1 day ago,Bas wrote
My life and my enjoyment of software improved so drastically the moment I decided to stop checking the CPU use, running processes, services etc. of every piece of software I ran. It's amazing.
There's a difference between that and when software is perceived to be doing something that it shouldn't be.
If a software seems to be doing things that traditionally they haven't (yet adds no functionality that would seem to require it) then it calls into question the quality of the software and makes us re-assess our buying/usage descisions.
Mail clients are fundamentally the same as they were in the late-1990s. Of course we expect modern features, like HTML view, spam filters, indexed search, RFC compliance, a viewing pane; and we wouldn't be too surprised (albiet, disappointed) to see features removed, like Usenet and HTML mail "stationary".
Mail clients really shouldn't be using more memory, CPU, and IO than they were in more resource-constrained days, with exceptions for aggressive caching and indexing of messages for performance reasons, anything else is unacceptable.
Remember that Microsoft has been known to outsource first-party software titles out to other companies, and this often results in poor software quality, such as Microsoft MapPoint 2007, or the awful official WLMessenger client for Android (compare with the beautifully designed WLMessenger app for iPhone).
Software/usability quality is important. No-one likes it when iTunes takes up to 5 seconds to open a context menu or perform an action, for example, and often these problems have their root in inefficient design (hello IPC).