Email Protocols: Where Do We Go Now?
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Slight Aside: Text Messaging?
Email persists as the primary means of communication among internet users, at least those of a certain age. That said, there are clear signs that the younger generation is more interested in text messaging and Instant Messages than in email.
Text messaging is faster, simpler, and more instant than email. An email inbox tends to be left until its owner is ready to go through the messages and deal with them; an incoming text message tends to be answered sooner, if not immediately. There's a "conversational" feel to texting that email lacks.
This quote from Paul Golding is telling: "Email is like placing a letter in someone's in-tray, whereas texting is like tapping them on the shoulder and saying look at this, whilst placing a message on a slip of paper in their hand."
Text messages have become hugely popular, especially in Europe, but they were not originally created for consumer use. The idea was to use them as a means of sending network and account information to users, not as user-to-user communication. The instantaneous results and low cost (in comparison to voice calls) were what made them very popular. As phones themselves get more powerful and technically complex, text messaging may be replaced by other technologies--perhaps some development of Instant Messaging. But I'd be willing to bet it will be known as texting for some time afterwards, especially here in the U.K. where it has become embedded in youth culture.
But I digress... let's get back to email and take stock of our situation.
Where Do We Go Now?
Ah, email.
Having established that email has a complicated history, tends to drive people crazy, has had entire books written about keeping it under control, and is broken beyond all repair for some people, let's try to work out what we can do--practically speaking--to make using it less of a hassle.
For casual and lightweight email users, there's nothing at all wrong with a good old-fashioned POP account and a copy of Apple's Mail. Assuming the ISP at the other end can be relied on, Mail copes very well with the basics and has the intuitive kind of interface that casual users can get along with (which isn't to say that pro users can't get a lot from it, too). Webmail is still an option here, of course. We know that casual users like webmail--look at the huge international success of Hotmail.
For professionals who live half their working day in email, combining IMAP and Gmail makes sense, but only if they (and their employers) are prepared to place sufficient trust in Google to keep business secrets secret.
In practical terms this makes a lot of sense, since using Gmail while travelling can help you get around SMTP problems (where your normal SMTP server might only permit you access if you're connecting via a certain ISP or IP range). Combining the two means Gmail effectively becomes an online backup of every email message in your IMAP account--a free, huge, and easily searched backup.
This combination is clearly popular with geeks, too. In my personal experience, and despite privacy concerns from many people, a lot of geeks I know have switched fully or partially to Gmail from existing IMAP setups. Some just use Gmail as a backup, or depend on it as a spam filter or for managing mailing lists; others depend on it completely for all their daily email tasks. There are, of course, those who say the privacy concerns are nothing to worry about; at least, they are no more of a concern than almost any other email service. People have grown used to the idea that email is, in general, a secure and private means of communication, which it is far from being (unless you take a proactive step and use encryption).
For those who are uncomfortable about the privacy issues, there are alternatives. Fastmail is a popular choice, offering very flexible IMAP accounts with webmail for a reasonable annual fee. Hushmail is an attractive service, built entirely around the premise of security for your email.
Final Thoughts
POP? Gmail? IMAP?
Not everyone thinks very much of email in general. And, not everyone likes IMAP.
And yet email persists, it grows, and people are always interested in new devices that support it. As mobile devices evolve, our messaging services will, too. I think we're going to see a lot of change in the next few years.
Giles Turnbull is a freelance writer and editor. He has been writing on and about the Internet since 1997. He has a web site at http://gilest.org.
Return to the Mac DevCenter.
You must be logged in to the O'Reilly Network to post a talkback.
Showing messages 1 through 14 of 14.
-
Cyrus Daboo is at Apple
2006-11-07 03:41:04 chrisridd [Reply | View]
He's definitely working at Apple. For public evidence, see the Trac changelogs at MacOSForge (http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/calendarserver/timeline) .
-
Combining IMAP & Gmail?
2006-10-19 04:32:57 infotexture [Reply | View]
On page 3, Giles writes: "Combining the two means Gmail effectively becomes an online backup of every email message in your IMAP account"
Are there any tricks to this, or is it as simple as creating a rule to forward a copy of every message that arrives on the IMAP account to Gmail?
I see that that would work for all new messages, but what about all the existing messages in various subfolders? It would be a bit of a pain to lose existing flags such as "Replied to" or to manually label everything once its copied.
Any cool tips?
-
webmail is imap
2006-09-18 08:55:20 Scot Hacker |
[Reply | View]
Though webmail feels a lot different to the user than using an IMAP client does, it's worth pointing out that all of the webmail systems (that I know of) are in fact IMAP clients. They just happen to be installed on the server itself rather than on the client computer. Of course I haven't seen under the hood of GMail et al., but have installed quite a few webmail systems on servers (Squirrrel, Horde, Imp, Roundcube), and none of them need anything "special" to work other than available IMAP services on the server they're installed on.
-
Email is broken. Fix in progress...
2006-09-08 06:01:01 M. David Peterson |
[Reply | View]
http://dev.llup.org/
We've got a solid and recognizable group of folks pulling this all together, most with extensible backgrounds in standards development. See: http://dev.llup.org/wiki/about/project/developers for more detail.
