Yahoo "classic" (free) POP mail service?

[DaveC]

When I signed up with Yahoo (years ago) they did not allow POP access to the
free mail service. You had to purchase the "Plus" (or was it "Plus!"?)
service at a premium.

Does the free service still disallowed POP access? I thought Yahoo had
changed their policy and allowed POP...

Thanks.

[DaveC]

This is what I see that makes me think "yes":

http://www.emailaddressmanager.com/tips/mail-settings.html

Scroll down to:

Mail Server Settings
ￜ Yahoo! Mail Settings

It unambiguously shows servers for both the free POP mail service and the
Plus POP mail service.

[Neill Massello]

It wouldn't when I tried it several months ago, but your question
prompted me to check again, and I was just now able to set up an account
in Apple's Mail app that works with Yahoo's POP server
(pop.mail.yahoo.com).

[DaveC]

> It wouldn't when I tried it several months ago, but your question
> prompted me to check again, and I was just now able to set up an account
> in Apple's Mail app that works with Yahoo's POP server
> (pop.mail.yahoo.com).

What port did you use? SSL?

Thanks!

[Neill Massello]

DaveC <inv...@invalid.net> wrote:

> What port did you use? SSL?

Mail set up the account with SSL and port 110, but Yahoo's "Receiving
email in another email program" page recommends port 995. It seems to
work on either port.

[Your Name]

In article <0001HW.CDBF11BB...@news.eternal-september.org>,

With Yahoo it's ore like POOP access - they're idea of "service" is utter
crap. The morons at Yahoo closed down my account with no warning
apparently because I hadn't logged into the website. What's the {BEEP}ing
point of being able to auto-forward the emails when you still have to log
in to a slow and cumbersome webmail system. X-(

Don't even bother wasting your time with them and get a proper email
service instead. Use the Google's Gmail or the free GMX
(http://www.gmx.com).

[DaveC]

> Mail set up the account with SSL and port 110, but Yahoo's "Receiving
> email in another email program" page recommends port 995. It seems to
> work on either port.

Something's screwy. Accessing my email address at pop.mail.yahoo.com port 110
w/SSL enabled results in this error:

Login error for "[myaddress]" on "pop.mail.yahoo.com:110"
[AUTH] Access to this server is not permitted.

Using port 995 with SSL tries for about a minute then displays this message:

"pop.mail.yahoo.com:995" closed the POP connection

You are having no problems accessing this server? And you have a free (not a
paid) Yahoo mail account?

Thanks.

[DaveC]

> Yahoo's "Receiving email in another email program" page ...

That page says:

"Please note: this feature is available only to Mail Plus subscribers."

[Neill Massello]

DaveC <inv...@invalid.net> wrote:

> You are having no problems accessing this server? And you have a free (not a
> paid) Yahoo mail account?

Yes, I have standard, free Yahoo Mail, not Mail Plus.

What email client are you using? Apple's Mail lists the account type as
"Yahoo! POP" rather than just "POP", so there may be something Mail
knows about how to use Yahoo's server that other email clients don't.

[DaveC]

> Yes, I have standard, free Yahoo Mail, not Mail Plus.

From this I can reach one of 2 conclusions:

1. You have an old Mail Plus account that you forgot and the Yahoo POP server
is letting you log in under this account.

or

2. Yahoo server admins/accountants have made a mistake and have you listed as
having a Mail Plus account.

I have tried 9 ways from Sunday to get access to my non-Plus account via this
Yahoo server (pop.mail.yahoo.com) using several different mail clients. All
fail, and the ones that display error details say something like "Access to
this service is not permitted".

This is not an authorization (ie, password) issue: when I intentionally used
the wrong password I got a different message: "Incorrect username or
password".

Lucky you.

[Mitch Bujard]

Here comes the other shoe. They must be able to show crappy adds so
they turn around and sell x million users to advertisers. No ad will
show in computer clients…

Google is more elegant in that respect. Although Gmail has been overtly
designed for advertising, their pop service works well and reliably,
and they do not cut customers out for not logging in web mail.

