Re: [Evolution] IMAP vs. POP

[Patrick O'Callaghan <poc usb ve>]

On Thu, 2010-03-18 at 16:45 +0000, Paul Leyland wrote:
> > Quite a few valid reasons for IMAP.  Except.  In my situation, I don't
> > need backup by an administrator, I'm him.  All the accounts on my single
> > machine are from only two hosts.  I don't need auto vacation messages.
> > I keep my folders quite small in size/number of messages.  I have a huge
> > distrust of having personal stuff on someone else's computer.  I know it
> > passes through one, but it doesn't stay.
> >
> > Would you agree in my situation I am as well served with POP3 as IMAP?
> >
> > Bart
>
> I agree with you because I'm largely in your situation.  I've been a
> Unix sysadmin for well over 20 years and think I know how to run a
> reliable system, including the need for regular (and restorable!)
> backups.  My boxes check the POP servers every few minutes and download
> any waiting mail.  Spam filtering, auto-forwarding, classification into
> folders, etc, happen on my machines.  Remote access to my mail is no big
> deal because my systems are running 24/7 and have ssh access.
>
> I also sympathize with your privacy concerns but recognize that in
> practice there is relatively little difference between IMAP and POP from
> the point of view of a determined attacker.  The lower residence time in
> a POP server is only a minor distinction and if you want privacy you
> need encryption.
>
> OTOH, anyone who isn't capable and willing to run a professional set-up
> may be better served by IMAP.

Sounds like you could just run your own mail server and get all the
above plus easier remote access.

poc