-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, December 09, 2002, Markus Gloede wrote...
>> Wait until TB!2 comes out first... The 1.6 series of TB has bad >> IMAP support ;) > Very funny. This could become a running joke. "Wait for TB!2" [snip] lol... very good ;) >>> 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 ;) > Well, why can a provider claim their IMAP service supports only > specific clients (in the case of GMX: Outlook 2002, OE 6, and > Netscape mail up to version 4.x (but not version 7.x or Mozilla > 1.x))? What are the differences? As you mentioned yourself, you had to flick a switch to enable options that were bad form, but were coded into Outlook (and express). This would mean the nice programmers of the IMAP server you used flexed to take this into account. It could very well be possible that the imap server GMX is using only knows the broken IMAP method of OE/Outlook, could even be an MS server. Because of this, the older versions of Netscape might have been coded to also respond to the bad IMAP, but the newer versions fixed to properly comply with RFCs. > Where - though limited - would the Bat fit in? As has been said before, TB!s IMAP support is very... restricted in the fact that it treats IMAP as a multi-folder POP3 server, instead of true IMAP. There is a possibility that if GMX sorts the servers out, you could read the mail. - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 6.5.8ckt iQA/AwUBPfTRkSuD6BT4/R9zEQJH/QCggwL/asLnBamkpiBpXDvZ6BFIOq8AoMy7 O7ZyM5W1WtYrlKJUFtnA5rI0 =5KPY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
