"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:


"Adrian C" wrote in message
...
On 15/04/2012 20:34, Adrian C wrote:
On 15/04/2012 19:15, dennis@home prattled:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message


I had to evaluate it for IP use when it first appeared. As it was
essentially X-400 with a bit of TCP/IP and SMTP gatewaying bolted on
the front,.

I was actually quite impressed.

OK it ran on NT and it wasn't a patch on sendmail. But compared with
microsoft mail it was a huge step forward. Very corporate though. No
pop clients to a local mail folder. Oh no. Cant have that!

Funny, I use Outlook and it does POP to a local file.

Re-read the words "when it first appeared"....


Mind ye, he was talking about exchange.... So you've also messed your
shorts there.

Your Reading 0/10
My Reading 3.5/10

Since when did mail servers do POP to local files?

since forever dennis.

In the non Microsoft world.


In fact I ported the very first pop3 server ever used in a british ISP to
SCO unix from PDS and sent it off to Cliff Stanford at Demon systems, who
thanked me and never paid me a penny...

If you know anything about POP it was most often used then and generally
is used today to download and read mail LOCALLY. its not really up to
managing mail held ON the server - Imap is a better protocol for that.


That's why POP works with local files, local to the client not to the
server.
IMAP works with files local to the server.

See I was correct all along.
I just need to get you to admit that you were wrong by getting you to
explain it.




It isn't even likely to have access to local files.
Local as living on a server doesn't make much sense.

Thats because you cant talk English or understand it Dennis.

In et context of a client server relationship 'local files' are held to
be local to the client, not the server.


That is exactly right and what I said.