On Sun, Feb 24, 2002, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote about "Re: mua which handles very large mailboxes": > I never bothered exploring IMAP as an alternative to POP from my own > mail reading. While mostly it was due to unwillingness to invest time > and effort into this, part of the reason was that I learned (read? > heard? I don't recall...) that the mail stays on the server. My > paranoia tells me that I would like to keep the time my mail sits on > an ISP server to the minimum. > > Assuming that I assign a high priority to the privacy of my mail, what > arguments are there for and against switching from POP to IMAP?
Well, imagine your mail not being on a sleazy ISP, but rather on a server you trust (your own Internet-connected machine, you company's server, etc.). IMAP allows you to keep your mail there, in several folders (not just one like in POP3) and operate on it remotely. Even without IMAP, people (like me) ssh to their server, and run (say) mutt on it to read their mail. All their mail would anyway be found on that server, so IMAP keeping the mail on the same server isn't a new privacy hole. -- Nadav Har'El | Sunday, Feb 24 2002, 12 Adar 5762 [EMAIL PROTECTED] |----------------------------------------- Phone: +972-53-245868, ICQ 13349191 |If at first you don't succeed, skydiving http://nadav.harel.org.il |is not for you. ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
