Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is implementation, not Internet architecture (was Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC.)]
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Wed, 18 June 2014 13:12 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE0C1A01F6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:12:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.251
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.251 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D48sHa8PtdGU for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:12:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACE0E1A0247 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 06:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [198.252.137.115] (helo=JcK-HP8200.jck.com) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1WxFce-0001Rj-9K for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:09:52 -0400
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 09:12:01 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is implementation, not Internet architecture (was Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC.)]
Message-ID: <568D757BC9C61D83B86AA45D@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPv4CP_M0O0vhGRJm9NF+1G1RYPtPG_L86Oz2x=0nUa=ANymkA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <9DAFD7B8DAA49A1629E4CC7E@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAMm+LwhakExz_wAnWy3eizvhC8Lzs1RhZWmJK+-Yp5d9zHPwOA@mail.gmail.com> <539BF66B.3020404@bbiw.net> <CAMm+Lwjr8tjR1-yaJdtG8GhNQ7+G5g5xCUDcNSSA6Qkd4JzW5A@mail.gmail.com> <539C5ED6.7080708@meetinghouse.net> <01P8ZV7PHO8M0049PU@mauve.mrochek.com> <539CAD2E.6030805@gmail.com> <01P907G00ESM0049PU@mauve.mrochek.com> <539F5828.60403@gmail.com> <alpine.OSX.2.19.9991.1406161432260.11755@auge.gateway.2wire.net> <20140616235540.GC2214@thunk.org> <6C327290EAFAB2FEE15F5FA9@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <2FC96FA4-5EF0-4F0A-9E3E-5DD42BEA8A25@nominum.com> <62BB2DC3A8B0A3A93833E5C5@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAPv4CP_M0O0vhGRJm9NF+1G1RYPtPG_L86Oz2x=0nUa=ANymkA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.115
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bXcN1vGgbn9YIMOYGMi7FgA60EA
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:12:14 -0000
--On Tuesday, June 17, 2014 12:38 -0400 Scott Brim
<scott.brim@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 11:51 AM, John C Klensin
> <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
>> The things that I think have security (or significant
>> operational) impacts include tracking beacons embedded in
>> messages to tell the sender (at least) when or if they were
>> read (privacy problem), embedded large images or text that is
>> automagically downloaded when the message is opened or earlier
>> (potential DoS attack), embedded malware and scripts of
>> multiple flavors even if not intentionally hostile, and so on.
>
> Yes, there are many traps for the average user on a MUA that
> tries very hard to look spiffy. I like mutt ... but an
> alternative is to use a GUI MUA that where you can keep its
> behavior conservative. Thunderbird is not bad at that.
But not so good at some other things.
<mini-rant>
I use email heavily enough that I'd happily pay a hundred or two
USD a year for something that was optimized for IMAP desktop and
laptop use, that has good MIME support (not just patches on an
earlier approach), that was well-supported and whose design
enhanced or preserved my productivity. Wrt the latter, note that
I'm heavily dependent on IMAP disconnected mode and, like many
others here, have strong opinions about the importance of
controlled handling of HTML messages, controlled handling of
certs, S/MIME and PGP (both OpenPGP and legacy), and support for
other email and IMAP functionality that seems critical. Now
that it is the middle of 2014, an MUA that didn't have full i18n
(aka "EAI") support wouldn't be worth the cost of conversion.
Perhaps unlike others, I'm a lot less concerned about close
calendar integration or inline support of a wide variety of
media types as long as I can quickly and easily extract body
parts to the local file system, get to them, and open them with
external programs. Probably some other IETF users are in
similar situations. But the evidence is that those who are
making product decisions don't believe we constitute a market on
which they can get adequate ROIs, so we periodically end up in
these almost-pointless "where is the action" discussions that
lead nowhere... except back to the conclusions that some people
are more or less happy with whatever they are using and that a
lot of people (who presumably don't deal with the combination of
very high mail volume and the periodic need to work offline) use
some flavor of "webmail".
Sad situation, IMO.
</rant>
john
- Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Martin Rex
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Dave Crocker
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. John C Klensin
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Ted Lemon
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Ted Lemon
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Miles Fidelman
- Webmail is implementation, not Internet architect… Dave Crocker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Miles Fidelman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Tony Finch
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Ted Lemon
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Tony Finch
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Stephen J. Turnbull
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Miles Fidelman
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Joe Abley
- Re: Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC. John C Klensin
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… Miles Fidelman
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… ned+ietf
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… Alessandro Vesely
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… Dave Crocker
- email client popularity [was Webmail is implement… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… ned+ietf
- Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol… Brandon Long
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Eric Burger
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… ned+ietf
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Stephen Casner
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… John C Klensin
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Ted Lemon
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Tony Finch
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Ted Lemon
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… John C Klensin
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Scott Brim
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Hector Santos
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… John C Klensin
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Hector Santos
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Miles Fidelman
- Re: email client popularity [was Webmail is imple… Hector Santos
- Re: Webmail is implementation, not Internet archi… Mark Rousell