Webmail vs IMAP4 vs POP3. Or not?

ageor — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 22:14:24 +0000

With email dominating a good part of our communication, mailbox management is an ever growing issue. This is primarily intended for people who access their email from at least two different email clients (webmail counts as one) and people who share a mailbox with others.

I want access to my email via webmail and offline acceess on my two laptops and mobile phone. Worse than that, I am using 2 different email clients on each laptop (one I regularly use and one I am trying). So, I frequently get to answer the question “How to best setup my client(s) to receive email; POP3 or IMAP4?” for myself and others. As usual, there is no single answer. However, there may be a proper email setup strategy for some scenarios. Good understanding of the tools will, hopefully, help determine which one it is. First, some background:

Webmail

Webmail is actually a web-based email client. As such, it is accessible from a web browser and it talks directly to the email server instead of transferring emails locally.

Webmail can be a one stop shop, provided there is access to the email server, which probably also requires Internet access. Yahoo! mail, Hotmail, Gmail, the upcoming Facebook Social Inbox etc. are full fledged email clients that can receive, send and manage emails, complete with antispam, folders and address books. A webmail user has no need to know about protocols to enjoy complete use of an email system, unless he would also like to access email offline. In that case, use of an email client like Pegasus, Eudora, Outlook Express, Outlook (yes, they are different), Evolution, Thunderbird etc. (forgive me if I missed your mailer of choice) is required.

SMTP (Simple Mail Transport Protocol)

Not to be forgotten, SMTP is the protocol that sends email. It is used by all email clients in both POP3 and IMAP4 configurations.

POP3 (Post Office Protocol v3)

POP3 ia a protocol for one way transfer (reception, downloading) of email from the server to the client for offline use. It is supported by all of the above (and more) mailers.

Once an email is succesfully received by the email client, it is, typically, erased from the mailbox at the server. Thankfully, most mailers allow the user to modify this behaviour so the mailer leaves the email at the server’s mailbox as well, either indefinitely or for a preset amount of days. Not erasing an email from the server is so important that Gmail (basically a webmail system) supports setting emails to not be erased on the server side, in case email clients are setup wrong.

So, when we need to have our mail delivered to more than one clients, we can set them up so they don’t erase downloaded emails from the server. This way, email stays on the server ready to be downloaded again or to be accessed via a webmail client.

IMAP4 (Internet Message Access Protocol v4)

IMAP is also supported by all of the above (and more) mailers. It is usually perceived as another protocol to receive email. Well, it is not! It ia actually a protocol to synchronize folders on the email server with folders on the email client(s). Email reception is, effectively, a subset of that.

So, what exacly is the difference and why is it important? Here is a partial list (visit a more comprehensive list and “Internet Message Access Protocol” in Wikipedia). The reason I use “differences” over “advantages” is that advantages depend on the usage scenario:

	Some IMAP and POP protocols differences		Best protocol for scenario
	IMAP	POP	User with multiple email clients	Multiple users sharing a mailbox
Mailbox Size	The complete mailbox resides on the server and requires the corresponding disk space. Depending on how email is synchronized in the clients, they may require less disk space than on the server	At worst, only the size of the “Inbox” folder, provided that mail is not deleted when received (default behaviour)	POP	POP
Folders Structure	The structure of the email folders is the same in the server and the clients and any change propagates from the server to all the clients. If you like to arrange your emails in folders, you only have to do it once for all your clients and the server. Only folders subscribed-to are synchronized	The structurs must be maintained on every client separately	IMAP	IMAP
Direction	Emails get copied both ways; from the server to the client(s) and from the client(s) to the server. This applies to all folders (including “Sent Items” and “Drafts”). It also applies to any number of clients	Email transfer goes only from the “Inbox” folder on the server to the client(s)	IMAP	IMAP
Email Status Synchronization	Email status of “Deleted”, “Read” and “Starred” synchronizes as well. When it changes, it first propagates to the server and from there to all clients	Some clients can direct the server to delete emails that are deleted locally. “Read” and “Starred” status is local to the clients and to the server and does not synchronize in any direction	IMAP	POP
Deletion	Email deletions move both ways. Once a deletion happens on or reaches the server, it propagates to all the clients	Clients never ask for the same email again. Once downloaded, nothing will happen to it in the client, even if deleted on the server	IMAP	POP
Push email delivery	Yes, when both server and client support the IDLE command	No	IMAP	IMAP

User with multiple email clients

IMAP is clearly better for a single user with multiple clients, provided there is enough room for the mailbox on the server. Even with a limited mailbox, a backup of older emails will allow deletion from the server. This backup can be available in as many of the clients as needed.