Maybe the slow demise of Yahoo has reached a point where they no longer
realize how easy it is to loose customers, and difficult to gain new
ones ?

--
Mitch Bujard
Fonts for Zaner-Bloser and Dnealian worksheets
http://www.SchoolFonts.com

[Wes Groleau]

On 07-03-2013 14:40, Mitch Bujard wrote:
> Google is more elegant in that respect. Although Gmail has been overtly
> designed for advertising, their pop service works well and reliably, and
> they do not cut customers out for not logging in web mail.

However, GMail has its quirks. Two that irritate me:

1. Thye are "doing me a favor" by eliminating duplicate messages. Well,
I never had duplicates before, but now when I send a message to a
mailing list, what comes back to me is discarded as a duplicate of the
one in my Sent folder.

2. If I have a rule to move messages to a folder, GMail replaces the
copy moved out of the Inbox. So much for eliminating duplicates. Yeah,
you can make the rules in GMail instead--by logging into their slow and
cumbersome webmail system.

--
Wes Groleau

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible
will make violent revolution inevitable.
— John F. Kennedy

[Wes Groleau]

On 07-04-2013 01:20, Lewis wrote:
> In message <kr2rkr$k91$1...@dont-email.me>

> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>> On 07-03-2013 14:40, Mitch Bujard wrote:
>>> Google is more elegant in that respect. Although Gmail has been overtly
>>> designed for advertising, their pop service works well and reliably, and
>>> they do not cut customers out for not logging in web mail.
>
>> However, GMail has its quirks. Two that irritate me:
>
>> 1. Thye are "doing me a favor" by eliminating duplicate messages. Well,
>> I never had duplicates before, but now when I send a message to a
>> mailing list, what comes back to me is discarded as a duplicate of the
>> one in my Sent folder.
>

> Yes, but at least they include the one from your sent folder in the view
> of the thread. If there's a thread, of course.

Apple controls the display, not Google. And I see no such behavior.

[Mitch Bujard]

On 2013-07-04 05:20:32 +0000, Lewis said:

> I find gmail's web interface pretty decent. I don't use it much, because
> i don't use gmail much, but I do setup filters on it on occasion and
> find it works very well.

I have been using GMail web interface since day one, and find it
responsive and appropriate. For a while I went for the pop solution but
had too many message and it was cluttering my disk. Now I am back on
the web and it works for me. It does take a lot of bandwidth, though,
and may not be allright with slow connections.

Filters are fine as well.

[Wes Groleau]

On 07-04-2013 17:34, Lewis wrote:
> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>> On 07-04-2013 01:20, Lewis wrote:
>>> In message <kr2rkr$k91$1...@dont-email.me>
>>> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>>>> However, GMail has its quirks. Two that irritate me:
>>>
>>>> 1. Thye are "doing me a favor" by eliminating duplicate messages. Well,
>>>> I never had duplicates before, but now when I send a message to a
>>>> mailing list, what comes back to me is discarded as a duplicate of the
>>>> one in my Sent folder.
>>>
>>> Yes, but at least they include the one from your sent folder in the view
>>> of the thread. If there's a thread, of course.
>
>> Apple controls the display, not Google. And I see no such behavior.
>

> I was talking about the gmail web interface, not Gmail's pseudo IMAP in
> Mail.app.

Ah, I see. But we (in general) were discussing

"... when you still have to log in to a slow and
cumbersome webmail system."

[Wes Groleau]

On 07-05-2013 20:13, Lewis wrote:
> Wes Groleau <Grolea...@FreeShell.org> wrote:
>> Ah, I see. But we (in general) were discussing
>
>> "... when you still have to log in to a slow and
>> cumbersome webmail system."
>

> Right, Which is why I was talking about the webmail for gmail. It's
> quite good and I find it speedy. In that interface, the send messages
> are shown as part of any thread. This, however, means that any threads
> you START on a mailinglist will not show up for you unless someone
> replies.

I've used it. I am decidedly unimpressed with all the clutter.
And while it's not slow, the local app is faster.