On 30 Dec 2018, at 1:58, Randall Gellens wrote: > the biggest problem with IMAP is the huge variability among servers. Adding > yet another protocol to the mix will only make that problem worse.
+1 > There have been attempts over the years to raise the bar for IMAP server > compatibility by mandating support for a slew of extensions and certain > behavior that is now variable. But it hasn't gotten wide support among > servers. So I don't see how something new will do better. Including Gmail. If you look at The Big Players, they have always been the issue. Look at Microsoft/SMTP and Google/IMAP over time... Mumble... > It's also not true, as the link asserts, that IMAP is not designed for > today's constrained network environments or high latency. Quite the > opposite: IMAP was originally designed to work over dial-up modems with > extremely low bandwidth, high latency, and high disconnects. Agree. IMAP is very efficient for constrained networks. Patrik
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ mailmate mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freron.com/listinfo/mailmate
