John Welch, on 2/4/01 2:26 pm, wrote:
> On 2/4/01 1:46 PM, "W John Carlsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>>> First question: I always feel like I'm missing something by not using IMAP.
>>>> What?
>>>
>>> The main advantage: IMAP allows me to view the same INBOX, whether at home
>>> or at work. I use Outlook Express at work to read and answer mail; at home I
>>> use Entourage. They both see the same INBOX.
>>
>> I have the same in POP mail. I leave the messages on the server for several
>> days, and get exactly the same incoming mail on both computers. Though I may
>> have different folders that they are sorted into, they are mostly the same.
>> And they are safely of two of my computers, not depending on someone else's
>> server.
>
> The difference is, IMAP is designed to work this way, POP is designed to be
> fully downloaded. I can get 3000+ IMAP headers very quickly on a 33.6 modem.
> Even leaving copies, you aren't going to do that with POP.
I don't download 3000+ messages/day, headers or the full thing. Do you? I
get 100-200 max. Besides, I have a fast cable modem, and all they offer is
POP.
> The server issue is an interesting one. You have to rely on it anyway, at
> least until you can get the messages down to your Mac. If it dies in the
> middle of a download, then you're just as screwed.
I lose that one message. But I don't have to worry whether some server out
of my control has most of my mail.
> If you are that worried
> about your email server, that is a different issue from IMAP.
If you have a departmental or small company server, and you can easily get
at the backups, then that is a different matter. But buying a IMAP service
from strangers is kinda silly. But a company owning its own server could be
done with POP, and often has. That would make me trust it more, as part of
my backup system.
What I was arguing was POP vs IMAP, under the save server ownership. And
I've never used IMAP, like most people, so I can only say what I do with
POP. If your company offers a local well-maintained mail server of either
type, take it.
> I've been
> using IMAP exclusively for 3 years now, and have not had any cases with my
> email server losing email. I can also have almost 3GB of mail on the server,
> and my email DB is only about 85 MB, and my messages file is only about
> 248MB.
Mine are about the same size. I also archive selectively out of Entourage
into topic-oriented FMP databases, both to keep active db sizes low and
because I frequently access recent and very old ones in some topics
frequently. I'd do it with IMAP, too.
> I think that if you *are* going to implement IMAP, suck it up, buy
> the disks you need, and stop with email limits. That just cripples IMAP,
> IMO. By not having email space limits, I can use it as troubleshooting
> database, thanks to the server side searches I can do with IMAP.
Again, there are reasons for a corporate mail server. But if I am a college
student and the school offers IMAP manned by students, or in a small company
whose IMAP server is also poorly maintained, then I feel safer with POP. And
I'd rather debug things on my own Mac.
> Also, since
> I never through out any sent mail, or company email, I can pretty much end
> the 'you never sent that' arguments fast enough so that I don't get them
> anymore.
It's easy to make an Outgoing Rule that will redirect a copy to yourself
every time. A one-time setting. Sure, you don't have to with IMAP, but a
good POP is lots cheaper!
All I'm saying is that they both work, differently--but that is the real
point. If you have the choice, pick the one that fits your needs as you see
them. I don't have a choice, so I make-do by setting up my POP mailer
correctly.
Cheers,
John
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
