My current provider is terminating their email service.
I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
[https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description of
POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.

Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
Comments?
TIA

Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

>My current provider is terminating their email service.
>I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
>[https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description of
>POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.

>Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
>Comments?
>TIA

Panix has an excellent reputation and still offers shell accounts.

In <ud7h4n$21ac9$3@dont-email.me> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> writes:

>Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

>>My current provider is terminating their email service.
>>I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
>>[https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description of
>>POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.

>>Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
>>Comments?
>>TIA

>Panix has an excellent reputation and still offers shell accounts.

With the disclosure I worked there for a decade, let me
cheerfully and full heartedly recommend them.

Lots of other features in addition to e-mail, including
web hosting, Usenet, ssh-tunneling for your web browser,
and all the ships at sea.

--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

Richard Owlett wrote:
> My current provider is terminating their email service.
> I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
> [https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description of
> POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.
>
> Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
> Comments?
> TIA

I will say that I know Panix only by reputation, and I haven't come
across their name in years.

Panix might do what you need, but if you only need POP then they may be
providing a lot more than you need.

To me, I think the key thing for what you're doing with email is simply
to make sure that you're using a paid, dedicated provider, rather than a
provider that does mail for "free" as a value-added feature. A provider
that does mail as value-added isn't really committed to doing mail, and
chances are relatively high that they view mail more as a cost than a
compelling part of their service. Thus, plenty of incentive either to
minimize support, or as you're seeing, dropping altogether. This isn't
really different than connectivity providers who dropped Usenet 15 or 20
years ago.

For dedicated mail providers, most are likely to be providing both POP
and IMAP, even if there is a preference (as Panix notes) for IMAP.

It's important to understand that there are reasons to use both POP and
IMAP, and they don't entirely overlap.

For me personally, I use a mixture of the two. My primary mail usage is
in Seamonkey (both work and personal), and I prefer to use POP, as I
find that the best way of archiving mail that has accumulated for close
to 30 years (and over multiple mail providers). However, I make use of
multiple clients (and multiple profiles and computers), and IMAP makes
all of that a lot easier.

The primary thing that I do is with my POP connections in my primary
setup, I change the mail retention settings from the default of "delete
mail from server when download is complete" to leaving mail on the
server for 15 days after download. With that, if I'm making alternate
access, whether from secondary Seamonkey profile on my primary computer,
Thunderbird or other mail client on any computer, web mail or from my
phone, all of those have access to the most current messages, and that's
generally adequate for me. On occasions when I send mail from an
alternate location, then I just have to remember to move any messages
that I want to keep for permanent filing from the server's Sent folder
to the Inbox, where the POP client can grab it on the next mail exchange.

Web access to your mail (i.e. leaving on the server after a POP
download) is also useful for spam filtering considerations. If you
interact with the server's web client, then using the junk filtering
there (i.e., designation of Junk or Not Junk) allows the server to be
making judgement calls at the time of mail reception, and depending on
how a server is configured, may be sufficient to force a server to
reject some junk mail before it ever reaches your inbox. It's also
necessary to remember to check the web interface to correct false
positives that do make it to the server, but get put in a Junk folder
that a POP client will never see.

As for mail providers, I do my personal mail through Fastmail, and I
have had no problems with POP, or the hybrid POP/IMAP approach that I've
just described. And I'm inclined to believe that behavior is similar
across most dedicated providers. For my work mail, we hosted on Zimbra
for a number of years (no problem for me with POP access), and a couple
of years ago, we shifted to hosting in Microsoft Outlook. I was not
sure if I could continue using POP there, but I haven't had problems
with that in Seamonkey 2.53.x, including support for MFA activity via
OAuth2.

And even if you don't want to be exposed to advertising infrastructures
of Gmail or Yahoo or whatever branding Microsoft is currently using with
their mail services, I believe that all continue to allow for POP
access, although I haven't actually tried POP with Gmail.

Although there may be mechanical differences between POP and IMAP as
defined by RFCs, from your perspective as an end user, the practical
difference is merely a matter of POP that sees only an inbox on a server
(and default presumption of automatic deletion of messages from the
server following download) and IMAP, where messages are normally left on
a server and mirrored to the client, and where the client has the
ability to see and maintain folders on the server.

And for what it's worth, it's possible to create both POP and IMAP
connections to the same email account within the same profile. I
haven't done this in Seamonkey, but I have done it in testing in
Thunderbird. For the most part, I doubt there's a practical reason to
do something like that other than testing, but it is worth knowing that
such a configuration is possible.

To conclude with your original question -- I don't think it really
matters what mail provider you use, as long as you're working with a
dedicated provider that you're paying for. Sure, there may be providers
that have additional services if you want them, such as the ability to
host a personal domain, enhanced security and privacy (such as
ProtonMail) or shell-level access, such as you get with Panix. But if
all you need is a mail server that allows POP access, there are plenty
of those around, and all it takes is a little work with a search engine.

Actually, besides Fastmail, one that I like is Swissmail.org. I don't
have first-hand experience with it, but I have a number of friends that
are happy with it.

Smith

On 09/05/2023 10:23 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>> My current provider is terminating their email service.
>> I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
>> [https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description of
>> POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.
>
>> Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
>> Comments?
>> TIA
>
> Panix has an excellent reputation and still offers shell accounts.
>

I had assumed a good reputation. As the WikipediA article says:
> Panix is the third-oldest ISP in the world ...

I was thinking more in terms of "Does SeaMonkey see what it assumes?".

On 09/05/2023 10:31 AM, danny burstein wrote:
> In <ud7h4n$21ac9$3@dont-email.me> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> writes:
>
>> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>>> My current provider is terminating their email service.
>>> I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
>>> [https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description of
>>> POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.
>
>>> Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
>>> Comments?
>>> TIA
>
>> Panix has an excellent reputation and still offers shell accounts.
>
> With the disclosure I worked there for a decade, let me
> cheerfully and full heartedly recommend them.

That, and their age, suggests SeaMonkey gets what it expects when
connecting. [I date back to Netscape Navigator ;]

>
> Lots of other features in addition to e-mail, including
> web hosting, Usenet, ssh-tunneling for your web browser,
> and all the ships at sea.
>

One of the things that attracted me was that though they offered many
services, the customer gets to chose which ones to use.

On 09/05/2023 03:59 PM, NFN Smith wrote:
> Richard Owlett wrote:
>> My current provider is terminating their email service.
>> I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
>> [https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included description
>> of POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.
>>
>> Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
>> Comments?
>> TIA
>
> I will say that I know Panix only by reputation, and I haven't come
> across their name in years.
>
> Panix might do what you need, but if you only need POP then they may be
> providing a lot more than you need.

They _offer_ *MUCH* more than I need. They allow the customer to chose.

>
> To me, I think the key thing for what you're doing with email is simply
> to make sure that you're using a paid, dedicated provider, rather than a
> provider that does mail for "free" as a value-added feature.  A provider
> that does mail as value-added isn't really committed to doing mail, and
> chances are relatively high that they view mail more as a cost than a
> compelling part of their service.

You're "preaching to the choir" ;/

>  Thus, plenty of incentive either to
> minimize support, or as you're seeing, dropping altogether.  This isn't
> really different than connectivity providers who dropped Usenet 15 or 20
> years ago.

My email provider started ( >30 yrs ago ) as a father/son storefront
selling computers to the consumer market. They added becoming a dial-up
ISP. For years their focus has been local businesses while providing
excellent service to existing retail customers, such as myself.

>
> For dedicated mail providers, most are likely to be providing both POP
> and IMAP, even if there is a preference (as Panix notes) for IMAP.
>
> It's important to understand that there are reasons to use both POP and
> IMAP, and they don't entirely overlap.

Understood. POP gives me everything I want. Especially my mail spending
the least possible time on someone else’s computer.

>
> For me personally, I use a mixture of the two.  My primary mail usage is
> in Seamonkey (both work and personal), and I prefer to use POP, as I
> find that the best way of archiving mail that has accumulated for close
> to 30 years (and over multiple mail providers).  However, I make use of
> multiple clients (and multiple profiles and computers), and IMAP makes
> all of that a lot easier.

[SNIP detail description of why POP/IMAP combo is logical for you]
I use only one computer. Due to vision issues I don't even own a smartphone.

>
> As for mail providers, I do my personal mail through Fastmail,...

I investigated Fastmail. I prefer dealing "onshore".
The Panix website did make a much better impression. It's usable
*WITHOUT* JavaScript being enabled.

[snip]
>
> To conclude with your original question -- I don't think it really
> matters what mail provider you use, as long as you're working with a
> dedicated provider that you're paying for.

*YES*

>  Sure, there may be providers
> that have additional services if you want them, such as the ability to
> host a personal domain, enhanced security and privacy (such as
> ProtonMail) or shell-level access, such as you get with Panix.  But if
> all you need is a mail server that allows POP access, there are plenty
> of those around, and all it takes is a little work with a search engine.

Firm believer in web searches. Panix seemed to be best fit on both tech
and non-tech criteria&preferences.

Thank you.

I now have a functional email account with panix.com .
I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.

He said two things of interest to this list:
1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
I said it was.
2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a password
to be entered for both sending and reading email. He did not know
if SeaMonkey handled that as expected.
I don't expect there to be a problem as Thunderbird is supported.

Webmail has been verified as functional:
1. I've received a bill for the first month of service <grin>.
2. I successfully sent a test email.

I'll not use webmail in the near term as:
1. As they are doing a system wide switch from SquirrelMail to
Roundcube as of tomorrow.
2. POP3 is much more appropriate for how I do things.

I was NOT successful adding an appropriately configured profile to my
primary machine [SeaMonkey 2.49.4 on Debian 9.13].
I was not surprised as I had similar problems when my previous provider
changed their account structure last year. There was no problem with a
fresh install of SeaMonkey 2.53.17 on a machine using Debian 11.3 .

After backing up that machine's profile, I'll do a "from scratch"
install of the current SeaMonkey on that machine.

Thanks for the support.

On 09/06/2023 04:38 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> On 09/05/2023 10:31 AM, danny burstein wrote:
>> In <ud7h4n$21ac9$3@dont-email.me> "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
>> writes:
>>
>>> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> My current provider is terminating their email service.
>>>> I came across panix.com. Though they encourage the use of IMAP
>>>> [https://www.panix.com/help/whyimap.html], their included
>>>> description of
>>>> POP3 is a fair description of how I use email.
>>
>>>> Do any SeaMonkey users have experience with Panix?
>>>> Comments?
>>>> TIA
>>
>>> Panix has an excellent reputation and still offers shell accounts.
>>
>> With the disclosure I worked there for a decade, let me
>> cheerfully and full heartedly recommend them.
>
> That, and their age, suggests SeaMonkey gets what it expects when
> connecting. [I date back to Netscape Navigator ;]
>
>>
>> Lots of other features in addition to e-mail, including
>> web hosting, Usenet, ssh-tunneling for your web browser,
>> and all the ships at sea.
>>
>
> One of the things that attracted me was that though they offered many
> services, the customer gets to chose which ones to use.
>
>

Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:

>I now have a functional email account with panix.com .

Yay!

Did you take a shell account?

>I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
>It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.

>He said two things of interest to this list:
> 1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
> I said it was.
> 2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a password
> to be entered for both sending and reading email. He did not know
> if SeaMonkey handled that as expected.

It depends more on what the servers expects than what the client
expects. Given that POP and IMAP are message receiving protocols and
SMTP or SMTPS are unrelated sending protocols, some sites handle the
SMTP credentials issue by requiring the user to POP over any email
receiving in the inbox first before sending messages. These sites often
require the very same credentials be used for POP and SMTP. I've never
encountered this with a site that's set up for IMAP.

I doubt Panix is such a site. You can use the same credentials for both
POP and SMTP or you can use different credentials. Just make sure you
enter the correct credentials when configuring SeaMonkey.

Yes, the user has to enter credentials for receiving and sending email
separately but I never thought POP first before sending is a good idea.
If the user just wants to send an email message first and not read his
INBOX, there's no good reason to make him wait. And if the user wants to
use different credentials for two separate functions, let it be his choice.

> I don't expect there to be a problem as Thunderbird is supported.

>Webmail has been verified as functional:
> 1. I've received a bill for the first month of service <grin>.
> 2. I successfully sent a test email.

>I'll not use webmail in the near term as:
> 1. As they are doing a system wide switch from SquirrelMail to
> Roundcube as of tomorrow.

My site changed from one to the other many years ago. I really didn't
have a preference. On occassion, I use webmail to receive messages that
have attachments I need to save on a specific host I use for a specific
function to save the sftp step to transfer the file between hosts. I
also use webmail to send messages from a particular account that has
DKIM set up with too many restrictions; I have no access to the Zone
file to change this.

