Re: email and nvda


Brian's Mail list account <bglists@...>
 

And that is exactly why I like it.

Sorry but I'm obviously a square peg, the exception to a rule etc, and I cannot help that, its me and its my experience and preference.
Brian

bglists@blueyonder.co.uk
Sent via blueyonder.
Please address personal email to:-
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk, putting 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name field.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Vogel" <britechguy@gmail.com>
To: <nvda@nvda.groups.io>
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2017 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: [nvda] email and nvda


On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 01:11 pm, Gene wrote:


I don't use identities but that may be something many sighted people want
as well, though it isn't favored by modern e-mail programs.
Clearly they do not, or this concept would not have gone the way of the dinosaur.

The only e-mail client I know of that ever used identities is Outlook Express. Outlook Express has been dead for a long time. If identities had been considered a "must have" feature every e-mail client that has come since would have created them. What became a "hot item," which I dislike, is the universal inbox that takes all the inboxes of all the accounts you have in an e-mail client and integrates all the messages in all of them arranged, whether threaded or unthreaded, with the sort order you want. That's my idea of a nightmare because my e-mail accounts are used for separate purposes and the last thing I want is to be looking at all of them at once. I am, however, clearly in the minority since the universal inbox is a very popular and almost ubiquitous feature these days.

I have never understood the attraction of identities, myself. It is easy enough to jump from account to account in a tree structure and those accounts are entirely separate entities. I believe that this is the reason that identities really never took off.

--
Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1703, Build 15063 (dot level on request - it changes too often to keep in signature)

* * *The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement.* * But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another* * profound truth.*

* ~ * *Niels Bohr*

Join nvda@nvda.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.