Re: Confirm imap support
Hi there Mr. Fox, Going back 06:20 31.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: Probably allow POP3 on an internal LAN, but don't want people checking personal mail at work, or bringing in viruses/worms in school or something like that. The firewall admin probably forgot to block the IMAP port. No, no ;-) They allow of course everything as long as you're connected to the internet gateway. From outside they don't allow POP3 because *basic* POP3 transmits your user/password combo in cleartext. IMAP doesnt, thats why its allowed. You are free to use any POP3 you want, of course if you're dialled in as well. I must admit I can understand them! They're not an ISP. I'm not sure how you call it in US. It's a non-profit organization that's mostly funded by local government... Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- While money can't buy happiness, it certainly lets you choose your own form of misery. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
Hi there Marck, Going back 23:44 30.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: ... and MD5 CRAM. Both of these encoded login methods are supported. I use MD5-APOP myself. I know that POP3 can be made secure. I personally really enjoy using it over an SSH tunnel or secured via SSL. But the matter is not what I believe, its what the tech guy of a small e.V. thinks. They're perhaps 10 to 15 guys, not a real ISP but guys that are from local government funding InterneteMail access for their citizens (well until somewhat like a year, now only eMail access). Anyway IMAP support behaves like POP3 in TB so its ok for me ;-) Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- When all other means of communication fail, try words. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
Hi there Marck, Going back 02:32 30.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: Personally, I have no need for IMAP. If you have real and complex IMAP needs, i.e. as more than a glorified POP protocol, then TB v1 is not going to suit you. I would love to hear from someone knowledgeable what TB IMAP support does and doesn't, because one of my mail providers forces me to use IMAP, POP3 is blocked ourside their LAN... Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Whenever people agree with me I always feel I must be wrong. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
On 29 Jan 2001, at 20:35, Brian Clark wrote: Hello Andrew, (AH == "Andrew Hodgson") [EMAIL PROTECTED] conveyed: AH Other than the bats other rfc deficiencies, can we confirm/deny that AH tb supports imap in the following way: I don't use IMAP, but AFAIK TB! supports it (to what degree, I don't know). In account properties, one of the protocols listed is IMAP4. Yes, however I noticed the deficiencies I spoke of in my message, and just wanted to know if it was me or the program. AH P.S. For a real imap client, try Mulberry, Pegasus etc. What is this? Some sort of Troll? Why do people quarrel over MUA's and editors and browsers and operating systems. Just use what you want; who cares? Mulberry is the comparison :-) I hate the ui, however, the degree to which it supports imap is cool. Andrew. -- Sincerely, Andrew. Get Public PGP key from: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key ID: 0x16282F3D (RSA Key prefered) -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
On 30 Jan 2001, at 18:05, Johannes Posel wrote: Hi there Marck, Going back 02:32 30.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: Personally, I have no need for IMAP. If you have real and complex IMAP needs, i.e. as more than a glorified POP protocol, then TB v1 is not going to suit you. I would love to hear from someone knowledgeable what TB IMAP support does and doesn't, because one of my mail providers forces me to use IMAP, POP3 is blocked ourside their LAN... Ok, I used tb over weekend using imap support, and did not notice any difference between pop3 and imap. So basicly, no support for imap server folders, everything is downloaded from the root folder, if it is marked as read it is not downloaded from the server. If the delete from server option is checked everything is deleted as per pop3. This wasn't the design of imap, however, and so it didn't forfil my requirements. Andrew. -- Sincerely, Andrew. Get Public PGP key from: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key ID: 0x16282F3D (RSA Key prefered) -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
Dear Andrew, Going back 18:29 30.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: This wasn't the design of imap, however, and so it didn't forfil my requirements. So basically TB uses it just like POP3. Well, to be honest, for me this is great, because this way I can circumvent the postmasters stupid idea of banning POP3 and enforcing IMAP. He gives no mbox max for IMAP, I think im gonna try this one day :-) Andrew. ThanksCheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- /earth is 98% full ... please delete anyone you can. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
