Hasbullah Bin Pit (sebol) wrote: > i think microsoft should call it HTTP mail
i want to say shouldnt actually :) sorry > it's confusing > > mail = open starndard like pop3, smtp, imap > HTTP = is the web w3.org > but HTTP + mail = microsoft proprietary protocol? > > > Ben Bucksch wrote: > >> All, >> >> what he means is that Mozilla Mailnews should be able to retrieve mail >> from Hotmail. >> >> I think, he doesn't realize that Microsoft owns Hotmail. Microsoft >> decided to oppose open-source, so if we try to support Hotmail via >> HTTP, they will just change the webpage all the time so that our >> parser (which gets the mail out of the webpage etc.) breaks. Also, >> Hotmail uses MS Passport, and we're likely to encounter problems >> there, too. >> >> Do you know that Netscape 6 Mail supports webmail accounts from >> webmail.netscape.com, just like OE supports Hotmail? >> >> Chris Lee wrote: >> >>> I personaly think mozilla should step out of the protocol issue, and >>> use protocols for waht they were intended >> >> >> >> I agree. Which, for me, means that we do not support webmail in >> Mailnews. There are enough freemail / webmail accounts offering POP or >> even IMAP access. >> >> If you really want to use hotmail, use a standalone server on your >> system, which translates between the hotmal webpages and POP, just >> like Michael Klose reports. >> >>> In mozilla terms you have a UI and mail handler but the protocols >>> used to deliver and receive mail are abstracted so that if you have a >>> server that gives you mail via http so be it its just a new >>> 'language' plug in. >>> After all mail is mail no matter how you got or sent it. >> >> >> >> Apart from the fact that Mozilla Mailnews is already designed the way >> you describe - after all, it supports POP, IMAP, news, Unix >> mailboxes, AOL mail (proprietary) and Netscape Webmail (proprietary). >> The protocols *are* already "pluggable". >> >> But what you say here seems to be the exact opposite of what you say >> above. >> >> Ben Bucksch >> >> > >
