> 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. Paul _______________________________________________ Evolution-list mailing list Evolution-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/evolution-list
