On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 05:13 -0600, Bart wrote: > Hope this is not too far off topic. > I am using pop for all my email accounts. I receive all my mail on one > machine at one location. But I keep seeing remarks that indicate IMAP > as being just "SO" much better. > Would someone either explain or point me to a place where I can learn > the reasons for these comments?
It depends upon your server; if you have a powerful full-featured IMAP server like Cyrus IMAPd [you can get a free Cyrus IMAP account at <http://fastmail.fm/>] you can really exploit the power of a real mailbox management protocol and server features. If you are using some hack ISP's IMAP implementation then it may not matter - or your ISP may provide nothing but POP3. With IMAP you can have multiple folders on the server, move messages between folder [on the server], access the mailbox from multiple clients/hosts/interfaces, etc... all of which are impossible with POP [which simply uses the INBOX on the server as a store-and-download bucket]. Mail on the server is backed up by the server admins - a BIG advantage over mail stored on the client. If your server supports it you can also setup rules [filters] on the server that are invoked when the message is *delivered* vs. the crappy client side filters that most mail clients try to implement. There is a lot of power in having the server filter [discard, file into folder, flag as important, forward, auto respond, etc...] your messages - it happens even when you are on vacation. Real IMAP servers also let you set annotation on folders that might do things like discard messages after a certain number of days; again, without you having to do anything [you don't even have to login]. -- Adam Tauno Williams <awill...@whitemice.org> LPIC-1, Novell CLA <http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com> OpenGroupware, Cyrus IMAPd, Postfix, OpenLDAP, Samba _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
