[sylpheed:30319] Re: junk filtering not automatic

Colin Leroy colin at colino.net
Tue Oct 31 21:54:06 JST 2006

On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 13:39:01 +0100 31 Oct 2006 at 13h10, Stefaan A
Eeckels wrote:


> > Probably about the same order of market share as Linux on the
> > desktop, in other words.  
> But surely not all Linux users use IMAP :) 

This was there as a comparison, I didn't want to state that Linux and
IMAP user base is the same, just that, just because it's small, it
doesn't mean it doesn't deserve attention.

> I appreciate that some providers (and Universities) don't do this, but
> then why offering IMAP? I'm really interested in understanding this.

I'm a sysadmin; I have to be able to read my mail at home, preferably
not read again what I've already read at the office, and preferably
with all of the cron mails sorted away, so that I can see only the very
important stuff when I'm at home.

Now, your ssh -X solution doesn't work for me for various reasons, like
no access to the LAN workstations from the VPN. 

Besides, IMAP is certainly faster than ssh -X'ing some host behind an
ADSL line.

To quote another of your mail:

> unless one really, really needs
> that central mail store POP3 is faster, easier and more reliable.

faster, yes, but not awfully slower either (talking about a good IMAP
implementation, of course)
easier, no, there's no difference, the folders look the same and the
filtering does too
more reliable, definitely not, as people can't seem to be able to backup
anything correctly, whereas sysadmins handling mail servers loaded with
multiple-years-old mailboxes tend to perform better than the average
user :-)

Anyway, maybe it's just that IMAP is geared towards the power user, and
Sylpheed's user-friendliness is incompatible with power-user features.

More information about the Sylpheed mailing list