent years has been wonderful, and it's a pleasure
| to use (although I've vastly cut down on mail on mobile because
| hey, a keyboard is better).
|
| Overall, this seems like it makes a lot of sense. Hopefully this
| will mean that the shift to supporting a mobile client won't
| detract from the good stuff desktop Thunderbird is doing as well.
|
| [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26131509
| xg15 wrote:
| I'm continually creeped out by all the PR sugarcoating on what
| essentially are simple notices of acquisition. So all this is in
| effect saying is that K9 got acquired by Mozilla and will be
| integrated into the suite of Mozilla products.
|
| The justification given in the post is just non-information,
| because you could say this for almost any pair of software
| products if you define the terms fuzzily enough:
|
| > _The Thunderbird team had many discussions on how we might
| provide a great mobile experience for our users. In the end, we
| didn't want to duplicate effort if we could combine forces with
| an existing open-source project that shared our values. Over
| years of discussing ways K-9 and Thunderbird could collaborate,
| we decided it would best serve our users to work together._
|
| I don't want to say this is bad for K9, bit I still wonder what
| will happen to existing K9 installs.
|
| If you install Android app X and, due to an acquisition, the app
| suddenly morphs into app Y which has a different branding,
| different UI, different features, a different backend and a
| different development team (but still has your data), isn't this
| exactly one of the things that the app store rules are supposed
| to protect against?
| happyopossum wrote:
| > isn't this exactly one of the things that the app store rules
| are supposed to protect against?
|
| Umm, no? There's never been a rule about an app developer
| selling their app/company - that'd be pretty badly restrictive.
| xg15 wrote:
| I don't think the selling part is the problem (per se), I
| mean the app becoming something completely different after
| the acquisition, which users never consciously installed.
| notRobot wrote:
| While not commonplace, it's not unheard of for app UI/UXes
| to be changed completely over an update.
| iggldiggl wrote:
| I've just learned (one benefit of _not_ automatically
| updating everything) that the app I 've used for syncing
| music from iTunes to my Android phone [1] plus the
| associated music player app have been sold to some
| unscrupulous developers who have apparently proceeded to
| immediately re-add ads into the paid-for (!) versions, re-
| adding the the file sync limits that originally only
| applied to the free trial version and things like that and
| (instead of the former one-time purchase) are now demanding
| something on the order of 30 $ or so per month (!!) in
| order to unlock the former paid-for features again.
|
| It'd be nice if there actually was a rule against something
| like that...
|
| [1] The key features for why I didn't just use a simple
| file sync was that it supported bi-directional syncing of
| play counts, ratings and for podcasts also the playback
| position.
| gripfx wrote:
| Is it iSyncr + Rocket Player? I am in the same boat if
| so. Have the paid versions and don't see ads at the
| moment, but the "Rate Me" popups are a bad sign.
| iggldiggl wrote:
| Good guess, yes. :-) From a brief look it seems that
| these days (I don't think it was around when I first
| looked a few years ago) MusicBee instead of iTunes on
| desktop and GoneMAD Music Player might work as a similar
| combo with bi-directional play count and ratings sync
| (although I've found somebody saying that this didn't
| actually work on a latest Android version [1], so
| hmm...), but it seems the podcasts handling might not
| work as it currently does.
|
| The problem is that while I don't need the podcasts
| syncing for regular podcasts (for which a separate
| podcasts app on my phone would be perfectly fine, and
| besides I don't listen all that much to podcasts that way
| anyway), I'm also managing my collection of radio
| comedies I've scrounged together from all sorts of places
| as podcasts in iTunes (by simply manually setting the
| media type to "Podcast" - luckily on Windows, where
| iTunes hasn't been split up into its components this is
| still possible), so that
|
| a) they're all together in one place and not cluttering
| up the music part of my library
|
| b) especially to get the nice at-a-glance listened/not
| listened/partially listened display, and
|
| c) while iTunes allows setting the "Remember my playback
| position" for any kind of file, Rocket Player apparently
| supports remembering the playback position _only_ for
| podcasts
|
| I've got no idea how GoneMAD and MusicBee's file syncing
| behave in that regard, but a quick test installation of
| MusicBee showed that while I could get used to it as an
| iTunes-replacement for my general music library, it
| _doesn 't_ allow manually importing files as podcasts,
| meaning I'd have to resort either manually hacking the
| database, or setting up some sort of fake Podcast running
| on a local HTTP server in order to import new episodes...
| :-/
|
| At least for now the old versions will keep working, and
| if some future Android version does break things, I guess
| I'll decide what to do about it in terms of a replacement
| at that time and not now...