I really don't like to use webmail.

> 2. POP3 is much more appropriate for how I do things.

Ok. I have messages archived in folders on different hosts, and I check
inboxes on several hosts. I need IMAP4 for the way I use email.

>I was NOT successful adding an appropriately configured profile to my
>primary machine [SeaMonkey 2.49.4 on Debian 9.13].
>I was not surprised as I had similar problems when my previous provider
>changed their account structure last year. There was no problem with a
>fresh install of SeaMonkey 2.53.17 on a machine using Debian 11.3 .

>After backing up that machine's profile, I'll do a "from scratch"
>install of the current SeaMonkey on that machine.

>Thanks for the support.

Am 05.09.2023 um 15:31:05 Uhr schrieb danny burstein:

> Lots of other features in addition to e-mail, including
> web hosting, Usenet, ssh-tunneling for your web browser,
> and all the ships at sea.

But why do they get their IPv6 address range from Hurricane Electric?

In <udnluv$15a6v$1@dont-email.me> Marco Moock <mm+usenet-es@dorfdsl.de> writes:

>Am 05.09.2023 um 15:31:05 Uhr schrieb danny burstein:

>> Lots of other features in addition to e-mail, including
>> web hosting, Usenet, ssh-tunneling for your web browser,
>> and all the ships at sea.

>But why do they get their IPv6 address range from Hurricane Electric?

It's been quite a few years since I've worked there so afraid
I can't answer one way or another.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

Richard Owlett wrote on 11/9/23 11:24 pm:
> I now have a functional email account with panix.com .
> I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
> It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.
>
> He said two things of interest to this list:
>   1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
>      I said it was.
>   2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a password
O.K., I'll stick my oar in here ..... I thought there were only the two
methods of Receiving e-mails ....

1. POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my mail
agent to view the e-mail, and,
2. IMAP where the e-mails remain on a server somewhere (like
yahoo.com.au) and I use my Browser to read my e-mails.

Am I wrong?? What other methods/standards are there for RECEIVING
e-mails, please??
--
Daniel

On 09/12/2023 05:22 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
> Richard Owlett wrote on 11/9/23 11:24 pm:
>> I now have a functional email account with panix.com .
>> I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
>> It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.
>>
>> He said two things of interest to this list:
>>    1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
>>       I said it was.
>>    2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a password
> O.K., I'll stick my oar in here ..... I thought there were only the two
> methods of Receiving e-mails ....
>
> 1.    POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my mail
> agent to view the e-mail, and,
> 2.    IMAP where the e-mails remain on a server somewhere (like
> yahoo.com.au) and I use my Browser to read my e-mails.
>
> Am I wrong?? What other methods/standards are there for RECEIVING
> e-mails, please??

Paraphrasing J. Caesar, "All email is divided in three types" ;/
1. Webmail -- user access with arbitrary web browser.
2. "Traditional" email -- user access with dedicated client
Two primary protocols commonly used:
POP - all messages moved to local computer.
IMAP - all messages remain on hosting machine.
3. Other
e.g. SMS text messaging over cellular system

https://www.website.com/beginnerguide/email/9/1/what-is-webmail?.ws
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_Office_Protocol
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Message_Access_Protocol
https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is-sms-280988/

Richard Owlett wrote on 12/9/23 10:35 pm:
> On 09/12/2023 05:22 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
>> Richard Owlett wrote on 11/9/23 11:24 pm:
>>> I now have a functional email account with panix.com .
>>> I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
>>> It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.
>>>
>>> He said two things of interest to this list:
>>>    1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
>>>       I said it was.
>>>    2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a
>>> password
>> O.K., I'll stick my oar in here ..... I thought there were only the
>> two methods of Receiving e-mails ....
>>
>> 1.    POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my
>> mail agent to view the e-mail, and,
>> 2.    IMAP where the e-mails remain on a server somewhere (like
>> yahoo.com.au) and I use my Browser to read my e-mails.
>>
>> Am I wrong?? What other methods/standards are there for RECEIVING
>> e-mails, please??
>
> Paraphrasing J. Caesar, "All email is divided in three types" ;/
>    1. Webmail -- user access with arbitrary web browser.
>    2. "Traditional" email -- user access with dedicated client
>       Two primary protocols commonly used:
>       POP  - all messages moved to local computer.
>       IMAP - all messages remain on hosting machine.
>    3. Other
>       e.g. SMS text messaging over cellular system
>
>
> https://www.website.com/beginnerguide/email/9/1/what-is-webmail?.ws
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_Office_Protocol
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Message_Access_Protocol
> https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is-sms-280988/
>
>
>
AH!! But .... SMS = "Short Message Service" doesn't it?? .... so
different to e-Mail services.

