On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 02:29:19PM -0500, Colin Telmer wrote:
> > Unfortunately, this would eliminate the major advantage of IMAP. I read
> > my mail from two different locations (home and work) and up to 5 different
> > computers. Storing the mail locally really isn't an option, although I
> > suppose I could make *copies* of it instead of moving it from the mailserver
> > to a local machine.
> Isn't that basically what IMAP does? There is an fetchmail option to
> leave mail on each or some of the mailservers. Cheers.
Nope. IMAP's main strength is that it acts as a local storage system,
but is remote. This isn't just "leave mail on server" but actually filing
messages in different folders which are accessable from remote. If you just
want to "leave mail on server" you can do that with pop and is nothing more
than copying the files from one location to the next in a very kludgy
fashion.
The best analogy I can come up with is this: FTP (POP) versus NFS
(IMAP). Sure, with FTP you can access all the files, but it isn't the same
as having the file system seamlessly mounted into your local file system.
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus | employer's. They hired me for my
ICQ: 5107343 | skills and labor, not my opinions!
---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------Attachment:
pgpaqkSOj04qh.pgp
Description: PGP signature