Am 07.03.22 um 06:32 schrieb The Real Bev:
> I just noticed that it claims to be incompatible with
> TB38

Are you surprised? Currently we stand 91.6.2
TB 38 was released in 2016.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Thunderbird

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On 03/06/2022 10:50 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> Am 07.03.22 um 06:32 schrieb The Real Bev:
>> I just noticed that it claims to be incompatible with
>> TB38
>
> Are you surprised? Currently we stand 91.6.2
> TB 38 was released in 2016.

I had it long before v38. I suppose that happened (if it did) during an
automatic update. I should never have checked that box :-(

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Thunderbird

--
Cheers, Bev
"Everything sucks; reverse the wires and everything will blow."
-- Desert Ed

Am 07.03.22 um 08:23 schrieb The Real Bev:
> I had it long before v38. I suppose that happened (if it did) during an
> automatic update. I should never have checked that box :-(

I tried to suggest an update of your dusty TB with lame wings.
And your Linux - I guess - will have about the same age. It is full of
security holes like a Swiss Emmentaler.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Am 04.03.22 um 17:52 schrieb Andy Burnelli:
> Do you have a solution that allows us to keep using a passwd in an MUA?
>
> Did you get this message today in all your Google email accounts?
> <https://i.postimg.cc/2yBvxJhJ/gmailpasswd02.jpg>
>
> It implies Google is dropping third-party mail user agent passwd support.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/MGfN2Z7r/gmailpasswd01.jpg>
> Do you have any solution that allows us to keep using a password in an MUA?

The whole issue is a nonstarter. iPhone-users are accustomed to that
kind of procedures for many years. It has absolutely no impact on
privacy but a very positive one on security.

As soon as we get there we will see.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 06 Mar 2022 10:11:52 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 17:49:48 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
> ><robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >>On 2022-03-06 17:27, Ken Blake wrote:
> >>> On 6 Mar 2022 15:48:39 GMT, Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
> >>>> mechanic <mechanic@example.net> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:42:30 -0500, nospam wrote:
> >>>>>> In article <lDVZnXVdBBJiFwOg@a.a>, J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>
> >>>>>> it's not the device or os that limits it, but rather the email client
> >>>>>> and/or email provider, some of which are only imap.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Unfortunately some clients are not very good at it!
> >>>>
> >>>> Indeed. For example in Thunderbird you cannot have a 'Global Inbox',
> >>>> i.e. one Inbox for all mail from several IMAP accounts.
> >>>
> >>> Alas yes.
> >>
> >>You can switch to "Unified" folder view, in which all input folders are
> >>shown grouped and is easier to see which has new email.
> >
> >Thanks. I just did. I'll try it for a while, but I'm not sure it has
> >nay significant advantage for me.
>
> It's only been a few hours, but yes I like it and I think I'll stay
> with it. Thanks again.

I tried it as well, but - as I have many, many folders and subfolders
- it's way too messy for me.

In (View -> Folders ->) 'All' view, the folder list in my folder pane
is just a bit longer than [1] the pane, so I can easily select the
desired top-level folder and open it.

In 'Unified' view the list is some 16 screens long and hence an
absolute pain to navigate.

Which once more shows "Different strokes for different folks!".

[1] It would fit in the pane if Thunderbird could include IMAP accounts
in the 'Global Inbox'! :-(

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 at 22:12:36, Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> wrote (my
> responses usually FOLLOW):
> >Am 06.03.22 um 21:55 schrieb J. P. Gilliver (John):
> >> On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 at 09:27:52, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
> >> (my responses usually FOLLOW):
> >> []
> >>> I use IMAP because that's what my e-mail provider provides, but as I
> >>> just said in another message, to me it has no real advantage over
> >>> POP3.
> >>>
> >> Which provider is it that only provides IMAP?
> >
> >Very many. It is too expensive to maintain such an outdated
> >infrastructure and support the users.
>
> The majority of ones I've looked at do still do so. (I suspect the cost
> is fairly minimal.) Sure, they give you the IMAP settings first, may
> even not mention the POP option when setting things up by default.
> >
> >IMAP can do everything POP can and a lot more!
> >
> Just out of curiosity: if someone - for whatever reason, even if only
> perversity - decides he only wants POP functionality, but only has
> access to an IMAP service: _can_ it be constrained to provide POP-like
> functionality, or does it _always_ provide more?

