[freedomben]

I'm considering it now that my nostalgia is flaring up.

One thing that was a pain point in the past was offline use. If your mail provider is IMAP only then you need to hack stuff together to use offline. As a paranoid freak I prefer to have offline copies of everything.

[jjav]

> I'm considering it now that my nostalgia is flaring up.

That's one valid reason but it's unfortunate IMO to see it that way.

Mutt (and similar, although I use mutt) are just so much inherently better than any web interface can ever be. The configurability and access to pipe content to other processes cannot be matched.

[jlgaddis]

It's pretty easy to set up OfflineIMAP or isync or similar to sync a local copy of your mail (in fact, this is a great way to back up your IMAP mailboxes whether you use mutt or not!).

Then you just point mutt at the local copy instead of the IMAP server and it doesn't matter if you're online or offline.

[freedomben]

I don't remember if OfflineIMAP was the tool I tried or not, but at the time it was quite challenging. I always suspected that rate limiting on the mail server was blowing up the download tool, but I couldn't figure it out. This was a fair number of years ago though, so things are hopefully better now.

[dan00]

I’m using gmail + mutt + isync. Because some people recommend offlineimap, I used it before and isync is better in any regard.

[pge]

offlineimap works well with mutt to have everything accessible offline