On Mon, 26 Aug 1996, athar shiraz siddiqui wrote:
the mailer I use is
.... pine ( I plan to convert some day : it is now like some bad habit)
i've *never* *ever* *ever* seen an O'Reilly book mention pine ...
Books are the creations of people; therefore they reflect people's
natural biases, and myopic viewpoints.
Elm is older, more established, and distributed by a few vendors,
notably HP.
Also, pine is the creation of a university:
Copyright 1989-1994 by the University of Washington.
Pine and Pico are trademarks of the University of Washington.
which is sometimes anathema to corporations. Corporation mgmt. types
like that warm, cozy feeling of paying money to a vendor to have the
illusion that their software is "supported".
> discussing other similar programs or talking about e-mail
> generally and mail programs are mentioned. i don't think i've
> seen any other book by any other publisher mention it either.
> (but i mainly read O'Reilly, so i mention them.) elm gets
> mentioned, but i've never met anyone who uses elm. practically
> everyone who doesn't use an online service or a program like
> Eudora or Pegasus mail that runs on their own computer uses pine.)
> so what's the deal? someone please clue me in. it's got to be
> more than just the way pine saves files, right?
One more thing: Pine is an acronym: Pine = Pine Is Not Elm.
'Nuff Said?
Alan
PS: I like Pine, even though I use it only infrequently (typically while
on travel, on a slow link, and only when my usual MH + Emacs + mh-e are
not available).