[Gllug] Re: is KMAIL a good enough client for gllug?

[Dave Cross]

paul wrote:
>>funny that - like there's a *need* for a graphical interface - odd logic
> 
> Very interesting comment - could you expand on it please.
> I take it you mean that graphical interfaces are merely just
> a bolted on addition which tend to diminish correct working order
> but I can't tell - it is interesting though

You snipped the bit from your previous mail that Craig quoted which then 
gave context to what he said. It was the bit where you said:

"theres no need for a non graphical interface"

Which seemed to imply that you see a need for a graphical interface.

There's no _need_ for any particular kind of interface. Users are free 
to choose whichever interface style suits them best.

Most non-graphical interface fans will say that by keeping both hands on 
the keyboard all the time, they can work quicker than they can if they 
have to keep switching one hand to the mouse.

It's nonsense to suggest that programs with graphical interfaces have 
more features than ones without. As others have pointed out, mutt has 
more features by far than any other email program and I'm sure there are 
examples in other areas too.

I see that you are using Outlook Express. Does that explain why your 
quoting (as seen above) is broken? Or do you do that on purpose :)

Dave...
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug