IMAP (was: replacement for netscrape mail)

[bscott at ntisys.com]

On Fri, 20 Dec 2002, at 2:53pm, Ken.Coar at golux.com wrote:
>> I assume IMAP isn't an option?  It would be a much better solution.
> 
> i disagree.  been there, done that, got seriously pissed and frustrated.

  Okay, I simply have to ask: What about it frustrated you?  IMAP is
explicitly designed for what you're wanting to do (i.e., shared mail
stores).  I personally think IMAP is the greatest thing since SMTP.  I can
switch mail clients at will, and never have to worry about mailbox
conversion.  In general, I don't have to worry about mail storage at all -
my client(s) just speak IMAP.  Storage is an opaque server detail I don't
have to care about.  The server can have RAID and backups, so I don't have
to worry about those, either.  I can run my mail client from any number of
locations, including over SSH.  I can run a GUI client remotely, and still
get good performance.  And it does not depend on any evil "keep mail on
server" POP3 hacks, which are kludgey at best.

  In short, IMAP rocks.  How could you not like it?  ;-)

-- 
Ben Scott <bscott at ntisys.com>
| The opinions expressed in this message are those of the author and do not |
| necessarily represent the views or policy of any other person, entity or  |
| organization.  All information is provided without warranty of any kind.  |