[LMB] OT: Re: gmail shenanigans

Harvey fishman at panix.com
Tue Oct 2 02:21:33 BST 2018



------ Original Message ------
From: "Marc Wilson" <marc.wilson at gmx.co.uk>
To: "LMB" <lois-bujold at lists.herald.co.uk>
Cc:
Bcc: fishman at panix.com
Sent: 10/01/2018 20:47:09
Subject: Re: [LMB] OT: Re: gmail shenanigans

>On Mon, 1 Oct 2018 16:08:32 -0600, Zan Lynx <zlynx at acm.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>>>>I've had POP providers where any messages older than 30 days were
>>>>>deleted by provider policy.
>>>>
>>>>In fact they must do this and it's one of the reasons IMAP is 
>>>>superior.
>>>
>>>If they "must" do this, I know of at least a dozen ISPs breaking the
>>>standard.
>>>
>>
>>They must not POP all 30,000 messages in my Inbox, that's for sure. 
>>What
>>I meant isn't 30 days, but that they have to have a limit. They can
>>pretend that the older messages don't exist, that is a valid tactic.
>>Then your client will never download them again but you can still see
>>them on the web interface.
>
>I think you don't understand how POP works.  They don't "pretend the
>older messages don't exist", they flag them as read.  And mail clients
>won't retrieve them again.  Which doesn't delete them, unless you set
>your client to not leave mail on the server.
>
Marc, you are positing a completely unsustainable business model for an 
ISP. You are asking that he must provide an unbounded amount of storage 
for the mail. The initial cost of that storage could conceivably be 
bundled into the cost of service, BUT storage has maintenance costs that 
are proportional to the size of the storage (backup &c.). This would be 
a constantly growing cost for the company with no upper limit.

Harvey
>



More information about the Lois-Bujold mailing list