On 4/21/01 at 7:04 PM J wrote:
>hey Holm,
>
>so what other pop servers are amongst the more reliable ones??
>it is really frustrating when you thought the there is finally one that u
>can rely on and then.......sigh!
Hi J,
I went on a signup frenzy a few weeks ago when my "Inwind.it" account
suddenly ceased being capable of sending messages (although it 'pops' quite
reliably). Among those that are highly rated on this list are
"digitalme.com" and "myrealbox.com". I added the former but not the latter
- simply a matter of aesthetics about the name.
A service which I have seen others employ is "gmx.net" so I signed up for
that. I am keeping my fingers crossed about it since it is a simple name
and the people running it (in Munich) seem to know what they're doing,
which makes a change. It requires ESMTP authentication and one has both a
user name and an ID number. I have great hopes for this one and would
appreciate any comments from the estimable listers with some experience
using this service. The English signup can be found at:
http://www41.gmx.net/v4/login
Another POP / SMTP mail which may be worth some consideration is
"in-box.net". Quite surprisingly, this service has been remarkably stable
and consistent over the past six months. Of course, the admirable service
'Mochamail.com' is one in which I hold in high regard. It is among the
oldest of all my free POP mail accounts and I must confess, one of my very
favourites.
The ghastly named "devilsplayground.net", if you can get past the
designation, might be worth the effort of signup. On the other hand, at
least it's memorable. In the same category is the embarrassingly named
"umailme.com". These last two are very recent additions about which I would
welcome any comments.
(What's with these names? Have all the best names been used? Are they the
results of brain-storming sessions with too much Jolt cola? They couldn't
come up with anything more suitable? Just what does an e-mail address
convey about the user? The "devilsplayground.net" seems the ideal addy for
someone running an XXX server on the side, while "umailme.com" conveys a
simple-minded hectoring tone. I do apologize for going on but some of these
names are so distasteful that they make addresses like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" look
good. Perhaps some of the old time "netters" on the list could send me a
few of the utter nadir of e-mail designations that they've seen over the
years; names that would make "umailme.com" look absolutely stellar by
comparison :>)
On last addition is the laudably named "paxemail.com". It has been behaving
itself and 'popping' expeditiously so I am hoping that it will prove to be
a reliable service.
(All the above mentioned free services have, to the best of my knowledge,
both POP /SMTP capabilities.).
As always, I welcome the comments of the Listers, off list if that seems
more suitable.
A - watching the snow melt in Canada
