Windows IMAP client?

93 views
Skip to first unread message

Wipe_out

unread,
May 30, 2002, 12:58:56 PM5/30/02
to
Whats the best Windows based IMAP client??..

Outlook 2000 is driving me up the wall...


Edward Alfert

unread,
May 30, 2002, 1:51:57 PM5/30/02
to
I'll second that one... outlook forces your inbox to be the .pst inbox
instead of the imap inbox... as well as other things like not downloading
all messages from subfolders ...

I tried and didn't like the following...
netscape mail
eudora
outlook express

also anxiously waiting for recommendations...

--
Edward Alfert
http://edward.alfert.com/
"Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your
life." - Confucius
****************************************

"Wipe_out" <wipe...@go.com> wrote in message
news:ad5log$jfs$1...@knossos.btinternet.com...

Nancy McGough

unread,
May 30, 2002, 2:32:24 PM5/30/02
to
On 30 May 2002 Wipe_out (wipe...@go.com) wrote:
> Whats the best Windows based IMAP client??..

I've been following this topic for a long time and the consensus
at the moment seems to be Mulberry and PC-Pine. I've got info and
links about both of them, and a lot of other IMAP clients, at the
IMAP link in my sig.

BTW, Mulberry v3.0a2 was released yesterday and so far I'm quite
enjoying it!

If anyone knows of any other good IMAP clients, please let us
know.

Thanks,
Nancy


REFERENCE:
The message I'm replying to -- and this entire thread & group --
may be available at

<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=ad5log$jfs$1...@knossos.btinternet.com>


--
PROCMAIL <http://www.ii.com/internet/robots/procmail/qs/>
IMAP <http://www.ii.com/internet/messaging/imap/isps/>
PINE <http://www.ii.com/internet/messaging/pine/>

-- I N F I N I T E I N K www.ii.com N A N C Y M c G O U G H --

Jorey Bump

unread,
May 30, 2002, 3:41:24 PM5/30/02
to
Nancy McGough wrote:
> On 30 May 2002 Wipe_out (wipe...@go.com) wrote:
>
>>Whats the best Windows based IMAP client??..
>
>
> I've been following this topic for a long time and the consensus
> at the moment seems to be Mulberry and PC-Pine. I've got info and
> links about both of them, and a lot of other IMAP clients, at the
> IMAP link in my sig.
>
> BTW, Mulberry v3.0a2 was released yesterday and so far I'm quite
> enjoying it!
>
> If anyone knows of any other good IMAP clients, please let us
> know.

mozilla is worth a try. Just keep in mind that it is beta, it has always
been beta, and AFAICT, it will always *be* beta. But it is one of the
few integrated suites that provides a browser, POP3/IMAP client, and
newsreader that actually work well together. It's reasonably secure
(unlike Outlook or Outlook Express), but can be a sluggish buggy memory
hog at times. The only thing close is Opera, but it doesn't do IMAP. :(

Nancy McGough

unread,
May 30, 2002, 3:51:53 PM5/30/02
to
On 30 May 2002 Jorey Bump (dev...@joreybump.com) wrote:

> Nancy McGough wrote:
> >
> > I've been following this topic for a long time and the consensus
> > at the moment seems to be Mulberry and PC-Pine.
>

> mozilla is worth a try. Just keep in mind that it is beta, it has always

Thanks Jorey. I've got a big blurb about Mozilla on my IMAP page
and I even posted to their newsgroup yesterday so I'm definitely
paying attention to them!

Someone mentioned Becky recently and I looked at it's web site
and even joined their mailing list but it seems to suffer from a
lot of the problems that other programs that weren't designed as
IMAP clients have. Please let me know if I'm wrong and I'll add
it to my page.

Thanks,
Nancy


REFERENCE:
The message I'm replying to -- and this entire thread & group --
may be available at

<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3CF6806...@joreybump.com>

Hale

unread,
May 30, 2002, 6:30:07 PM5/30/02
to
Wipe_out wrote:

> Whats the best Windows based IMAP client??..
>
> Outlook 2000 is driving me up the wall...


