On 1/26/10 9:25 AM, "Bob Allen" <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> Then don't talk to IMAP. Talk to POP. That's an easy standard. If you're
>>> going to do IMAP, either do it right or don't do it at all. Half-assed is
>>> bullshit.
>> 
>> Both of these statements ignore that existing products don't support IMAP
>> 100% correctly either.
>> 
>> Obviously, the goal of the project is to be better than other clients, but my
>> primary point is that focusing, like a laser,
>> on all the details of IMAP might hamper the effort, and seems to be a
>> sticking point, at least for you John.
> 
> I would really like to see a really strong e-mail client that would do both
> IMAP and POP well and that are designed from the get-go to do both well (at
> least in concept) even if the initial implementations are less than perfect.

Compared to IMAP, you almost COULD get a cat to write a POP client. Well,
okay, a grey parrot. Slow typer, but really good algorithm design.

-- 
John C. Welch         Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com              Mac and other opinions
[email protected]


_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
List help: http://lists.ranchero.com/listinfo.cgi/email-init-ranchero.com

Reply via email to