Re: [Evolution] IMAP vs. POP

[Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam opengroupware us>]

On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 05:13 -0600, Bart wrote:
> Hope this is not too far off topic.
> I am using pop for all my email accounts.  I receive all my mail on one
> machine at one location.  But I keep seeing remarks that indicate IMAP
> as being just "SO" much better.
> Would someone either explain or point me to a place where I can learn
> the reasons for these comments?

It depends upon your server;  if you have a powerful full-featured IMAP
server like Cyrus IMAPd [you can get a free Cyrus IMAP account at
<http://fastmail.fm/>] you can really exploit the power of a real
mailbox management protocol and server features.  If you are using some
hack ISP's IMAP implementation then it may not matter - or your ISP may
provide nothing but POP3.

With IMAP you can have multiple folders on the server, move messages
between folder [on the server], access the mailbox from multiple
clients/hosts/interfaces, etc... all of which are impossible with POP
[which simply uses the INBOX on the server as a store-and-download
bucket].  Mail on the server is backed up by the server admins - a BIG
advantage over mail stored on the client.

If your server supports it you can also setup rules [filters] on the
server that are invoked when the message is *delivered* vs. the crappy
client side filters that most mail clients try to implement.  There is a
lot of power in having the server filter [discard, file into folder,
flag as important, forward, auto respond, etc...] your messages - it
happens even when you are on vacation.   Real IMAP servers also let you
set annotation on folders that might do things like discard messages
after a certain number of days;  again, without you having to do
anything [you don't even have to login].
-- 
Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org> LPIC-1, Novell CLA
<http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com>
OpenGroupware, Cyrus IMAPd, Postfix, OpenLDAP, Samba