powermail-discuss Digest #2629 - Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Lane Roathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Sean McBride" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Not Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Barbara Needham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: PowerMail and IMAP
by "Charles Watts-Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Lane Roathe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 23:33:48 -0500
Hi,
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).
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).
Anyway, I for one am very happy that POP3 and text are the primary focus
of PM. That said, I'm not against improving IMAP or HTML as long as it
doesn't interfere with the primary reasons for using PM in the first place:
1. Fast search
2. Focus on proper text emails
3. Great POP3 support
4. Usability (ui, etc.)
5. Reliability (why isn't this higher ... maybe it would be if it became
an issue)
Anyway, just to be the ship sailing against the wind :)
Lane Roathe
President Ideas From the Deep <http://www.ifd.com>
___________________________________________________________________
Life is cheap, but the accessories will break you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Sean McBride" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 09:22:50 -0400
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
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 16:58:34 +0200
Lane Roathe suggested:
>If PM ever goes to the dark side and becomes HTML "compliant", I'll
>switch to another program -
As nothing most likely would stop you, under the described scenario,
from sending plain text messages and keep labeling incoming HTML-
messages as spam, that is a quite a childish attitude to flaunt. Why
shoudl we other users care about this? I don't care if you switch or
not, for whatever reason. Go join another cult!
It's like if I said if PM ever switches to an _optional_ OS X metal
interface, I'd switch. Like I couldn't keep using the old look (rolling
up my eyes).
Mikael
Tech facts:
PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.5 | Powerbook G4/550Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Mikael Byström" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 16:58:34 +0200
Curtis suggested:
>Webmail has made serious inroads into the popularity of IMAP. Webmail
>offers portability of email across machines, and with adequate
>functionality to please the majority of users interested in such
>portability.
According to what reputable authority?
Mikael
Tech facts:
PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.5 | Powerbook G4/550Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Not Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 11:32:09 -0400
Mikael Byström sez:
>Lane Roathe suggested:
>
>>If PM ever goes to the dark side and becomes HTML "compliant", I'll
>>switch to another program -
>As nothing most likely would stop you, under the described scenario,
>from sending plain text messages and keep labeling incoming HTML-
>messages as spam, that is a quite a childish attitude to flaunt. Why
>shoudl we other users care about this? I don't care if you switch or
>not, for whatever reason. Go join another cult!
>
>It's like if I said if PM ever switches to an _optional_ OS X metal
>interface, I'd switch. Like I couldn't keep using the old look (rolling
>up my eyes).
>
>
>Mikael
>
>Tech facts:
>PM 5.5.3 Swedish | OS X 10.4.5 | Powerbook G4/550Mhz | 1GB RAM | 80GB HD
>
Geez, louise, you're rude. Can you tone it down a bit, please? It's
really getting tiresome when you jump all over a person's case for
stating a personal preference as if it is some personal attack on you or
something. I didn't see anything in Lane's post that said "you" need to
do this or "everyone" needs to do that -- he wrote "I" throughout it.
The next time you want to comment on someone's personal preferences or
blast them for offering up a way they work around a particular issue or
bug while we wait for CTM to change or fix it --- don't. Hit the close
window and "Don't Save" buttons. Then, instead, if it is still
important, write it from your point of view. I could care less if you
think we're all idiots and treat us as such by figuratively rolling up
your eyes, calling us childish, and telling us to join other cults.
Ahhh... One more week to Luddite bliss.
--
Michael Lewis
Off Balance Productions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.offbalance.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Barbara Needham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 09:31:02 -0700
Sean McBride on 5/9/07 said
>For most, the biggest thing is being able to keep your mail at work,
>home, and laptop all in sync.
I manage to do this with pop mail, by not deleting from server. However,
this works only for INCOMING. For outgoing, it does not. There IMAP does
have the advantage if you keep a SENT mail folder on the server.
On the other hand, I turn on IMAP in PowerMail when I need it [for .mac
mail]; in the meantime I download it all as pop. Thunderbird emptied all
my folders on the server once.. that scared me off of using it for a while.
--
Barbara Needham
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: PowerMail and IMAP
From: "Charles Watts-Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 19:05:36 +0200
On 9 May Barbara Needham wrote:
> On the other hand, I turn on IMAP in PowerMail when I need
> it [for .mac mail]
I use my .mac account as a POP3 one. Works fine. Any advantage to using
it as IMAP other than access to one's Sent mail from several machines?
My young grandson accesses his .mac account with Mail using IMAP. Works
OK but we only have a slow connection and so he can wait a long time to
see his Sent folder.
-- Charles
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of powermail-discuss Digest
