[Design] Re: [Chandler-dev] Bridging the gap - email options

[Ted Leung]

On Jul 13, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Mikeal Rogers wrote:

>
> On Jul 13, 2006, at 3:19 PM, Andi Vajda wrote:
>
>>
>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2006, Sheila Mooney wrote:
>>
>>> 1) The technical pros/cons/issues for all of these alternatives  
>>> so then we can circle back and evaluate these from a workflow  
>>> perspective.
>>> 2) What are some other options we could consider that we may not  
>>> have thought of.
>>
>> Until Chandler's UI can implement a proper mail client, the next  
>> best solution is to use Chandler as a data hub for email and let  
>> another - existing - mail client handle the mail UI. This is what  
>> Travis is currently working on. It is a huge step forward for me  
>> to actually start using Chandler since I can then continue using  
>> pine for email but this time as an IMAP client against Chandler- 
>> the-IMAP-server.
>
> I have to agree with Andi. Since we're targeting people who would  
> be considered "power users" it's safe to assume that they require  
> features in their email clients that we aren't ready to deliver in  
> the beta timeframe.
>
> I'm in the same boat as Andi in this being my number one barrier to  
> adoption of Chandler.

I don't know whether I would be categorized as a power user or not,  
but I do get a lot of e-mail.   I know personally that the set of  
features that I really need in e-mail is actually fairly small.   Not  
having e-mail is not my number one barrier to adoption, I'd put  
performance, lack of the dashboard, and a few other things ahead of e- 
mail, but e-mail is high on the list, followed, or possibly preceded  
by RSS (the Feeds parcel doesn't count).     Unless the email that  
got sucked in to the IMAP server/proxy was deeply integrated into  
Chandler (which it won't be if we don't have basic composition,  
reply, etc), then I don't think I would use it.   For me the value of  
e-mail in Chandler is not every bell and whistle I can think of (and  
I can think of a lot), but it's the integration with the workflow and  
knowledge management capabilities.

Ted