I am using Eudora 5.1 and am used to its querks so I am reasonably happy with it
but I know a lot of people don't like it much. On linux I use Sylpheed and
Mozilla (Mozilla recently released v1).

You may want to have a look at Mahogany

http://mahogany.sourceforge.net/

I did not use it long enough to form a reasonable opinion of it. Have a look at
it, it is free on linux of course and I believe it is so on Win32.

There is Pegasus mail, also free at www.pmail.com.

DINH Viet Hoa

unread,
May 30, 2002, 6:50:07 PM5/30/02
to
> Whats the best Windows based IMAP client??..
>
> Outlook 2000 is driving me up the wall...

who said PC-pine ?

--
DINH V. Hoa,
libEtPan! - a mail library - http://libetpan.sourceforge.net

"Les casques anti-bruit, c'est pénible parce qu'au bout d'un moment
tu entends ton coeur battre et c'est gênant" -- jyb

srivastava

unread,
May 31, 2002, 1:49:53 AM5/31/02
to
Nancy McGough wrote as follows:

> at the moment seems to be Mulberry and PC-Pine. I've got info and
PC-PINE is not at all suitable for disconnected/offline handling of
mails.
--
srivastava
Email: this-address-is-not-valid (AT) srivastava (DOT) mailshell (DOT)
com


srivastava

unread,
May 31, 2002, 1:52:51 AM5/31/02
to
Hale wrote as follows:
> http://mahogany.sourceforge.net/

It is highly unstable.

> There is Pegasus mail, also free at www.pmail.com.

This does not catch mails for offline/disconnected working.

srivastava

unread,
May 31, 2002, 1:55:27 AM5/31/02
to
Edward Alfert wrote as follows:
> outlook express
OE 6 is quite stable as far as IMAP features are concerned. Mozilla is
also good but sometimes poses problems. May be in future it may turn out
to be the best IMAP mail client for window users.

Nancy McGough

unread,
May 31, 2002, 3:56:06 AM5/31/02
to
On 31 May 2002 srivastava (sriva...@deadspam.com) wrote:

> Nancy McGough wrote as follows:
> > at the moment seems to be Mulberry and PC-Pine. I've got info and
>
> PC-PINE is not at all suitable for disconnected/offline handling of
> mails.

Good point srivastava. From now on, I'll try to remember to
mention that PC-Pine, and all flavors of Pine, are good
**online** (as opposed to offline or disconnected) IMAP clients.

Thanks,
Nancy


REFERENCE:
The message I'm replying to -- and this entire thread & group --
may be available at

<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3cf70f01$1...@news1e1.seinf.abb.se>

srivastava

unread,
May 31, 2002, 4:04:15 AM5/31/02
to
Nancy McGough wrote as follows:
> **online** (as opposed to offline or disconnected) IMAP clients.
I attempted to use PINE on PC having run my own mail server. I tried
Mercury/32 and Hamster. The problem is that Mercury is a mail server
that collects mails from POP3 account but it deletes all the mails
catched. My ISP offers both IMAP and POP3 and I do not want those mails
to be deleted. Hamster does not offer IMAP server between mail client
and itself, and with PINE accessing a POP3 account is not very pleasant
experience. Overall it was NOT a good experience and I gave up PINE
finally.

Somehow I find OE is very useful IMAP client if viruses etc. can be
suitably taken care. Do you have any suggestions how we tackle viruses?
I do run McAfee on my computer and scan mail but some of them do cause
problem.

Nancy McGough

unread,
May 31, 2002, 4:59:50 AM5/31/02
to
On 31 May 2002 srivastava (sriva...@deadspam.com) wrote:
> Somehow I find OE is very useful IMAP client if viruses etc. can be
> suitably taken care. Do you have any suggestions how we tackle viruses?
> I do run McAfee on my computer and scan mail but some of them do cause
> problem.