|
| Though I guess it does mean that my personal main bug in
| iSyncr [2] won't ever get fixed now, so maybe I need to
| resort to APK hacking after all...
|
| [1] Which is how I found out about iSyncr + Rocket Player
| having been sold in the first place.
|
| [2] After a file has been synced, it won't be synced
| again if any subsequent changes that don't change either
| of title/artist/album (or possibly file size, but due to
| metadata padding small metadata changes won't necessarily
| change the total file size) happen within 24 hours [3] of
| the original sync.
|
| [3] I think this is trying to work around the fact that
| Android reports the file timestamps in local time, so due
| to either travel or even just summer/winter time a file
| might suddenly appear as outdated as compared to the last
| modified timestamp on the desktop. As my desktop with my
| music library, is in a fixed location, for me 24 hours is
| excessive, though, and 1 hour to cater for summer/winter
| time would be enough.
| Taywee wrote:
| Is there anything in the announcement that says that people
| who installed K-9 mail would find that it has silently
| turned into Thunderbird? I'd assume this would involve a
| separate install, as it'll probably have a separate app ID
| indicating the Thunderbird connection.
|
| In any case, I've had installed apps have the name change
| as a part of rebranding before. It's a little bit jarring
| sometimes, but name changes happen. They're usually small
| name changes, but I don't thing taking "K-9 mail is
| continuing development with a new name" as "app becoming
| something completely different" is really fair. Unless the
| functionality and UX completely changes, I don't think it's
| fair to read a name change as something so negative that
| needs to be "protected against".
| pndy wrote:
| They probably will provide message written in "big friendly
| letters" on a welcome screen at some point where it will be
| explained that K9 becomes Thunderbird, and how _great_ that is
| for you as the user. Either they 'll update the client or ask
| users to download new one and migrate - not sure how that
| happens on Android.
|
| Will that help? Not sure. Mozilla seems to have weird goals
| nowadays.
|
| Anyway, I'm so fed up with empty terms like "experiences" and
| "excitement" all around in IT. But guess that's what happens
| when you let marketing dictate way too many things in software
| development.
| Macha wrote:
| From Mozilla's previous attempts to jettison Thunderbird, and
| the period where the community kept it maintained while Mozilla
| allocated no resources, the relationship between Thunderbird
| and Mozilla these days is more akin to that between something
| like GNU or ASF and their projects than a company and its
| direct project.
|
| While yes Mozilla could theoretically enforce its trademarks
| and appoint its own team to start making more direct decisions,
| we've seen how that goes with various ex-GNU projects like
| libreboot or ASF projects where they don't have the community
| like OpenOffice
|
| > If you install Android app X and, due to an acquisition, the
| app suddenly morphs into app Y which has a different branding,
| different UI, different features, a different backend and a
| different development team (but still has your data), isn't
| this exactly one of the things that the app store rules are
| supposed to protect against?
|
| On my phone currently, this applies to the following apps:
|
| * Element
|
| * Free Now (European taxi app bought out by BMW/Daimler,
| formerly mytaxi, formerly hailo)
|
| * Google Hangouts (Was installed as Talk)
|
| * WhatsApp (now Facebook owned)
|
| * A local cinema chain bought out by a UK + Ireland chain
|
| * Pocket Casts (independent -> NPR -> Automattic)
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Element did not change ownership. They've just had a few
| confusing name changes. And the (same) people behind the
| client are trying to commercialise the client but not the
| network behind it where your data actually is.
|
| I never understood why they dropped vector as a name. It
| wasn't a worse name than element. Riot was a terrible name
| choice however. Sooner or later it would have got caught up
| being used by people coordinating a protest or something and
| the press would have had a field day with it.
|
| But your data has never left the matrix network or your own
| home server if you chose to have one.
| Macha wrote:
| No, but it did change name and appearence in the move from
| what was Riot Android to when RiotX was launched and
| rebranded to Element
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| RiotX? I don't remember that. There was a TelegramX,
| maybe this is what you mean? However there was a couple
| years that I didn't use it much so perhaps I missed it.
|
| But it did go from Vector -> Riot -> Element and various
| UI and branding changes along the way yes :) Part of this
| is also that the app was not really "finished" back in
| the Vector days. It only really came into its own during
| the Riot age. For example E2E encryption didn't yet exist
| at the start, and the underlying support in Matrix was
| missing as well. It's still a protocol and toolset that's
| evolving rapidly.
|
| However the benefit of Matrix is that you can choose any
| client you want, there are several for mobiles.
| Macha wrote:
| The app that is now the Element Android app co-existed
| with the old Riot app for over a year as "RiotX". The
| rebrand and app changeover were timed together, so they
| renamed the RiotX app to the Element app and replaced the
| old Riot app with it in one go.