Multiple users sharing a mailbox

Complete synchronization, a clear advantage for a single user, turns into a disadvantage when multiple users share an email account. I wouldn’t want my collegue(s) to erase the emails he doesn’t like for me as well. I have my own important emails to star. I don’t want to have emails I haven’t read yet appear to be read because someone else read them. And I have my own way to organize my inbox. I want my own email statuses and organization. But I also need to have access to the emails he composes and sends through this account. This is the one synchonization I need.

Thankfully, a mixed IMAP and POP system can be configured to optimize for all needs. The solution I suggest to this (quite frequent, I may add) problem is: Set it up twice. Once as POP3 without deletion for email reception and once as IMAP for the “Sent Items” (or “Sent”) and “Drafts” folders synchronization. Care is needed to not send email from the POP edition of the account. Even then, if the sent email is manually or automatically -via a rule- moved to the IMAP “Sent” folder, the result will be the same. Please note that while sent items and drafts will synchrnize back to the server, any folder-based organization of the email won’t happen on the server, therefore it won’t appear during mailbox access via webmail.

Multiple users sharing a mailbox and using multiple email clients

Unfortunately, the second scenario doesn’t mix well with the first. If I want to organize my shared mailbox in folders and access it from multiple clients, I will have to do so manually on each client. This is a scenario where incoming mail needs to arrive to a mailbox all my own. Actually, nothing a good old mail forwarding setup can’t do, at the expense of multiple times the incoming email space on the server…

How many devices and email clients do you use? Are you happy with your setup? Please share!

Possibly related posts (auto generated)

Twitter Lists Support: Management Status & Optimization Wishlist

ageor — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 12:31:52 +0000

I follow 2001 Twitter accounts (the limit Twitter inexplicably imposes for my number of followers). I have created some Twitter Lists and added some accounts in them, usually as I come across them. Twitter’s web interface leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to Lists management, so, this is a slow, painful process. I had also created groups in PeopleBrowsr, TweetDeck and PockeTwit. Having done part of the work to organize those I follow in Groups and Lists in a chaotic manner over time, I now wish for an easy way to bulk organize everything in Twitter Lists and be done with it. I wish for a Lists Manager that will let me optimize the process. While searching for it, I came across the following facts (please note that this is by no means a thorough survey; I just went through the clients I know of and use):

Clients that support Twitter Lists
- Seesmic for Windows now offers read only support
- SocialWhale offers read and add support on a per user basis, like Twitter
- PeopleBrowsr initially offered read only support and now also supports additions
- TweetDeck was the last to market but offers the best support so far, including read, easily add and export of its own Groups to Twitter Lists
Export the application’s Groups to Twitter Lists
- SocialWhale asks users to import their preexisting Groups to Lists at login
- TwitDeck fully supports copying Groups to Lists
- PeopleBrowsr initially did the opposite; it copied Twitter Lists to PB Groups. It does not do it in the right direction
Bulk-add accounts to Twitter Lists
- Twitdeck shows a selected Group, List or the complete list of followed accounts and allows to multiple-select-and-import any account from all friends, TweetDeck’s own Groups or Twitter Lists to a Twitter List
- PeopleBrowsr shows 16 accounts already in the Group or Twitter List with an “x” next to each one for one-by-one removal. To add an account to the List, one needs to manually type (part of) the names one by one and can’t bulk select them from a full list or PB’s own Groups
Applications’ own Groups vs. Twitter Lists management tools
- Oddly enough, both TwitDeck and PeopleBrowsr have different Managers for their own Groups and for Twitter List

The winner, so far, is TwitDeck; hands down. The race is not over, though and neither is my work, as I still have the PeopleBrowsr and PockeTwit groups to convert to Twitter Lists. So, I am waiting for them to add a competitive Lists Manager that not just gets the job done, it also removes some of the pain that goes with it. Some optimization suggestions to that extend:

Show the avatar, full name, site’s URL, following and followers along with account names

Long lists are difficult to handle just by a nick name.

Make the list auto resizing with the size of the window

The more the information available, the faster and easier the process.

Make it reliable and responsive

PeopleBrowsr often shows me a partial list of Twitter Lists and TwitDeck sometimes retries and fails to add accounts to Twitter Lists.

With Christmas and New Year around the corner, it’s a good time for wishes to come true… Meanwhile, I will update this post will any relevant information I come across, so check back.

DiPot: Ice Tea tech » clients

Webmail vs IMAP4 vs POP3. Or not?

Possibly related posts (auto generated)

Twitter Lists Support: Management Status & Optimization Wishlist

Possibly related posts (auto generated)