-
There is a way out
2006-08-31 13:08:05 Synchro [Reply | View]
There is a way out of the whole sorry email mess, but it's unlikely to happen. Microsoft creates a new protocol that is designed in conjunction with relevant interest groups (e.g. djb) to replace SMTP, POP and IMAP. They then make it the default mechanism in ALL their products. Then they open-source the protocol properly - i.e. GPL or mBSD license, free of any constraint.
And monkeys might fly out of my butt.
-
"If a new system was created..."
2006-08-30 13:33:45 paulwaite [Reply | View]
> "If a new system was created, that was free of Spam and phishing"
Right. Yeah. Just like phones. No spam or phishing on them. Well, except I got cold-called yesterday, and you can convince people to give out information just as easily on the phone.
Spam and phishing are not problems caused by technological flaws, they're caused by human nature. -
"If a new system was created..."
2006-09-01 14:41:29 Bradley2J [Reply | View]
Any system will suffer from some abuse. We can make the abuse harder to carry out. Do you get 10-12 cold calls on your phone every day? Do you even get 10-12 items of junk snail mail every day? I think lots of people get 10-12 or far more Spam messages every day. No system will be perfect but the one we have now is wide open.
-
Safe for business?
2006-08-30 10:53:50 Bradley2J [Reply | View]
Spam filters have been successful only because enormous amounts of resources are continuously being spent on them. That's a constant drag on the IT infrastructure and online commerce in general. Spam filters are just a gigantic band-aid for an email system that is fundamentally flawed. If we weren't already so dependent on SMTP I don't think it would be considered a safe medium for conducting business, with its vulnerability to Spam, phishing attacks, and lack of authentication. The internet will never achieve its potential if you can't put your contact details on a web page without being bombarded with garbage. If the average person can't trust everything in their inbox then everything must be viewed with suspicion. Any message in your inbox could be faked. Markets are based on trust. Suspicion weakens the market.
We have the technology to make a better system. We just have to demand it. If a new system was created, that was free of Spam and phishing, how fast would people migrate to it? There's room for multiple instant messaging systems. There must be room for multiple email systems.
-
SMTP not 'STMP'
2006-08-30 10:17:01 Bradley2J [Reply | View]
It's SMTP, Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, not STMP.
-
SMTP not 'STMP'
2006-08-30 10:22:29 Giles Turnbull |
[Reply | View]
Sorry, typo. Fixed in a moment.
-
Google Trends and Email
2006-08-29 21:19:53 jonathanhager [Reply | View]
Google Trends actual suggest a decline in interest when you search for IMAP (without version number) and POP3 (http://www.google.com/trends?q=pop3%2Cimap&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all).
The protocols (POP3 and IMAP) don't even register on the graph when compared with gmail (an end user application).
-
E-mail will always have a place
2006-08-29 16:53:28 qka [Reply | View]
E-mail will always have a place, due to its asynchronous nature. If I'm not on a daytime schedule, or I'm on the other side of the planet, e-mail will get the message to my recipient, and their response to me. Not to mention those times you just don't want to be interrupted by IM or texting.
I have pretty much solved the issue of POP and multiple computers by setting my mail client (Apple's Mail) to leave the messages on the server for at least a week. In that time, all my computers will have gotten all the messages. An automatic BCC to self, with a filter to file them in the Sent folder, takes care of the rest of the problem.
The biggest problem with both IMAP and Web mail was illustrated in a "Dilbert" strip a few weeks ago. Dilbert is being plagued by Mordac, the Preventer of Information Technology, because he was over quota on his e-mail disk usage. Anything server based suffers the whims of the server management. Using POP mail, I am limited only by my disk space. I cannot tell you how often having an very old e-mail saved the day for me. On a server based system, I might have had to delete the message in question because of disk limits.
As for spam, I honestly cannot say when was the last time I got any. Care in giving out e-mail addresses, and not using spam magnet domains (like AOL or Hotmail) goes a long way in thwarting spammers. Though I realize some folks, like the author, have a genuine need to advertise their e-mail address. For them, I have no suggestions, only sympathy.
-
Things are fine, look ahead!
2006-08-29 15:37:27 Chris_ [Reply | View]
For me e-mail still works. With SPAM filters getting better and better I've never quite understood, why people insist on e-mail being broken just because of SPAM. Generally UCE/UBE mails hardly reach my inbox at all these days. Of course there a kind of wave pattern with spammers finding new tricks and filters needing some time to catch on but IMHO it isn't that bad.
By the way, I think the Google Trends search was a bit "unfair". It seldom happens that people explicitly use the term "IMAP4", in my impression it's just "IMAP" mostly. In that regard the search for "pop3, imap -substrate" leads to somewhat less dramatic results. POP3 still comes out ahead, though ... ;-)
Still, for me there's no going back to POP. I just leads to trouble with switching mail clients and endless trouble if you want/need access from more than one machine.
Gmail is tempting me time and time again for it's the only alternative to the IMAP/mail-client combination I see right now, but just like you wrote in the Hawk Wings mail client interview a couple of month back, I simply cannot bring myself to trust Google ... Which is a shame because it probably is the only mail client that, well, "borrowed" from the old Mutt motto, sucks a little less than all others right now, GUI clients inclusive.
As for Apple Mail I kinda agree with what Ashish Gulhati wrote ( http://netropolis.org/hash/blog.cgi/Tech/Email/thunderbird_vs_apple_mail.html ).





