Best Mac Usenet Client
in [Mac Applications]
|
From: Jeffrey Goldberg on 2 Apr 2010 14:29 John wrote: > Is "unison" a better client or the best of the best for the Mac? Just to emphasize how silly your question is, let me tell you that alpine is the best news client. (I probably will be switching back to it soon as I've found that SeaMonkey has all the drawbacks of Thunderbird. The reason that I consider alpine the best is that there is one feature that is a requirement for me (but for few other people). I insist that my newsreader is also a good IMAP client. So I've pretty much been stuck with Thunderbird or alpine. -j -- Jeffrey Goldberg http://goldmark.org/jeff/ I rarely read HTML or poorly quoting posts Reply-To address is valid
From: Ian Gregory on 2 Apr 2010 14:53 On 2010-04-02, Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody(a)goldmark.org> wrote: > John wrote: > >> Is "unison" a better client or the best of the best for the Mac? > > Just to emphasize how silly your question is, let me tell you that > alpine is the best news client. Whereas I would say slrn is, and Paris Texas is the best film etc. Ian -- Ian Gregory http://www.zenatode.org.uk/
From: Doug Anderson on 2 Apr 2010 15:31 Ian Gregory <ianji33(a)googlemail.com> writes: > On 2010-04-02, Jeffrey Goldberg <nobody(a)goldmark.org> wrote: > > John wrote: > > > >> Is "unison" a better client or the best of the best for the Mac? > > > > Just to emphasize how silly your question is, let me tell you that > > alpine is the best news client. > > Whereas I would say slrn is, and Paris Texas is the best film etc. No, gnus is the best news client, and Blood Simple is the best film!
From: Malcolm on 3 Apr 2010 00:26 On 2010-04-02 13:16:47 -0400, Doc O'Leary said: > In article <1jgbhz1.wvlhj6k47o9sN%isteen(a)gmail.com>, > isteen(a)gmail.com (Steen) wrote: > >> Unison is by far the best choice when it comes to binary groups. > > I'm going to disagree with that. Binary groups are notable for their > large volumes of posts and their equally large volumes of spam. Unison > was the slowest reader I ever tried when it came to fetching headers, > and the filtering was *awful*. I paid for the last version before > realizing it was useless in the long term. I see no reason to pay for > the new version when it looks like they haven't improved basic operation. Fetching headers is a lot faster on the new Unison.
From: Steen on 3 Apr 2010 03:43
Malcolm <malcolm(a)invalid> wrote: > On 2010-04-02 13:16:47 -0400, Doc O'Leary said: > > > In article <1jgbhz1.wvlhj6k47o9sN%isteen(a)gmail.com>, > > isteen(a)gmail.com (Steen) wrote: > > > >> Unison is by far the best choice when it comes to binary groups. > > > > I'm going to disagree with that. Binary groups are notable for their > > large volumes of posts and their equally large volumes of spam. Unison > > was the slowest reader I ever tried when it came to fetching headers, > > and the filtering was *awful*. I paid for the last version before > > realizing it was useless in the long term. I see no reason to pay for > > the new version when it looks like they haven't improved basic operation. > > Fetching headers is a lot faster on the new Unison. I only miss the option to empty the cache. I was running MacKeeper (anyone know a free app that is just as good), and Unison builds up a big cache. That is easily cleaned out with MacKeeper - but it would be even better, if it could be done by Unison itself. http://mackeeper.zeobit.com/ -- http://bit.ly/daWnEe |