On Sat, 2003-12-27 at 11:01, Simon Perreault wrote:
> On December 27, 2003 10:50, David C. Hart wrote:
> > Kmail is much more efficient but still lacks
> > some features.
>
> Really? What features do you find lacking?
I have become accustomed to Evolution's VFolders. "Lacking" is probably
the wrong term. I - personally - find the migration from Evolution
difficult. KMail is certainly lighter on resources - MUCH. I haven't
used it enough - so I'm not 100% sure - but I *think* that Evolution
leaves the IMAP mailboxes on the server open while KMail logs in and out
each time that it checks mail. That's probably a good thing as well.
I'm talking myself into more experimentation with KMail as I type. I
just wish that I could convert filters, setting and the address book a
la Outlook to Eudora.
---------
Quality Management - A Commitment to Excellence
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