On 30 Jan 2001, at 17:33, Marck D. Pearlstone wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Andrew, On 30 January 2001 at 11:34:44 - (which was 11:34 where I live) Andrew Hodgson wrote and made these points: AH Mulberry is the comparison :-) AH I hate the ui, however, the degree to which it supports imap is cool. It has to be said that Mulberry is probably the paragon amongst IMAP clients. Though not user interfaces. Try using it for any length of time, you will find it isn't as easy as the bat, with complex dialog boxes appearing all over the place. Also, I hate those small windows (kinda like pmail) that pop up all over the place. I all fairness, the very ethos of full IMAP, with on-line folder structures, goes against the TB strengths in local mail-base. I can't see how TB can offer full IMAP support and still be the TB we all "know and love" with extreme filter, RegEx support and archive searching capabilities. This is probably the reason TB only offers it as a glorified POP3. I think that tb could involve imap support, but with eather online and offline mode. In offline mode, its just glorified pop3, but where message storage etc is an issue, you could use it in online mode, whereby messages can be manipulated throughout tb folders. One issue you could come up against though is where you have imap engines on the server processing rules to put certain messages into certain folders, it would be nice to specify different folders to look up in the bat. I will be posting a full list of problems we found with tb shortly. Andrew. -- Sincerely, Andrew. Get Public PGP key from: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key ID: 0x16282F3D (RSA Key prefered) -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: OT: More variants of TB! (was: Confirm imap support)
Hello Marck, On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, at 17:33:20 (your local time), you wrote: MDP I all fairness, the very ethos of full IMAP, with on-line folder MDP structures, goes against the TB strengths in local mail-base. I can't MDP see how TB can offer full IMAP support and still be the TB we all MDP "know and love" with extreme filter, RegEx support and archive MDP searching capabilities. This is probably the reason TB only offers it MDP as a glorified POP3. I greatly agree with your point about TB "that we all know and love". I found myself in it, thanks. Actually, I use to ask myself sometimes why RIT doesn't make some variants of TB, i.e. TB Lite (limited filter functions, no regexes and only POP3/SMTP), TB "Profy" (for advanced users who need IMAP or some sort alike, more business-comfortable) etc. Perhaps, RIT will make them, but I frankly hope they will NOT! Maybe all of this sound stupid, but here on these lists we got topics like this one all the times... Some users are unsatisfied with Bat! and they need "this", need "that"... ugh. Sorry for off-topic. -- Best Regards, Lija _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: Confirm imap support
Hello Johannes, On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, at 19:46:59 (your local time), you wrote: JP So basically TB uses it just like POP3. Well, to be honest, for me JP this is great, because this way I can circumvent the postmasters JP stupid idea of banning POP3 and enforcing IMAP. He gives no mbox max This is very off-topic now, but I'm curios: Why should someone enforce users to use IMAP and ban POP3? -- Best Regards, Lija _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
Hi there Lija, Going back 20:35 30.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: This is very off-topic now, but I'm curios: Why should someone enforce users to use IMAP and ban POP3? POP3 logins are transmitted clear text, while IMAP are somewhat secured. Personally I prefer POP3-SSL or POP3 over SSH... Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Modern man is the missing link between apes and human beings. -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: Confirm imap support
Hello Andrew, AH On 30 Jan 2001, at 18:05, Johannes Posel wrote: skip Personally, I have no need for IMAP. If you have real and complex IMAP needs, i.e. as more than a glorified POP protocol, then TB v1 is not going to suit you. I would love to hear from someone knowledgeable what TB IMAP support does and doesn't, because one of my mail providers forces me to use IMAP, POP3 is blocked ourside their LAN... AH Ok, I used tb over weekend using imap support, and did not AH notice any difference between pop3 and imap. So basicly, no AH support for imap server folders, everything is downloaded AH from the root folder, if it is marked as read it is not AH downloaded from the server. If the delete from server option AH is checked everything is deleted as per pop3. Just try to use 'Dispatch on the server' option and you will enjoy access to on-line folder etc. When I used IMAP it was somehow slower than pop and didn't seem to be extremely stable though:( But you definitely cannot 'mirror' on-line folder structure on your local hard drive automatically I believe. Best regards, Serge Skorokhodovmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
