Keep getting error message when checking IMAP account
Sydney Gondomer
except when I check my IMAP account.
It seems to bring me the mail, but I get this message four times every
time I check mail. I have to keep clicking "OK" until it stops. Why is
this happening.
"The IMAP command has failed."
Reason:You're a testa di cazzo!" :-)
Actually what is says is: "Reason Invalid IMAP mailbox name: "Junk"
Should I switch over to Thunderbird which handles IMAP flawlessly and
just use Eudora for all "POP" mail?
Or is there a way to stop it from doing that and make it act like it
has good sense?
Thanks in advance.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Race_Religion_Politics/
ALL laid off, or unemployed persons NEED this ASAP!!
John H Meyers
> Reason: Invalid IMAP mailbox name: "Junk"
Newsgroup search results:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.mail.eudora.ms-windows/browse_thread/thread/50e780bd8e9c8d63
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.mail.eudora.ms-windows/browse_thread/thread/f0e08ec7e702ba63
By the way, if I do not have a trailing "/"
at the end of my "IMAP Mailbox Location Prefix" -- e.g. "IMAP/" --
then my server-side mailboxes (on a Sun Solaris server)
get created as IMAPbox1, IMAPbox2, etc.
rather than as IMAP/box1, IMAP/box2, etc.
But I stay as far away from IMAP as possible,
for marvelous reasons too numerous
to fit in the margin of this post :)
--
Allie
> But I stay as far away from IMAP as possible,
> for marvelous reasons too numerous
> to fit in the margin of this post :)
What I really like about IMAP is being able to filter messages
client-side, but know I can access my organized messages server-side via
a web interface when necessary.
I'd be curious to hear about your POP workflow, and why you perhaps
don't miss IMAP?
John H Meyers
> What I really like about IMAP is being able to filter messages
> client-side, but know I can access my organized messages server-side
> via a web interface when necessary.
> I'd be curious to hear about your POP workflow,
> and why you perhaps don't miss IMAP?
What can you get out of finicky (and inefficient) IMAP,
using a local client "synchronizing" all the time with a server,
that you don't already get (with much greater efficiency)
from using a Gmail account instead, via its own web interface?
This way, the computer (or phone) you use to browse the web
keeps no settings, and has nothing to "synchronize" but
a single display page at a time.
Even if you have a standard IMAP account,
you can similarly view it through a web browser,
using either modern and more capable ISP-provided "webmail"
or a free public equivalent such as
http://mail2web.com/cgi-bin/login.asp?lid=0&il=0
or http://free.myemail.com/advanced.html
However, when I'm at my desk, I greatly prefer to use Eudora,
which "synchronizes" suffciently with Gmail, for all my purposes,
by just collecting all new incoming mail via POP,
and sending all my new outgoing mail via SMTP,
each being as simple and efficient as anything can ever be.
My "home" account is automatically forwarded to Gmail to begin with,
so all I had to do was change my POP server name from somewhere local
to Gmail, letting Gmail store it instead (but now permanently,
rather than only temporarily). This kept Eudora
working just the same as always, but made Gmail itself my "webmail" site,
offering much more than "IMAP viewed via Eudora," yet much more simply
and reliably, accessible from any computer at all, with no setup.
--
Allie
Thanks for the response, John.
So, to me, what seems to be the main difference is that mail on the
server is not organized into folders as it is in your client, and status
is not stored on the server either (replied to, read, not read, etc).
If that's not a big deal to you, then POP definitely seems like the big
winner. If it *is* a big deal, then i guess you have to weigh the
vagaries of IMAP vs the inconvenience of not having "syncronized" email.
Anything else you would add to that?
ebloch
labels to emails based on filtering rules and then they are visible in
pseudo folders = one label only.
Gmail also has very reliable spam filtering with few false positives.
Gmail can also get email from other systems if they are not able to
auto-forward.
Eric
"Allie" <als_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ghoeqp$fk0c$1...@usenet.osg.ufl.edu...
Allie
> But while gmail is different in not using explicit folders one can apply
> labels to emails based on filtering rules and then they are visible in
> pseudo folders = one label only.
>
> Gmail also has very reliable spam filtering with few false positives.
>
> Gmail can also get email from other systems if they are not able to
> auto-forward.
>
> Eric
Right - I don't mean to debate the merits of gmail versus eudora or TB
or whatever IMAP/POP client one choses to use. Rather, if gmail is
going to do all this tagging and filtering, etc, then you have to decide
*not* to do that, and not to use those tags, on your local client,
right? Or, perhaps some clients will download those tags when it gets
the mail with POP, if those tags are applied before the client downloads
the messages, but if you change them on gmail later, they won't be
reflected in your local client.
Stan Bischof
> But while gmail is different in not using explicit folders one can apply
> labels to emails based on filtering rules and then they are visible in
> pseudo folders = one label only.
>
> Gmail also has very reliable spam filtering with few false positives.
>
> Gmail can also get email from other systems if they are not able to
> auto-forward.
>
Gmail also gives complete control of your email to Google
to use in any way they like. I'm amazed that so many folks
just don't care that a large corporation has complete access
to all their corrrespondence. To each his own I guess.
But back on topic: I use pop exclusively as it does everything I need.
regards
Stan
John H Meyers
> Gmail also gives complete control of your email to Google
> to use in any way they like.
"To use in any way they like" is false.
> I'm amazed that so many folks
> just don't care that a large corporation has complete access
> to all their corrrespondence. To each his own I guess.
Anyone who doesn't host his own domain on his own computers
(including incoming/outgoing SMTP servers)
is sending all his/her mail through an ISP,
which also has "complete control" (i.e. can log it),
and anyone using IMAP is leaving all non-deleted mail
on a remote server, permanently.
Anyone whose email flows through the internet
is also having that mail scanned by "Big Brother" (governments),
so "where you gonna hide"?
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/23/technology/23college.html
http://government.zdnet.com/?p=3661
A great many people may also happen to have their own computers
under the control of others, without even knowing it;
apparently the highest government offices are no exception:
"Thieves Winning Online War, Maybe Even in Your Computer" [December 6, 2008]
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/06/technology/internet/06security.html?partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
"Thousands hit in broad Web hack" [November 7, 2008]
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9119598
Chinese hack into White House network [November 6 2008]
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/2931c542-ac35-11dd-bf71-000077b07658.html
Report: Obama, McCain campaigns hit with 'sophisticated' cyberattack
'Serious amount of files' lifted [November 5 2008]
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/05/obama_mccain_cyberattack/
--
John H Meyers
> So, to me, what seems to be the main difference is that your mail
> [at Gmail] is not organized into folders as it is in your [Eudora]
Not in the same way.
> And status is not stored on [at Gmail] either (replied to, read, not read, etc).
Not when I have used Eudora to read, reply, etc.
However, everything at Gmail is automatically organized
into "conversations" (threads), which often accomplishes all that's needed.
> If that's not a big deal to you, then POP definitely seems like the big
> winner. If it *is* a big deal, then i guess you have to weigh the
> vagaries of IMAP vs the inconvenience of not having "synchronized" email.
For me, having all mail saved (and readily searchable, almost instantly),
regardless of "mailboxes" and "status" info, is all that I need.
> Anything else you would add to that?
Gmail permits you to use IMAP if you want
(equating "labels" with "mailboxes"),
but that would bring back all the issues of why
I don't want to use IMAP at all, anyway.
--
John H Meyers
> ebloch wrote:
>> But while gmail is different in not using explicit folders one can apply
>> labels to emails based on filtering rules and then they are visible in
>> pseudo folders = one label only.
A message having multiple labels can be thought of as being "in"
multiple folders, and will appear that way when using Gmail via IMAP.
I think that using contrived labels such as "label1/label2" at Gmail
may create some sort of pseudo-heierarchy when using Gmail via IMAP
(I'm not going to bother looking it up again now, however).
> perhaps some clients will download those tags [labels]
> when it gets the mail with POP [from Gmail]
I think not.
But for me, Eudora is my _primary_ client;
Gmail is just my archiver/backup/spamfilter/etc,
plus a "webmail" to use when I'm not near my own computer.
--