Re: [Evolution] IMAP vs. POP

[Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam opengroupware us>]

On Wed, 2010-03-17 at 12:39 +0100, randall wrote:
> 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?
> for me as administrator it brings less problems since many email clients
> have limited storage of a few Gig, i used to have exploding mailboxes on
> a frequent schedule several years ago when we did pop, nowadays having
> someone with 20 or 30 gig in their inbox is not uncommon (yes, i know)
> besides that i can also easily make regular backups of all mailboxes and
> restore them if needed

Ditto; and as an admin the features like Delayed Expunge (provided by
Cyrus IMAP) are simply wonderful.  They make both help desk and auditors
happy when you can simply and quickly retrieve *deleted* messages from a
user's mailbox.  Without such features it is extremely difficult to
implement a data retention policy [which is legally *required* for
*every* organization, company, and corporation in the United States].

Data Retention w/Open Source
<http://mosg.googlegroups.com/web/DataRetention.odp?gda=rvjMLkMAAAC-jgpod-Vm3IqponsAjiNYMY_Qgfw51_BXRzpTapN-rPS7ePkljeN75DZzkM47KrAytiJ-HdGYYcPi_09pl8N7FWLveOaWjzbYnpnkpmxcWg>

-- 
Adam Tauno Williams <awilliam whitemice org> LPIC-1, Novell CLA
<http://www.whitemiceconsulting.com>
OpenGroupware, Cyrus IMAPd, Postfix, OpenLDAP, Samba