I'm not really a good person to answer this question because I
don't use virus scanning software and I've never gotten a virus.
My strategy, which anyone who reads my posts probably knows, is
to use either PC-Pine, Unix Pine, or Mulberry to read messages. I
leave all messages on IMAP servers and keep no copies locally
(this is useful for a lot of reasons including privacy in case
spooks ever knock down my door and take my computer away!). I've
got all my MIME associations (mailcap, MS Win registry, etc.) set
up so that almost every MIME type and file extension is auto
associated with vim. If I want to launch a file in a program, I
have to do it by hand. I've got lots of ideas about security here

<http://www.ii.com/internet/messaging/pine/pc/#security>

Many of these are relevant to any system and not specific to
Pine.

My one tip about viruses, which is also relevant to spam, is to
DO SERVER-BASED FILTERING and if you don't have a mail host that
does this or lets you set this up on the server, change your mail
hosting provider (e.g., to one in my IMAP Service Providers list
who does this).

BTW, I no longer help any of my friends, family, or clients with
email issues if they use an MS client. This has reduced my stress
tremendously.

Nancy


REFERENCE:
The message I'm replying to -- and this entire thread & group --
may be available at

<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=3cf72e7f$1...@news1e1.seinf.abb.se>

srivastava

unread,
May 31, 2002, 5:03:18 AM5/31/02
to
Nancy McGough wrote as follows:
> BTW, I no longer help any of my friends, family, or clients with
> email issues if they use an MS client. This has reduced my stress
> tremendously.
I didn't know that. Sorry for bothering you in any case.

Pete Maclean

unread,
May 31, 2002, 2:27:11 PM5/31/02
to
"Nancy McGough" <nm-this-addr...@no.sp.am> wrote in message
news:Pine.WNT.4.44.0205302048510.-4164963-100000@no...

> Someone mentioned Becky recently and I looked at it's web site
> and even joined their mailing list but it seems to suffer from a
> lot of the problems that other programs that weren't designed as
> IMAP clients have. Please let me know if I'm wrong and I'll add
> it to my page.

I have looked at Becky. On the whole, it's an email client that looks very
promising. I find its IMAP capabilities to be very immature though and I
would not recommend it for such use.

Pete

those who know me have no need of my name

unread,
Jun 1, 2002, 12:42:30 PM6/1/02
to
<3cf70fb3$1...@news1e1.seinf.abb.se> divulged:
>Hale wrote as follows:

>> There is Pegasus mail, also free at www.pmail.com.
>
>This does not catch mails for offline/disconnected working.

(i believe you meant `cache' rather than `catch'.)

off-line mode clients are those that fetch all messages to local storage,
erasing the server copy. on-line mode clients leave all messages on the
server never retaining a local copy. disconnected mode clients fetch new
messages to local storage but also leave them on the server.

disconnected mode clients have another feature that one generally expects:
synchronized folder manipulation. if folders can exist on the client and
server and the software ensures that they remain synchronized (changes made
at one side are also made to the other, at some point in time) -- this is
how good disconnected mode clients handle the inbox.

caching is a confusing concept when applied to these methodologies. e.g.,
an on-mode client might cache messages read during a session, so that
reading them again doesn't require re-fetching from the server, but that
doesn't turn it into a disconnected mode client.

client based rules can further confuse the issue, in that some on-line or
disconnected mode clients can be re-worked into off-line mode using rules
such that all messages are moved to client-only based folders.

and it can be even more complex than this, but i don't feel like getting
into it. those interested can read the imap documentation and papers for
your own clues, e.g., <http://www.imap.org/papers/imap.vs.pop.html>.

pmail is an off-line mode client. all messages are moved to local storage.
though it can be a limited disconnected mode client by configuring it not
to delete each message from the server as it is fetched, but it does not
offer synchronized folder manipulation.

--
bringing you boring signatures for 17 years

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages