Philip Storry, [PS] wrote: PS> I've not had any problems with The Bat!'s IMAP support, although PS> there is a vocal contingent who apparently do.
Things have been very smooth here of late. No problems except for performance issues on a slow connection. PS> It seems to depend, more than anything else, on how hard you want PS> to push IMAP. I'm not sure what you mean here. If you're genuinely having problems with TB!'s IMAP how does pushing IMAP help the situation? Are you referring to pushing for improvements? PS> IMAP is a nice protocol. But my first thought is that before you PS> switch to it, you need to check whether or not it suits the way you PS> use email. Do you currently (with POP3) leave your email on the PS> server? Does your email provider allow you enough space to do that for PS> more than a week or so? (Given how much email you typically get...) PS> If the answer to both those questions is no, then it's likely that PS> IMAP is going to be useless to you - you'll end up setting up a PS> complex server-side folder system which will just be wasted, as it PS> doesn't suit the way you use email. The server space issue is an important one or else it could lead to a lot of maintenance issues, i.e., moving mail regularly to local folders. However, TB! seems to have some interesting purging options here that I'll be shortly giving a try just to see how well they work with IMAP. You can have messages deleted during a purge operation, be moved to another folder rather than be simply deleted. I haven't had the need to do this since my IMAP server is on one of my systems so my space issues are determined by me and they're currently 'unlimited' within the scope of my e-mail. -- -=[ Allie ]=- (List Moderator and fellow end-user) PGPKeys: http://key.ac-martin.com Running The Bat! v2.04.7 on WinXP Pro (SP1)
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 2.04.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
