dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
29
share rss forum feed

tpkatl

join:2009-11-16
Dacula, GA
reply to RobXMiller

Re: [Rant] Comcast - worst web e-mail on market bar none - WHY

It's a package they bought from Zimbra - it's not something that Comcast developed itself.

The strange thing is that the Zimbra package that *Zimbra* supports on its own website itself is day-and-night better than the one Comcast uses. It's as if Comcast licensed it in 2004 and hasn't updated it since.

The Zimbra client (not the Comcast web) is actually fairly powerful. But like I said, Comcast seems to be stuck in the version that was released 5-6 years ago.

I only use the webmail when I can't get my laptop up and running quickly enough (like at an internet cafe or the library)


PGHammer

join:2003-06-09
Accokeek, MD
Again, the difference is *online vs. offline* - and the only widely-prevalent IMAP4-based service (which also offers POP3/SMTP, by the way) is that of Google/GMail.

The web-based client that Comcast (and other ISPs- including Yahoo, which also uses Zimbra - which was, in fact, originally a Yahoo-owned company) deploys is a *convenience* - it was never intended to be the default for anybody. Colleges and universities deploy IMAP4 primarily due to price/cost compared to POP3/SMTP - especially if they also run their own mail servers.

Lastly, one thing about IMAP4 - there's no such thing as *offline* when it comes to IMAP4; all messages remain on the server until you delete them. Folders are all stored on the server as well - while you can manage the folder layout on the client, it doesn't store either the folders themselves, or their contents locally. (The big advantage of IMAP4 for users is, in fact, that everything remains on the server by design *and* by default - HDD-constrained clients, especially thin clients, are therefore great fans of IMAP4, which lacks a local-storage option.)

Local users that desire (or need) to archive messages locally have extra steps that have to be gone through to do local archival with IMAP4 - POP3/SMTP. on the other hand, has always offered that option.

The big reason I personally prefer POP3 over IMAP4 - despite now being able to use the same software for both - is that local-archive option that IMAP4 lacks.


jlivingood
Premium,VIP
join:2007-10-28
Philadelphia, PA
kudos:3
reply to tpkatl
said by tpkatl:

It's as if Comcast licensed it in 2004 and hasn't updated it since.

The Zimbra client (not the Comcast web) is actually fairly powerful. But like I said, Comcast seems to be stuck in the version that was released 5-6 years ago.

The web client and the backend have both been updated regularly since our initial deployment. Every year we dedicate more resources to the platform, which is good.

I should also add that we keep an eye on threads like this to see what customers think, like, and obviously don't like. That factors in clearly to our future plans (and my team is in charge of the platform so I have a personal stake in it).

So we appreciate the feedback - and don't hesitate to start new threads on issues in the future - we read them (that includes engineers and developers working directly on the platform of course).
--
JL
Comcast

stonecolddsl
Linux Junkie

join:2004-01-07
Sarasota, FL
I find this funny as I use zimbra alot and even after compiling there opensourced free version has more features and less bugs then Comcast web mail.
--
Rob Snyder
»flatratefix.info