Hello -=Curtis=-, On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 09:57:57 -0500 GMT (03/08/2005, 21:57 +0700 GMT), -=Curtis=- wrote:
C> Why would IMAP be overkill? This is what it was designed for. [snip] C> In the past, one person/home having multiple machines was rare because C> of expense. Nowadays, it's quite common for one person or household to C> have multiple machines. I have 3 machines and there are 4 in the house. He has only two, so do I. C> The business of leaving messages on the server so that both C> machines can download the mail doesn't solve the issue of flagging C> (you reply/read to message on one machine, but the corresponding C> flagging isn't there on the other machine). With IMAP, there's no C> routine. You just use the client at whichever location you're at. C> You open any client and it's as though you were working only with C> that client. No synchronizing to worry about. This is a point that has a lot of value. At home, I just mark all message read that arrived before I left the office, so no problem. But I also reply to office emails at home, and then this doesn't show when I get back to the office in the morning, causing some duplication. But then, it is not a big problem over here. I cannot flag messages, of course. -- Cheers, Thomas. Der Angeklagte unterhielt mit mir bis zum 7. Monat einen intimen Kontakt und fuhr dann zu einer anderen Arbeitsstelle. Message reply created with The Bat! 3.51.10 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 ________________________________________________ Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