--
Daniel

On 09/11/2023 09:35 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Richard Owlett <rowlett@cloud85.net> wrote:
>
>> I now have a functional email account with panix.com .
>
> Yay!
>
> Did you take a shell account?

No. I don't foresee any need for shell access to a remote computer.

>
>> I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
>> It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.
>
>> He said two things of interest to this list:
>> 1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
>> I said it was.
>> 2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a password
>> to be entered for both sending and reading email. He did not know
>> if SeaMonkey handled that as expected.
>
> It depends more on what the servers expects than what the client
> expects. Given that POP and IMAP are message receiving protocols and
> SMTP or SMTPS are unrelated sending protocols, some sites handle the
> SMTP credentials issue by requiring the user to POP over any email
> receiving in the inbox first before sending messages. These sites often
> require the very same credentials be used for POP and SMTP. I've never
> encountered this with a site that's set up for IMAP.

Poor phrasing on my part. Both a sending operation and a receiving
operation require that the password for that operation having been
entered. The two passwords are not required to be the same.
>
> I doubt Panix is such a site. You can use the same credentials for both
> POP and SMTP or you can use different credentials. Just make sure you
> enter the correct credentials when configuring SeaMonkey.
>
> Yes, the user has to enter credentials for receiving and sending email
> separately but I never thought POP first before sending is a good idea.
> If the user just wants to send an email message first and not read his
> INBOX, there's no good reason to make him wait. And if the user wants to
> use different credentials for two separate functions, let it be his choice.
>
>> I don't expect there to be a problem as Thunderbird is supported.
>
>> Webmail has been verified as functional:
>> 1. I've received a bill for the first month of service <grin>.
>> 2. I successfully sent a test email.
>
>> I'll not use webmail in the near term as:
>> 1. As they are doing a system wide switch from SquirrelMail to
>> Roundcube as of tomorrow.
>
> My site changed from one to the other many years ago. I really didn't
> have a preference. On occassion, I use webmail to receive messages that
> have attachments I need to save on a specific host I use for a specific
> function to save the sftp step to transfer the file between hosts. I
> also use webmail to send messages from a particular account that has
> DKIM set up with too many restrictions; I have no access to the Zone
> file to change this.
>
> I really don't like to use webmail.

I didn't think I would. I did *NOT*.

>
>> 2. POP3 is much more appropriate for how I do things.
>
> Ok. I have messages archived in folders on different hosts, and I check
> inboxes on several hosts. I need IMAP4 for the way I use email.
>
>> I was NOT successful adding an appropriately configured profile to my
>> primary machine [SeaMonkey 2.49.4 on Debian 9.13].
>> I was not surprised as I had similar problems when my previous provider
>> changed their account structure last year. There was no problem with a
>> fresh install of SeaMonkey 2.53.17 on a machine using Debian 11.3 .
>
>> After backing up that machine's profile, I'll do a "from scratch"
>> install of the current SeaMonkey on that machine.
>
>> Thanks for the support.