On 30 Jan 2001, at 21:02, Johannes Posel wrote: Hi there Lija, Going back 20:35 30.01.2001. when you uttered the following thoughts: This is very off-topic now, but I'm curios: Why should someone enforce users to use IMAP and ban POP3? POP3 logins are transmitted clear text, while IMAP are somewhat secured. Personally I prefer POP3-SSL or POP3 over SSH... Not strictly true, what happened to the apop support which tb supports? -- -- Sincerely, Andrew. Get Public PGP key from: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key ID: 0x16282F3D (RSA Key prefered) -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[2]: Confirm imap support
Hello Johannes, On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, at 21:02:20 (your local time), you wrote: JP POP3 logins are transmitted clear text, while IMAP are somewhat JP secured. Personally I prefer POP3-SSL or POP3 over SSH... You have also APOP in TB... it's up to your ISP if supports it... -- Best Regards, Lija _ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re[3]: Confirm imap support
Hello Lija, Tuesday, January 30, 2001, 11:35:57 AM, you wrote: L Hello Johannes, L On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, at 19:46:59 (your local time), you wrote: JP So basically TB uses it just like POP3. Well, to be honest, for me JP this is great, because this way I can circumvent the postmasters JP stupid idea of banning POP3 and enforcing IMAP. He gives no mbox max L This is very off-topic now, but I'm curios: Why should someone enforce users to L use IMAP and ban POP3? Probably allow POP3 on an internal LAN, but don't want people checking personal mail at work, or bringing in viruses/worms in school or something like that. The firewall admin probably forgot to block the IMAP port. -- Best regards, Silvermailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Confirm imap support
Hi all. Other than the bats other rfc deficiencies, can we confirm/deny that tb supports imap in the following way: 1. Allow the viewing of read/unread messages? 2. Lookup other folders other than inbox? 3. Manipulation? I would love to know. P.S. For a real imap client, try Mulberry, Pegasus etc. Andrew. -- Sincerely, Andrew. Get Public PGP key from: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key ID: 0x16282F3D (RSA Key prefered) -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Andrew, On 29 January 2001 at 23:43:32 - (which was 23:43 where I live) Andrew Hodgson wrote and made these points: AH Other than the bats other rfc deficiencies, What RFC deficiencies are you alleging? None have been reported for a long time - unless you are referring to the incompleteness of the IMAP implentation. AH can we confirm/deny that tb supports imap in the following way: AH 1. Allow the viewing of read/unread messages? AH 2. Lookup other folders other than inbox? AH 3. Manipulation? AH I would love to know. I believe that the IMAP implementation in the TB v1 is incomplete, although to what degree and in what ways I do not know. v2 is scheduled to offer far better support and, before you ask, no-one here knows the release time-scale for v2. AH P.S. For a real imap client, try Mulberry, Pegasus etc. ...and for a real and *powerful* POP3/SMTP email client, try The Bat!. It is the best by a long way. Pegasus was one client that I found completely failed to provide for my needs as a computing professional after having used it for several months. Personally, I have no need for IMAP. If you have real and complex IMAP needs, i.e. as more than a glorified POP protocol, then TB v1 is not going to suit you. - -- Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH [ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ] [Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ] TB! v1.49c S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: PGP 6.5.8 Secured Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness iQA/AwUBOnYZrTnkJKuSnc2gEQJOAgCg/SsvYsoahTRhj5imL6o+wd24uyUAniGI WvdNGrUggupWjJxGbNrrlMuY =s72M -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
Re: Confirm imap support
Hello Andrew, (AH == "Andrew Hodgson") [EMAIL PROTECTED] conveyed: AH Other than the bats other rfc deficiencies, can we confirm/deny that AH tb supports imap in the following way: I don't use IMAP, but AFAIK TB! supports it (to what degree, I don't know). In account properties, one of the protocols listed is IMAP4. AH P.S. For a real imap client, try Mulberry, Pegasus etc. What is this? Some sort of Troll? Why do people quarrel over MUA's and editors and browsers and operating systems. Just use what you want; who cares? -- ... Brian Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP-KeyID: 0xE4D0C7C8 Web Architect, Designer, and Programmer Tel: 864.227.0750 http://www.fusionwerks.com/ Fax: 864.942.7249 ... TB! 1.49c, Windows 98 (SE) 4.10 Build A -- __ Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
