On 2/4/01 3:07 PM, "W John Carlsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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.
I get several thousand. It all depends on how you read your mail. If you
have a single computer, or you don't travel, POP is probably the better
choice as most mail programs support it better and provide more features for
it.
However, if you tend to travel and link up with a 33.6 modem, I like the
ability to read through your mail headers rather quickly rather than see the
counter (downloading Message 1 of 622). I know there are ways in POP around
this, but they are not typically as elegant.
With multiple computers, you can't beat IMAP. Especially if you are on a
borrowed machine. I can log into a workstation at a conference (shared),
quicky setup a guest account, and voila, there is all of my mail!
The other advantages of IMAP are:
Mail stored on the server, if this is a service, you can probably count on
them putting it in a more reliable datacenter, on a more reliable server,
and probably backing it up. I am not saying that all SPs do this, but we do.
(so no comments please :-) )
>
>> 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.
You rely on SPs to host your web site - but you don't trust them to host
your 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.
SLAs - you probably put more than you know into the hands of others. I
completely trust my provider will do a better job storing my mail than I
will do with my home computer or my Powerbook.
>
> 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.
Same here- I have about 16 GB of mail on my IMAP server in about 200
folders. Never lost a message. Whats nice is that my email db on my local
computers are very small.
>
> 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.
Agreed - like I said, IMAP is the best for business users on the move or
power users of email.
>
> Cheers,
> John
>
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
