>>TB is the pick, because it is the most well developed Imap >>implementation with the most configurable interface, with tolerable html >>in email display. It is true that Mulberry's Imap is more complete, but >>I don't find it more trouble free.
> TheBat!'s IMAP handling is crude and unpredictable. I would never trust > it in a production environment. The HTML display is not tolerable until > we have the choice to display images. Crude and unpredictable. That would be Pocomail and Eudora. > Thunderbird is what I chose to put my company on. The IMAP > implementation is great. It is not complete, but average users won't > notice unless they want to drag out the RFC :). At least I can save my > sent mail to my IMAP sent items box, I can rely on the counters, I can > leave it on as long as I want and it won't hang, I can filter my account Yes, if static message index columns, inability to set font sizes, and many other things is good enough, Thunderbird is good enough. > and my number one pet peeve..... I can mark items as deleted and they > don't disappear from the inbox (when we used TB! this was the number one > trouble call, accidental deletion) with Thunderbird, it is just lined > through, the user can right click and undelete, no more hysterical > calls. undelete is possible in TheBat!, it just isn't intuitive to the > average user, gone is gone to them. Interesting. One of the things I positively didn't like about Mulberry was the necessity to delete messages twice. If I delete it, I want it to be gone. All gone. POP users have survived a long time without needing to deleting messages twice, why does this become necessary for Imap users? -- Gleason Using 3.99.24 on Windows XP, 5.1, Build 2600. IMAP email provider is Fastmail, which uses Cyrus server software. ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.99.24 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