With sufficient kludge/hacks an IMAP e-mail account can mostly be made
to provide POP-like functionality.

While the IMAP *protocol* can indeed do 'everything' the POP protocol
can do, and more, there are aspects outside the protocols, which may
still favour POP over IMAP.

I already gave an example of the 'Global Inbox' (one Inbox for all
mail from several accounts) functionality in Thunderbird [1], which is
only available for POP accounts.

Another example is that you cannot have a single folder structure
accross multiple IMAP servers. In practice that probably means that you
will have to have one 'home' IMAP server which carries all your main
folders and have only Inbox(/Drafts/Sent/etc.) folders on each of the
other non-'home' IMAP servers. It also means that you will have to move
mail from your non-'home' servers to the appropriate folders on your
'home' server. Not a big deal, but also not an advantage of IMAP.

These are some of the issues I've encountered. Maybe there are others,
maybe not.

FWIW, I use a combination of POP and IMAP accounts. Mostly POP,
because of the Global Inbox and single folder structure aspects, and an
IMAP account (because that particular MSP (Mail SP) has a misbehaving
spam filtering system which cannot be turned off)

[1] Other/earlier e-mail clients like Outlook Express, Windows Mail and
Windows Live Mail - and probably many others - had/have similar
functionality.

In article <t05bvk.14k0.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net>, Frank
Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:

> > >IMAP can do everything POP can and a lot more!
> > >
> > Just out of curiosity: if someone - for whatever reason, even if only
> > perversity - decides he only wants POP functionality, but only has
> > access to an IMAP service: _can_ it be constrained to provide POP-like
> > functionality, or does it _always_ provide more?
>
> With sufficient kludge/hacks an IMAP e-mail account can mostly be made
> to provide POP-like functionality.

documented functionality is not a kludge/hack.

copying mail to a local store, the pop-like functionality that people
frequently mention, is trivial to do with imap, no kludge/hack needed.

the problem is that in doing so, reading email is now limited to only
that one device, in a world where people have numerous devices.

> While the IMAP *protocol* can indeed do 'everything' the POP protocol
> can do, and more, there are aspects outside the protocols, which may
> still favour POP over IMAP.
>
> I already gave an example of the 'Global Inbox' (one Inbox for all
> mail from several accounts) functionality in Thunderbird [1], which is
> only available for POP accounts.

that is a limitation of thunderbird, not pop/imap.

> Another example is that you cannot have a single folder structure
> accross multiple IMAP servers. In practice that probably means that you
> will have to have one 'home' IMAP server which carries all your main
> folders and have only Inbox(/Drafts/Sent/etc.) folders on each of the
> other non-'home' IMAP servers. It also means that you will have to move
> mail from your non-'home' servers to the appropriate folders on your
> 'home' server. Not a big deal, but also not an advantage of IMAP.

that's also a function of the email client, not pop/imap, and without
the need for a 'home server'.

Joerg Lorenz wrote:

> The whole issue is a nonstarter. iPhone-users are accustomed to that
> kind of procedures for many years.

Who on earth would say such a thing but an avowed iKook?

It's like saying why bother fighting for freedom of speech.

We may as well all be slaves because it's easier to live that way.
--
The problem with low IQ people like Joerg isn't that they're incredibly
stupid, but that they can never seem to add any on-topic technical value.

On 3/6/2022 8:20 AM, Ken Blake wrote:

> Regardless of whether you use IMAP or POP3, if you do regular backups,
> it is ALSO on the backup media. If you don't do regular backups to
> eternal media, you're playing with fire, and not just for that reason.
>
> So as far as I'm concerned, that's not a big advantage of IMAP.
>
> I use IMAP, but to me there's no real advantage to using it.

OMG, I don't think anyone still uses POP3. The advantages of IMAP are
enormous.

