[imp] The PIMP

[Bill Tihen -- Information Technology]

Hi,

Schools also tend to use OSS (at least ours does).  We use imp, so that I don't
have to configure 300 students pop accounts and then fix them when the kid
messes it up.  Schools tend to use computers for a very long time (just this
year we finally officially retired our Mac Classics and are now giving them to
faculty for free.  Practically, what it means to using javascript is that imp is
very resource intensive and doesn't work on many client browsers.  We have been
slowly upgrading to more workable (modern) workstations.  So it is slowly
becomming less of a problem for us.  However, the javascript still plagues us a
little.  

I personally like using IMP.  However, had I been aware of PIMP, I bet I would
have been using it to better support our aging computers -- who really don't do
javascript well at all.  (I suppose I could install both are they compatible --
that is do they coexist) -- nicely?

I probably didn't change your mind, but it is true that schools (some) anyway
have a lot of older client browsers.  Some of our machines simply won't do
javascript.

Bill


    Quoting Brian Dragoo <bdragoo@thomasaquinas.edu>:

    > On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Max Kalika wrote:
    > 
    > > Quoting Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck@horde.org>:
    > > 
    > > > If someone wants to put in the time to make lynx work nicely,
    I'll

    > anyone can think of a real reason to remain lynx-compatible in IMP, I'd
    > be happy to change my position on this.Quoting Brian Dragoo
<bdragoo@thomasaquinas.edu>:

> On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Max Kalika wrote:
> 
> > Quoting Chuck Hagenbuch <chuck@horde.org>:
> > 
> > > If someone wants to put in the time to make lynx work nicely, I'll
> support
> > > you, but ... I don't use lynx much. So I don't need it - I have much
> bigger
> > > itches to scratch.
> > 
> > And if someone on a system with access to lynx, it is a good bet that
> pine is 
> > accessible as well.
> 
> 
> This is an excellent point; quite worth reiterating whenever this
> discussion comes up.  I'm all for being aware of simplicity and
> compatiblity (even with lynx) when designing websites, but that cannot
> be
> a simple dogmatic mantra.  There is no point in having web-based e-mail
> accessible to a text-only browser for exactly the reason that Mr. Kalika
> pointed out above, namely that mutt, pine, elm, and (hell) even mail are
> likely to be available to anyone that might be browsing text-only.  If
> anyone can think of a real reason to remain lynx-compatible in IMP, I'd
> be
> happy to change my position on this.
> 
> My general point is this: in the often dogmatic GNU/*NIX/OSS community,
> it's important to consider individual cases (like this) carefully, and
> make sure that our dogmas *really* apply.  Here, I think it (the dogma
> of
> hyper-compatibility with everything right down to lynx) loses its
> applicability.
> 
> Brian Dragoo
> TAC
> 
> 
> -- 
> IMP mailing list: http://horde.org/imp/
> Frequently Asked Questions: http://horde.org/faq/
> To unsubscribe, mail: imp-unsubscribe@lists.horde.org
>