| dizhn wrote:
| Microsoft Swiftkey Keyboard is another good example. (The
| product got worse though)
| ryanleesipes wrote:
| Thunderbird Product Manager here. We have no intention to
| replace the backend or most of the components. It will not be a
| different app. It's still run by the K-9 project maintainer.
| The difference? We didn't want to see K-9 die because of a lack
| of funding, and our visions were aligned - so it made sense to
| work together. That's it. Thunderbird is community run (unlike
| Firefox, our community representatives approve our team's
| budget and goals), so our aims are just to provide for our
| users and community what they want. And they want to use email
| on their phones as well as desktop.
|
| The way you present it sounds devious. But we're just truly
| trying to work together in the open source ecosystem the best
| we can and put our resources to their best use.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >We have no intention to replace the backend or most of the
| components.
|
| So sayeth every acquiring company about the acquired. I can
| think of very few that it held true. Maybe this can be added
| to the list, but only time will tell. I wouldn't suggest
| people holding their breath though
| 3np wrote:
| Hi Ryan, nice seeing you here. If you don't mind, would love
| to hear your thoughts:
|
| I'm missing a story about mobile Linux. Has this been
| discussed; is this something on the roadmap?
|
| There are already excellent e-mail options for iOS. Right now
| there is almost nothing outside of the cli that's usable on
| mobile Linux. Thunderbird would have a chance of being the
| main choice while helping adoption of mobile Linux in the
| medium-to long-term.
|
| I understand it's not realistic to expect anything anytime
| soon, but I do hope this is being discussed and that we will
| see a strategy for it.
| NoGravitas wrote:
| Have you tried Geary on mobile Linux? I haven't (no
| pinephone or similar), so I'm sincerely asking. It works
| well in a very narrow window on desktop Linux, so that
| seems hopeful? I wonder if it's excessively memory hungry
| or syncs mail inefficiently, though.
| 3np wrote:
| I've tried it a bit.
|
| It's the most viable and promising so far I think. I have
| too many directories for it to be usable without some new
| features, though (namely highlight dirs with new mail and
| more filtering capabilities). It's practically unusable,
| but granted I may have an unusual setup. If you just have
| a handful of active folders it might be great.
|
| Didn't notice any surprising syncing issues so far.
| donio wrote:
| Why not keep the K-9 name though? Arguably it's a stronger
| brand for the target audience than Thunderbird.
| 0des wrote:
| > It will not be a different app. It's still run by the K-9
| project maintainer. The difference? We didn't want to see K-9
| die because of a lack of funding, and our visions were
| aligned
|
| Nothing in this world is purely altruistic. If it didn't make
| business sense, this wouldn't be happening. Please surprise
| me and stay true to your word on this.
|
| > The way you present it sounds devious. But we're just truly
| trying to work together in the open source ecosystem the best
| we can and put our resources to their best use.
|
| We are all from the internet here, you know exactly why we
| are this way. Even if true, please understand why your words
| are perceived this way.
| sky-kedge0749 wrote:
| What business sense do you have in mind? Thunderbird is
| funded by donations and governed by volunteers. Even if
| this were some kind of money grab, who's grabbing what
| money?
| dizhn wrote:
| This is great. I am glad K9 will live on. I didn't think it
| wouldn't anyway because frankly K9 is established software
| and Thunderbird doesn't seem to have anything in that space.
| It wouldn't make sense to kill it and redo it. This is not
| Microsoft after all, which would take the product and cripple
| it so much that it has one third the features and the
| Microsoft name.
|
| However this particular deal sounds a lot like white
| labeling, don't you think ? :)
| [deleted]
| madeofpalk wrote:
| > _the app suddenly morphs into app Y which has a different
| branding, different UI, different features, a different backend
| and a different development team (but still has your data), isn
| 't this exactly one of the things that the app store rules are
| supposed to protect against?_
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2022/6/1/23149832/google-meet-duo-c...
