Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:14 AM, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@xxxxxxxx > <mailto:dcrocker@xxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > On 6/12/2014 6:33 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:50 AM, John C Klensin > <john-ietf@xxxxxxx <mailto:john-ietf@xxxxxxx> > ... > > (2) One of those changes --support for remote body parts-- was > > incorporated into MIME in its very first version and contains > > most of the mechanism needed to support what I understand PHB is > > recommending for PUSH-PULL-PULL. It has been implemented in > > several places but has gotten very little traction in the mail > > sending and receiving community. IMO, it ought to be incumbent > > on anyone proposing a different "get notification, then retrieve > > mail from server" model explain why their ideas will be more > > successful than that 20-odd-year-old MIME mechanism. > > > > In a word - WebMail. > > This is a classic confusion between software implementation and > operation, vesus networking architecture. > > Webmail is nothing more than a particular style of user interface, > integrated into the operations of a particular service. > > > It is the mode used by the majority of mail users today. Which makes > it rather more than just technology from a deployment point of view.
That's almost certainly not true, or it's certainly highly questionable.
Two words: 1. Outlook 2. Smartphones
Some data to support this conclusion: http://emailclientmarketshare.com/ Ned