“It's best not to argue with people who are determined to lose. Once
you've told them about a superior alternative, your responsibility is
fulfilled and you can allow them to lose in peace.” ― Mark Crispin,
inventor of the iMAP e-mail protocol

On 03/07/2022 12:02 PM, sms wrote:
> On 3/6/2022 8:20 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> Regardless of whether you use IMAP or POP3, if you do regular backups,
>> it is ALSO on the backup media. If you don't do regular backups to
>> eternal media, you're playing with fire, and not just for that reason.
>>
>> So as far as I'm concerned, that's not a big advantage of IMAP.
>>
>> I use IMAP, but to me there's no real advantage to using it.
>
> OMG, I don't think anyone still uses POP3. The advantages of IMAP are
> enormous.

I do on the accounts that are important to me. Thunderbird displays the
trivial IMAP accounts in a really stupid way. I don't have the IMAP
accounts on my phone, just the POP(3) accounts. Not looking forward to
having to switch my REAL accounts because google gets its panties in a wad.

> “It's best not to argue with people who are determined to lose. Once
> you've told them about a superior alternative, your responsibility is
> fulfilled and you can allow them to lose in peace.” ― Mark Crispin,
> inventor of the iMAP e-mail protocol

If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?

--
Cheers, Bev
"In all recorded history there has not been one economist who has
had to worry about where the next meal would come from."
-- Peter S. Drucker, who invented management

The Real Bev schrieb:
> If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?

I think you wouldn't understand the arguments.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 at 14:30:20, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 20:55:45 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
><G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 6 Mar 2022 at 09:27:52, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote
>>(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>>[]
>>>I use IMAP because that's what my e-mail provider provides, but as I
>>>just said in another message, to me it has no real advantage over
>>>POP3.
>>>
>>Which provider is it that only provides IMAP?
>
>
>Godaddy. I *think* it only provides IMAP but it was long ago enough
>that I might be misremembering.

https://uk.godaddy.com/help/server-and-port-settings-for-workspace-email-
6949
suggests both.
[]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Can a blue man sing the whites?

On 03/07/2022 01:14 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
> The Real Bev schrieb:
>> If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?
>
> I think you wouldn't understand the arguments.

Perhaps, but quite a few intelligent people have been explaining them
for several days now. The main advantage seems to be that you can
access your mail from a number of devices. I can already do that with POP.

I get mail each day into one of my IMAP accounts. I don't need to see
it and would prefer that it be deleted without my ever seeing it. I'd
prefer NEVER receiving it, but it's part of a subscription. When I try
to delete it with Thunderbird it simply draws a line through the entry.
It's permanently in the trash. I can't delete it. Perhaps if I go
to the gmail website I can delete it there but I NEVER want to go to the
gmail website. If I wanted to do that I wouldn't use Thunderbird.

Oh yeah, I can't get to the FULL gmail site with my preferred version of
Firefox; I have to use Chrome. I hate Chrome. So I have to use a tool
that I hate in order to do something that I shouldn't need to do.

Gmail is so nice. In order to get rid of something you have to delete
it TWICE, possibly THREE times. First from the inbox, next from trash,
and then (possibly) from All Mail. Does All Mail include drafts? I
don't know because I don't send mail from those accounts, certainly not
from the website. Maybe it includes Sent, but again I don't know
because I never send from those accounts.

I rest my case.

--
Cheers, Bev
"In all recorded history there has not been one economist who has
had to worry about where the next meal would come from."
-- Peter S. Drucker, who invented management

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/07/2022 01:14 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> The Real Bev schrieb:
>>> If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?
>>
>> I think you wouldn't understand the arguments.
>
> Perhaps, but quite a few intelligent people have been explaining them
> for several days now. The main advantage seems to be that you can
> access your mail from a number of devices. I can already do that with POP.

That means you have little expectations of "access mail"...

> I get mail each day into one of my IMAP accounts. I don't need to see
> it and would prefer that it be deleted without my ever seeing it. I'd
> prefer NEVER receiving it, but it's part of a subscription.