On 09/12/2023 07:50 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
> Richard Owlett wrote on 12/9/23 10:35 pm:
>> On 09/12/2023 05:22 AM, Daniel65 wrote:
>>> Richard Owlett wrote on 11/9/23 11:24 pm:
>>>> I now have a functional email account with panix.com .
>>>> I had minor problems with signup procedure - an non-intuitive prompt.
>>>> It was quickly resolved by a patient gentleman via phone support.
>>>>
>>>> He said two things of interest to this list:
>>>>    1. He didn't know SeaMonkey was still actively supported.
>>>>       I said it was.
>>>>    2. He said that when when using POP or IMAP, Panix required a
>>>> password
>>> O.K., I'll stick my oar in here ..... I thought there were only the
>>> two methods of Receiving e-mails ....
>>>
>>> 1.    POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my
>>> mail agent to view the e-mail, and,
>>> 2.    IMAP where the e-mails remain on a server somewhere (like
>>> yahoo.com.au) and I use my Browser to read my e-mails.
>>>
>>> Am I wrong?? What other methods/standards are there for RECEIVING
>>> e-mails, please??
>>
>> Paraphrasing J. Caesar, "All email is divided in three types" ;/
>>     1. Webmail -- user access with arbitrary web browser.
>>     2. "Traditional" email -- user access with dedicated client
>>        Two primary protocols commonly used:
>>        POP  - all messages moved to local computer.
>>        IMAP - all messages remain on hosting machine.
>>     3. Other
>>        e.g. SMS text messaging over cellular system
>>
>>
>> https://www.website.com/beginnerguide/email/9/1/what-is-webmail?.ws
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_Office_Protocol
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Message_Access_Protocol
>> https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is-sms-280988/
>>
>>
>>
> AH!! But .... SMS = "Short Message Service" doesn't it??

Yes.
Wikipedia says in part "... as the digital version of, or counterpart
to, mail (hence e- + mail)."
Besides, I wanted to have my paraphrase match the divisions of Gaul.

> .... so
> different to e-Mail services.
>

Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>. . .

>1. POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my mail
>agent to view the e-mail, and,

POP3 can be instructed to leave messages on the server.

>2. IMAP where the e-mails remain on a server somewhere (like
>yahoo.com.au) and I use my Browser to read my e-mails.

Browser?

Use an email client that does IMAP4. Mailboxes can be kept in sync on
the local host and remote host; I don't use IMAP that way. Typically,
I copy messages from one server to be archived on another server.
Deleting the message from the inbox of that server is a separate step.

IMAP is safer from POP.

>Am I wrong?? What other methods/standards are there for RECEIVING
>e-mails, please??

If your email client is in your account on the same host as the Mail
server, you aren't using either IMAP or POP. You're just reading messages
in the inbox with your email client.

Adam H. Kerman wrote on 13/09/2023 6:27 am:
> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>
>> . . .
>
>> 1. POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my mail
>> agent to view the e-mail, and,
>
> POP3 can be instructed to leave messages on the server.

For acessing from many computers (like in business where you might be
using a different physical computer tomorrow, I guess!)

>> 2. IMAP where the e-mails remain on a server somewhere (like
>> yahoo.com.au) and I use my Browser to read my e-mails.
>
> Browser?

Yes, like when I use my Browser to go to my Yahoo e-mail account. (I
don't pull my e-mails from the Yahoo server down into my email account.)

> Use an email client that does IMAP4. Mailboxes can be kept in sync on
> the local host and remote host; I don't use IMAP that way. Typically,
> I copy messages from one server to be archived on another server.
> Deleting the message from the inbox of that server is a separate step.
>
> IMAP is safer from POP.
>
>> Am I wrong?? What other methods/standards are there for RECEIVING
>> e-mails, please??
>
> If your email client is in your account on the same host as the Mail
> server, you aren't using either IMAP or POP. You're just reading messages
> in the inbox with your email client.
>
In my case, I download my email from my ISP's server and store it on my
Laptop's HD. Isn't that what POP3 is supposed to do??
--
Daniel

Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:

>>. . .

>In my case, I download my email from my ISP's server and store it on my
>Laptop's HD. Isn't that what POP3 is supposed to do??

Yes

On 12 Sep 2023 at 22:27:12 CEST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>
>> . . .
>
>> 1. POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my mail
>> agent to view the e-mail, and,
>
> POP3 can be instructed to leave messages on the server.
>>

[cut]

And the mail servers often won't follow your setting because it's not the way
POP3 should work.

Gabriele - onenet wrote:
> On 12 Sep 2023 at 22:27:12 CEST, ""Adam H. Kerman"" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>> Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>>
>>> . . .
>>
>>> 1. POP email downloads the messages to my Harddrive and I use my mail
>>> agent to view the e-mail, and,
>>
>> POP3 can be instructed to leave messages on the server.
>>>
>
> [cut]
>
> And the mail servers often won't follow your setting because it's not the way
> POP3 should work.
>

Really?
I have POP3 accounts with four separate companies and all of them honour
that setting.