3 ms·
> but (clunky) IMAP is already and works just fine Well, 'works just fine' is not what I would say about IMAP, more like 'works most of the time'. But in the e
by justsomehnguy 4y ago
> but (clunky) IMAP is already and works just fine
Well, 'works just fine' is not what I would say about IMAP, more like 'works most of the time'. But in the end, IMAP is just for accessing mailbox and mail. JMAP also covers (besides server side actions and settings) calendar and contacts. If you remember, there are a separate protocols for these now (CalDAV, CardDAV) which are totally unrelated to IMAP. A desktop client with a full JMAP support would be close by the functionality to Outlook connected to Exchange, which is a thing many desire, especially in corporate settings.
- ktosobcy 4y agoI'm aware and use those protocols. What's the benefit of bundling IMAP/SMTP/Cal|CardDAV into single JAMP protocol here? Those separate protocols work great and if someone only needs mail can only use IMAP/SMTP?
- justsomehnguy 4y ago> Those separate protocols work great Nope, they are not. > What's the benefit of bundling Even not running around and configuring a separate IMAP, CalDAV, CardDAV, SMTP account settings would be a solid improvement. Runing over one endpoint instead of 3 would be a fine addition too. Not using a ridiculous STARTTLS would be a good thing too. > if someone only needs mail can only use IMAP/SMTP? That's not a protocol question, it's a MUA interface and configuration question.