On 1/26/10 9:42 PM, "Rhy" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 1:04 PM, LuKreme <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I thought Letters was already decided to be an IMAP only client, and that if >> POP3 is supported, it would be a plugin for those few unwashed heretics that >> aren't using IMAP. >> >> Er, I mean those rapacious luddites... >> >> Ah, I meant to say those poor sucker stuck on archaic mailserver... >> >> No no, I really meant to say those people who still choose to use POP3. >> > Dude, ever try a big IMAP sync over the 9600 bps Thuraya data network? Or on > an African GSM network with 25-50% uptimes with anywhere from 10-50% packet > loss? There are some situations where POP3 is the correct solution. Hell, > even on a BGAN or a VSAT with 800ms+ latencies, IMAP can be impractical. > That¹s silly, imap with allowances for partial downloads in the spec is FAR better at this. I¹ve done 3000+ headers on a 33.6K modem in netscape 4.5 on Mac OS 8 in well under 5 minutes with IMAP. That would literally be impossible with POP. Mulberry could probably do that even better.
-- 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