That all has NOTHING to do with IMAP!

> When I try
> to delete it with Thunderbird it simply draws a line through the entry.

That is a setting under "server settings". "when I delete a message..."
(you can set it to "move to Trash", "mark as deleted" or "remove it")

> It's permanently in the trash. I can't delete it. Perhaps if I go
> to the gmail website I can delete it there but I NEVER want to go to the
> gmail website. If I wanted to do that I wouldn't use Thunderbird.

There is the extra setting to "Expunge" it on exit.

In article <t05uu1$8gi$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?
> >
> > I think you wouldn't understand the arguments.
>
> Perhaps, but quite a few intelligent people have been explaining them
> for several days now. The main advantage seems to be that you can
> access your mail from a number of devices. I can already do that with POP.

not without significant effort and a huge risk of losing mail, you
don't.

> I get mail each day into one of my IMAP accounts.

imap is not a separate type of account.

imap a protocol, as is pop. either or both can be used to access a
single mailstore, assuming the mail provider offers both protocols.
increasingly, only imap is offered, since it has made pop obsolete.

some people consider webmail to be a third method to access mail, but
it's using imap behind the scenes.

it's a bit like having a single network share and using ftp, smb, afp
or nfs to access it.

> I don't need to see
> it and would prefer that it be deleted without my ever seeing it.

then create a filter to move it into a junk folder (or whatever folder
you think is appropriate), or in gmail's case, tag it.

very easy.

> I'd
> prefer NEVER receiving it, but it's part of a subscription.

then unsubscribe to whatever mailing list is sending you the mail you
don't want to see.

also very easy.

> When I try
> to delete it with Thunderbird it simply draws a line through the entry.
> It's permanently in the trash.

nope. it can be moved back if you later decide to not delete it.

eventually, what's in the trash will be permanently deleted, so if
you're going to change your mind, do it sooner than later.

> I can't delete it. Perhaps if I go
> to the gmail website I can delete it there but I NEVER want to go to the
> gmail website. If I wanted to do that I wouldn't use Thunderbird.

it can be permanently deleted in thunderbird, or just wait for the
trash to auto-empty on its own.

> Oh yeah, I can't get to the FULL gmail site with my preferred version of
> Firefox; I have to use Chrome. I hate Chrome.

gmail works with firefox, but you just said you don't want to go to the
website, so why is that an issue?

> So I have to use a tool
> that I hate in order to do something that I shouldn't need to do.

you don't need to do anything, other than create a filter to move email
to wherever you want. once that filter is created, the computer does
the work for you.

you can always move email manually if you prefer, even after the filter
moved it.

> Gmail is so nice. In order to get rid of something you have to delete
> it TWICE, possibly THREE times. First from the inbox, next from trash,
> and then (possibly) from All Mail.

only once is needed.

> Does All Mail include drafts? I
> don't know because I don't send mail from those accounts, certainly not
> from the website. Maybe it includes Sent, but again I don't know
> because I never send from those accounts.
>
> I rest my case.

you just made the case supporting the original claim, that you don't
understand the arguments.

On Mon, 7 Mar 2022 at 12:02:47, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote
(my responses usually FOLLOW):
>On 3/6/2022 8:20 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
>
>> Regardless of whether you use IMAP or POP3, if you do regular backups,
>> it is ALSO on the backup media. If you don't do regular backups to
>> eternal media, you're playing with fire, and not just for that reason.
>> So as far as I'm concerned, that's not a big advantage of IMAP.
>> I use IMAP, but to me there's no real advantage to using it.
>
>OMG, I don't think anyone still uses POP3. The advantages of IMAP are
>enormous.

