Lane Roathe ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) on 2007-05-08 00:33 said: >I've never figured out the attraction of IMAP, maybe just because I'm >focused on speed so much. Using both in several programs and via webmail >I continue to prefer POP3 from both a user and server perspective. >(Although anymore I have to run IMAP for webmail).
See: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imap#Advantages_over_POP3> For most, the biggest thing is being able to keep your mail at work, home, and laptop all in sync. >If PM ever goes to the dark side and becomes HTML "compliant", I'll >switch to another program - if I want to send 4MB word docs I'll do so >knowingly, not accidently via my email program. I also like the fact >that I can simply flag all HTML email as spam and narrow down my emails >to (nearly) only those I want (that's after filtering over 90% of the >spam at the server, leaving only a few hundred a day arriving for PM to >filter). For me anyway, I also don't want to compose html mail, but I would like to be able to read it properly. Often times I get html mails where the message in empty and there is a .html attachment. That's pretty lame. Sean -- "Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to reform." - Mark Twain
