KDE 4.8.1 showstopper - for me at least

Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa ildefonso.camargo at gmail.com
Fri Mar 23 13:47:18 UTC 2012


On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Basil Chupin <blchupin at iinet.net.au> wrote:
> On 24/03/12 00:14, Jose Ildefonso Camargo Tolosa wrote:
>>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 5:59 AM, Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au>
>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 23/03/12 20:58, O. Sinclair wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 23/03/12 11:51, Myriam Schweingruber wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:39, Myriam Schweingruber<myriam at kubuntu.org>
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:27, O. Sinclair<o.sinclair at gmail.com>
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> well well, on forums.kde.org a developer claims that this was
>>>>>>> deliberately
>>>>>>> removed to "complete transfer to Akonadi" but is back in "trunk". But
>>>>>>> will
>>>>>>> not be back in main code until 4.9...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Could you please provide a link to that forum thread? I can't find a
>>>>>> post stating it was deliberately removed so far.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nevermind, found it: http://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=215&t=100742
>>>>>
>>>>> /me wonders how they can ship that and then be astonished end-users
>>>>> complain...
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards, Myriam
>>>>>
>>>> You are not the only one Myriam...
>>>> http://forum.kde.org/viewtopic.php?f=215&t=100742
>>>>
>>>> disabled - not removed. But effect for us users is the same
>>>
>>>
>>> As it is with all Linux distros, there are other options available.
>>>
>>> Unless you have a VERY particular reason to use kmail - which, in this
>>> case,
>>> is not working for you anyway - then why not use Thunderbird? Latest
>>> version
>>> out is v11.0.
>>
>> Thunderbird is slower (for me, at least),
>
>
> I have been using Thunderbird since it was first known as a component of
> Netscape. I have never found it to be slow.
>
> So I am wondering why you consider it to be "slow" - a term which, as
> mentioned here, appears to be a relative term :-) . Why do you think that it
> is slow?

Sure, I have a mail filter configured, and I get ~500 mails a day and
that filter have to parse them, while Thunderbird get the mails, apply
the filter, and move the messages to another folder, it doesn't
respond.. and it can take up to 3 minutes (usually ~1 minute, but can
be more).... kmail is faster doing this (and doesn't becomes
unresponsive).

>
>
>
>>  but due that kmail now have
>> this annoying issue that it just "disconnects" and doesn't get new
>> emails after a while (after 1~3 hours, unpredictable), and I have to
>> close it and re-open to get it going again, I guess I have no way out
>> but to go back to thunderbird (evolution is not in good shape right
>> now either).
>>
>>> "Why keep doing it if it hurts?"
>>
>> well, thunderbird hurts too, only not on so important areas
>
>
> So it only hurts only on those unimportant points, right? :-) .
>
> Again, could you please mention what these points are where TB "hurts".

Slowness, that's the most important to me...

Another is the fact that it does illogical things while dealing with
attachments, I hasn't really tested this with kmail yet (just forgot
to do it, but I will), because this problem was reported by a customer
who have very slow Internet links, and uses Windows, I verified this
on Linux TB too:

1. It will either: completely download all attachments, or download no
attachments at all (no "maximum download" that works, like k9 mail
(android)).
2. If you can make it to *not* download the attachments initially, and
you open an attachment, it will download the attachment from the imap
server, but if you want to open the same attachment again later: it
will download it again!!!! (I don't want to save disk, I want to save
bandwidth)....no good.

>
>
>> .... at
>> least it will get new emails.
>
>
> Well, it seems to me a very good reason then to use it, right? :-D

Right, that's why I'm going back to it for now.

Ildefonso.




More information about the kubuntu-users mailing list