Re: [Evolution] IMAP vs. POP

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?


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.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]