|
| > _Pretty soon, the Duo app will get an update that brings an
| onslaught of Meet features into the platform; later this year,
| the Duo app will be renamed Google Meet. The current Meet app
| will be called "Meet Original," and eventually deprecated._
| c_prompt wrote:
| Speaking only for myself, I would LOVE to get away from Microsoft
| Outlook. As I've alluded elsewhere [1], there are some key
| functions that are needed:
|
| - Full encryption integrated into the client for all data (e.g.,
| I don't want Windows Search able to index the mail so someone has
| access when the client is closed/unencrypted; I also remember
| testing Thunderbird years ago and was able to go into the
| individual unencrypted .eml files [I think that's what they were]
| and read the messages without having Thunderbird opened)
|
| - Full local sync with Android/iPhone (i.e., home WiFi,
| Bluetooth, or USB cable); it still amazes me that Thunderbird
| still doesn't have this built-in
|
| - Xobni-like functionality (e.g., showing all emails and
| attachments to/from sender when clicking on an email, keyword
| searches); yes, I know the plugin is still available but it
| doesn't work properly with current Outlook versions (and no
| plugin like this exists for Thunderbird)
|
| But if the upgraded K-9 also got other integrated Thunderbird
| functionality (e.g., calendar, contacts, tasks), that would be
| especially amazing as I could then move away from Google (which
| I'd also LOVE to do). For example, the Notes field in Google's
| base Contacts app is limited to 1000 characters. That means I can
| only sync Outlook to Android one-way (else I lose longer notes
| when they sync back).
|
| To be able to move away from Microsoft and Google to open
| source... now that's a future worth dreaming about.
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31683214#31686186
| NonNefarious wrote:
| After not trying Thunderbird since the '90s (when I dismissed
| it with prejudice for having no way to export, and thus copy
| between computers, all the filters you'd set up), I was forced
| to after discovering the unusably defective shitshow that is
| Outlook today.
|
| I was pleasantly surprised by the experience of installing and
| configuring Thunderbird on two new computers I bought for my
| parents. Pretty much seamless, and I kept waiting for it to
| fail it furiously downloaded all 15,000+ messages in each of
| their AOL In-boxes. Nope. It worked fine, unlike Outlook and
| whatever the atrocious POS client Microsoft is including with
| Windows these days.
| [deleted]
| dataangel wrote:
| I had no idea thunderbird is still around
| jesprenj wrote:
| I hope there will be no integration with sponsored providers in
| K-9. I remember I switched to sylpheed when I figured out
| Thunderbird was establishing connections to DropBox and promoting
| it for sharing large files.
|
| Perhaps it wasn't DropBox but something else ... Perhaps I'm even
| making this up (although I don't think so). I've always wanted to
| know more about this promotion of a filesharing service in
| Thunderbird, so if anyone knows anything about this, please reply
| (:
|
| AFAIR it was a preinstalled extension on Thunderbird from Debian.
| L0stLink wrote:
| I would love to see what this will bring to K9 mail. I hope
| having the support of Thunderbird will allow K9 to really get
| some much needed polish. My preferred app right now is FairMail,
| its interface takes some getting used to and settings layout is
| very confusing but once I did manage to get it setup, it became
| clear that I preferred its extensive customizability and sidebar
| vs K9 when it comes to managing emails across multiple accounts.
| They are basically the only two FLOSS Email apps worth using on
| android, so K9 getting some extra support is really awesome.
| oblib wrote:
| I use Thunderbird on my late `09 Mac Mini. Last week I was
| testing an html email that uses Bootstrap css for the design
| layout and it looked great in Thunderbird, Gmail strips any tags
| for links to css files, and so does Roundcube, so it looked like
| crap in those.
|
| So then I tried embedding the css in the email and same thing.
| Thunderbird rendered it perfectly and the others ignored and/or
| removed it. I'm at a loss as to why CSS in an email is ignored or
| stripped out by Gmail. Sure makes it ugly though.
| CivBase wrote:
| I'm curious how Mozilla feels "Thunderbird on Android" aligns
| with their mission statement. Thunderbird was practically the de
| facto alternative to Outlook back when desktop clients were the
| standard for email. But there have been plenty of quality email
| clients on Android for a long time. Does buying a popular
| competitor and re-branding it as Thunderbird really help to
| "ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and
| accessible to all"? I'm worried this will just end up being
| another ongoing expense for Mozilla.
| warabe wrote:
| There are a lot of "closed source" email clients on Android. I
| tried to find free, open source email clients, but found only
| k9 and FairEmail.
| bitwize wrote:
| Neat. Something for me to fall back on in case FairEmail guy
| decides to take his ball and go home again.
|
| I've recently started maining Seamonkey as a browser. It has a
| better UX than all of the big ones -- especially Chrome but even
| Firefox isn't so great anymore. The Mozilla spinoff projects have
| lots to recommend them, now that Mozilla is more an outreach
| organization than a software development organization.
| zafiro17 wrote:
| I wish both the K9 and Thunderbird teams all the best. K9 needs
| some love, and so does Thunderbird, honestly.
|
| I use Aquamail on Android and love it. Great feature set, works
| great with multiple accounts, lots of configuration options. It's
| not open source or free and I honestly do not care.
|
| Back in the day it was something like USD 4. Now it's something
| like USD 25. Still worth it, and I don't mind paying for software
| if it keeps the developers in business.
| ig-88ms wrote:
| Let's hope K9-Mail gets a more attractive UI. It always felt more
| clunky than it needed to be.