I collect my email on one device (this computer), and manually move
emails into folders occasionally. (Actually, I do have some
autorouteing.) I do backups. For me, the touted advantages of IMAP are
zero.
>
>“It's best not to argue with people who are determined to lose. Once
>you've told them about a superior alternative, your responsibility is
>fulfilled and you can allow them to lose in peace.” ? Mark Crispin,
>inventor of the iMAP e-mail protocol

It's best not to argue with people whose minds are that closed. Perhaps
excusable if he "invented" it, as it's his baby so he's likely to be a
little biased; does sound insufferably smug though (-:
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

The voices of Radio 4 continuity and newsreading have been keeping me right
for as long as I can remember. I can call on a million different information
sources, but it doesn't make sense until I've heard it from Peter, Harriet,
Charlotte and the rest.- Eddie Mair in Radio Times 10-16 November 2012

In article <Tu6EcMEhhoJiFwbg@a.a>, J. P. Gilliver (John)
<G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:

> >OMG, I don't think anyone still uses POP3. The advantages of IMAP are
> >enormous.
>
> I collect my email on one device (this computer), and manually move
> emails into folders occasionally. (Actually, I do have some
> autorouteing.) I do backups. For me, the touted advantages of IMAP are
> zero.

you're using folders, so not zero.

On 3/7/2022 2:54 PM, The Real Bev wrote:

> Gmail is so nice. In order to get rid of something you have to
> delete it TWICE, possibly THREE times. First from the inbox, next
> from trash, and then (possibly) from All Mail.

Gmail trash has saved my butt more than once when I found that I needed
something that I had earlier deleted and was able to go back and
retrieve it. Mine automatically deletes my email when it's 30 days old
so it eventually goes away without my help anyway.

Awhile back my email address stepped in something bad and I went from a
couple of spams a week to over a 100 a day. Fortunately Gmail catches
virtually all of them and sticks them in the spam folder so I don't have
to deal with them. I can't imagine having to weed out my usual 100 valid
emails a day from the 100 spams like I would if I was using my ISP for
email. Thanks Gmail...

On 03/07/2022 02:16 PM, Rob wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 03/07/2022 01:14 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>>> The Real Bev schrieb:
>>>> If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?
>>>
>>> I think you wouldn't understand the arguments.
>>
>> Perhaps, but quite a few intelligent people have been explaining them
>> for several days now. The main advantage seems to be that you can
>> access your mail from a number of devices. I can already do that with POP.
>
> That means you have little expectations of "access mail"...

I rarely want to see email on my phone. I'm a computer person. I type
with all ten fingers. The phone is just for when I'm not at my
computer, which is rare. Yes, I need a life, but I'm not going to get
one so this is second best :-(

My two real accounts have both POP and IMAP enabled. Thunderbird sees
'POP' and my phones see IMAP. On the face of it this seems like the
best of all possible worlds, but if I have to eventually tell TB that
the account is IMAP I suspect that it will foul up my 'folder' structure
(I have filters that send messages to maybe 30 different 'folders')
tremendously. I don't care about this on my phone because I just use it
for 'now' messages.

>> I get mail each day into one of my IMAP accounts. I don't need to see
>> it and would prefer that it be deleted without my ever seeing it. I'd
>> prefer NEVER receiving it, but it's part of a subscription.
>
> That all has NOTHING to do with IMAP!
>
>> When I try
>> to delete it with Thunderbird it simply draws a line through the entry.
>
> That is a setting under "server settings". "when I delete a message..."
> (you can set it to "move to Trash", "mark as deleted" or "remove it")

THANKS! I hadn't paid any attention to those accounts since forever,
and the POP accounts don't offer those options -- I'd forgotten they
existed :-(

>> It's permanently in the trash. I can't delete it. Perhaps if I go
>> to the gmail website I can delete it there but I NEVER want to go to the
>> gmail website. If I wanted to do that I wouldn't use Thunderbird.
>
> There is the extra setting to "Expunge" it on exit.

I want to control when I delete stuff. The only reason for keeping it
hanging around is that I MIGHT need it because... because. At some
point I figure I haven't needed any of that stuff so I get rid of it,
but I want to make that decision myself perhaps every 3 months or so.

I guess I'm bitching about the same thing(s) that everyone else is
bitching about -- we've got something that works now and we don't want
to have to jump through a lot of new hoops just to accomplish the same
old thing. ESPECIALLY since it seems to offer no particular advantage
over what already exists.

