On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Luca Olivetti <luca@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > El Mon, 8 Sep 2008 15:15:21 -0600 > Mark <wolfmane@xxxxxxxxx> escribió: > >> The crux of the matter is in specifically *what* resources are in >> question. IMAP may have an initial savings in network bandwidth (which >> is debatable), but ultimately uses much more in the way of every other >> type of computing resource on the server side, > > FWIW, my imap server runs on an arm processor slightly less powerful > than the one in the tablet, and it manages to do many other duties at > the same time, so I don't think it's such a big resource hog. > Of course it couldn't manage thousands of accounts, but it doesn't need > to (after all it's just for me and my wife) > > Bye > -- > Luca The discussion is about "real" mail servers that are running on the Internet somewhere else and serving large numbers of accounts, with many large files etc. A local server running on a LAN is irrelevant to the discussion. Pretty much *any* hardware can do that for *any* protocol. Your setup may be able to handle IMAP just fine, but it could at least as easily handle POP3. If you're running it on an ARM system you clearly are not leaving messages (especially with large attachments) on the server indefinitely (there's no ARM system I know of that has the storage for that), so you're really using it as if it were a POP3 system anyway... Anyway, I didn't say that IMAP was a "resource hog" in the grand scheme of computing, only in comparison with POP3. Mark _______________________________________________ maemo-users mailing list maemo-users@xxxxxxxxx https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-users