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Have you tried the new 6.000?
| mid-kid wrote:
| Its classic android 4 gmail-esque-but-refreshed look is the
| main reason I use it. It works really well for me, and I kind
| of miss the primary screen for accounts it used to have, now
| being delegated to a popout on the sidebar.
| OptionX wrote:
| I would normally be wary of such a merger/acquisition, but as a
| long time user of thunderbird on the desktop this is actually
| exciting.
|
| At least I don't predict K-9 getting worse and has the distinct
| possibility of getting better and getting more features.
| 8845327 wrote:
| Does anyone know how to make gmail play nice with K-9 or
| FairEmail? Gmail keeps asking me to log in through a browser on
| my phone, and authorize almost every log in attempt, and not all
| authorizations are accepted! When I log in into my gmail account
| on a computer and authorize the "suspect" log ins, gmail still
| refuses (8/10 times) to allow use through 3rd party apps. My
| experience with 3rd party email apps has been awful because of
| this. My conspiracy theory is that google wants to lock users
| into its ecosystem for continued surveillance/data gathering on
| users and their usage but I digress. Back to the original issue,
| wouldn't TB on mobile experience these same issues as
| K-9/Fairemail?
| forbiddenlake wrote:
| On FairEmail, GMail via OAuth works fine for me :tm:. On K-9,
| for now you are going to have to enable 2FA on your google
| account, then create an app password for K-9 to use. A future
| version of K-9 will enable OAuth.
| _jsnk wrote:
| Regarding authorizing suspect logins, the only thing that would
| successfully authorize my email client access was visiting
| https://accounts.google.com/DisplayUnlockCaptcha
|
| I finally set up two factor auth in gmail using FreeOTP and
| have Fairemail (fdroid version) configured using an app
| password. (I run LineageOS with no Google services installed or
| account setup so the OAuth method isn't an option for me)
| 8845327 wrote:
| > LineageOS with no Google services
|
| this is probably the better way in the long run, but freeOTP
| might do the trick for now!
| brnt wrote:
| Go to your Google account and setup an app password. Might have
| to enable 'unsecure' access in additionele (Google think
| standards bases interfaces are outdated, you see). Then you can
| add your mail account through IMAP/SMTP, *DAV.
|
| As with all things Google, the only winning move is not to
| play. Long term I'm sure they'll axe this and tell you to use
| their app or bust.
| 8845327 wrote:
| agreed that it's best not to use gmail, but boy it is not
| easy to find a mail service to replace
| gmail/hotmail/yahoo/etc. So far the alternative seems paid
| protonmail, which I don't mind paying, but how long until
| they start doing 'funny' things like gmail et al and one has
| to migrate again.
| mxuribe wrote:
| I agree with you that Google wants to lock users into their
| ecosystem. Separetly, i think @brnt is 100% correct; an app
| password should do the trick for you. Well, at least for
| now...because @brnt said it best with the following: "...As
| with all things Google, the only winning move is not to play.
| Long term I'm sure they'll axe this and tell you to use their
| app or bust."
| NoGravitas wrote:
| Google has said already that they will be dropping app
| passwords for GMail soon. I don't remember the exact date,
| but it's not far off.
| sureglymop wrote:
| FairEmail seems a lot more feature filled and better than K9. I
| think it even tops Desktop Thunderbird.
| stratom wrote:
| I personally also use FairEmail, but I appreciate that there is
| an viable opensource alternative.
| zen_1 wrote:
| FairEmail is also open source [1]
|
| [1]: https://github.com/M66B/FairEmail/
| NoGravitas wrote:
| I keep going back and forth between the two. Each of them has
| strengths and weaknesses the other lacks. Currently, I'm on
| FairEmail because its IMAP IDLE client implementation seems so
| much better than K-9's. On the UI side, FairEmail is trying
| harder to keep up with the Material Treadmill, but still
| manages to seem less polished.
| itintheory wrote:
| I thought they were gone after the developer had a fit:
| https://www.ghacks.net/2022/05/19/fairemail-developer-calls-...
| but I guess the issue is resolved and they've recanted?
| xcambar wrote:
| Fairemail is worth every penny I've donated to the project and
| more.
| XorNot wrote:
| I'm pretty happy about this: K-9 is my daily driver on my phone,
| and Firefox my web browser. This is a win for the open web.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-06-13 23:00 UTC)