[yjftsjthsd-h]

> I once worked in a shop where Exchange was configured not to send text equivalent with HTML emails.

You can just plug in an external program to convert HTML to plaintext; IIRC elinks/lynx/w3m can do it.

> "Try using an email client from this century."

Outlook launched in 1997, so obviously that's out.

> Mutt is NOT suited for the professional world. The professional world has standardized on Outlook and Exchange.

Yeah, no; a large chunk of the professional world lives in Microsoft's little bubble, but plenty of companies live outside of it quite happily.

[tiben_]

I understand the willignness to do everything in command line. But it's just dogma. Seriously, using so many external tools to deal with such a dumb and common thing like sending/read a mail doesn't have to be so complex. It's useless complexity for nothing. As i recall, mutt has been designed to handle local Unix mail. Not to deal with web providers as the majority of non-nerd people use today. It's a significant effort to configure the tool for this common use case, the soft originally has not been designed for that hense the useless effort to adapt it.

It's not my hobby anymore to spend time around this. I just use the app provided by my telecom provider to send SMS, i haven't configured an obscure TUI tool to interface my local 4G antenna to just tell my wife i'm well. Email is the same. Life is short hence the idea that using mutt is just a nerd hobby today. You can't advocate common mortal to go this way it's just outdated and overall ridiculous.

If its your hobby, well, i'm happy for you

[em-bee]

it's not dogma, it's a preference.