On 2014/11/15 08:28, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Sat, Nov 15, 2014 at 10:21 AM, Always Learning <centos at u62.u22.net> wrote: >> Why keep masses and masses of irrelevant data in an unstructured format >> presided over by Google? Its not logical sense. Essentially, why store >> a lot of "rubbish" that will never ever be needed ? >> > Email is inherently unstructured and searches are over some set of > words that I happen to remember. So you really need a full text > indexer which google happens to be very good at. And the storage is > their problem... Actually thunderbird is very nice at this too if > you do have your own copy - I don't remember if you have to enable > indexing or if it is the default now. > Why? Because keeping "masses of irrelevant data" takes none of my time and when I need to dig for something there are ways to do so that cost me little or no time. Storing the irrelevant data is cheap, my time isn't and I have very little time to spend on something like email. I converged on a solution that works for me and lets me do my job and take care of my family in a relatively efficient way. Sure there are all sorts of things I could do to be "better" but I have neither the time or resources to devote to making those happen. So I live with what I have. Les, I believe TB does index by default. I recall seeing a setting for that someplace in the menus. Thunderbird's search is pretty good, pretty much like gmail's in fact. Miranda