-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, December 09, 2002, Markus Gloede wrote...
>> I don't know why IMAP support depends so much on the client used, >> but according to their mailing, there is no reason to assume that >> this first version should work with TB at all. > I recall having read somewhere that MS products speak a different > dialect of IMAPrev4. I set up an IMAP server once where one setting > was along the lines of "support broken OE IMAP -yes". Again, evidence that the software giant makes everybody have to flex for their incompliant code with RFCs. >> Thus, don't worry. Be patient until they say that IMAP support >> should work with all mail clients. If it still won't work with TB, >> contact GMX first. Wait until TB!2 comes out first... The 1.6 series of TB has bad IMAP support ;) > Again, unless the pressure rises I don't think GMX will put much > effort into supporting other IMAP 'dialects'. Sadly we are in no > position to claim that the Bat speaks proper IMAP. We simply do not > know if the limited IMAP support that the Bat currently has is > 'proper' or 'improper'. Yet I know for sure that it at least is able > to work with fastmail and other mail providers. There really shouldn't be variable 'dialects'... just one... and that is RFC compliant, responding, and reading only what is allowed. > Anybody here that knows about the differences in IMAP support? Depends what you mean... or in regards to what. I'm a developer on a popular web based IMAP4rev1 client ;) - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 6.5.8ckt iQA/AwUBPfTGmSuD6BT4/R9zEQINnQCg5veQkIn0U2RMEovyyI1WkPklP8gAn1z9 CWsCDwWIwsHmbhCO2uqR7p5+ =0CSu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