--
Cheers, Bev
Bender: And so I ask you this one question: Have you ever tried simply
turning off the TV, sitting down with your children, and hitting them?

In article <t065t0$qv4$1@dont-email.me>, The Real Bev
<bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I guess I'm bitching about the same thing(s) that everyone else is
> bitching about -- we've got something that works now and we don't want
> to have to jump through a lot of new hoops just to accomplish the same
> old thing. ESPECIALLY since it seems to offer no particular advantage
> over what already exists.

except it does offer numerous advantages, some of which you are using.

The Real Bev schrieb:
> On 03/07/2022 01:14 PM, Joerg Lorenz wrote:
>> The Real Bev schrieb:
>>> If the "superior" attributes are of no interest, why are they superior?
>>
>> I think you wouldn't understand the arguments.
>
> Perhaps, but quite a few intelligent people have been explaining them
> for several days now. The main advantage seems to be that you can
> access your mail from a number of devices. I can already do that with POP.

But in the first place your sent folders are inconsistent across the
population of your devices. POP is dead and the number of providers
offering POP3 is shrinking rapidly.

--
De gustibus non est disputandum

The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
> I want to control when I delete stuff. The only reason for keeping it
> hanging around is that I MIGHT need it because... because. At some
> point I figure I haven't needed any of that stuff so I get rid of it,
> but I want to make that decision myself perhaps every 3 months or so.

In IMAP you can make folders. You can move stuff into folders to
keep it, you can automate that, you can even configure where it is
moved when you click the delete button.
In my mail, stuff from mailinglist is automatically moved into a folder
for each list, as are certain other messages.
(this can be done inside Thunderbird but in my case I do it on the
IMAP server using a filtering protocol called SIEVE, because then it
also happens when I don't have Thunderbird open but e.g. access my
mail via WEBMAIL)

> I guess I'm bitching about the same thing(s) that everyone else is
> bitching about -- we've got something that works now and we don't want
> to have to jump through a lot of new hoops just to accomplish the same
> old thing. ESPECIALLY since it seems to offer no particular advantage
> over what already exists.

It is the typical behavior of old people. Do not want to learn new
things, want to keep doing things the old way.
I do have that in some fields, but fortunately I have made the move
to IMAP very long ago so that is not one of them.

J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
> I collect my email on one device (this computer), and manually move
> emails into folders occasionally. (Actually, I do have some
> autorouteing.) I do backups. For me, the touted advantages of IMAP are
> zero.

It means that when you are away, you are not able to access your mail.
Of course when you never leave the home for e.g. a holiday, that does
not matter. But lots of people do.

In message <slrnt2e7jr.6gk.nomail@xs9.xs4all.nl>, Rob
<nomail@example.com> writes
>J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> I collect my email on one device (this computer), and manually move
>> emails into folders occasionally. (Actually, I do have some
>> autorouteing.) I do backups. For me, the touted advantages of IMAP are
>> zero.
>
>It means that when you are away, you are not able to access your mail.
>Of course when you never leave the home for e.g. a holiday, that does
>not matter. But lots of people do.

You can still access via webmail items that have arrived on your email
service provider's server since you last did a OP3 download, and those
new items are the ones that you are most likely to want to read. (And,
if you want to, you can arrange for items not to be deleted from the
server once they've been downloaded.)
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Tue, 8 Mar 2022 at 10:14:35, Rob <nomail@example.com> wrote (my
responses usually FOLLOW):
>J. P. Gilliver (John) <G6JPG@255soft.uk> wrote:
>> I collect my email on one device (this computer), and manually move
>> emails into folders occasionally. (Actually, I do have some
>> autorouteing.) I do backups. For me, the touted advantages of IMAP are
>> zero.
>
>It means that when you are away, you are not able to access your mail.
>Of course when you never leave the home for e.g. a holiday, that does
>not matter. But lots of people do.

I take this computer with me, and continue to collect by POP when away;
I don't notice any difference (to email; news varies slightly).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm not a great fan of new technology. I don't change my phone every time the
bell rings - Sir David Attenborough, RT 2016/1/23-29