<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GMail FINALLY Supports IMAP</title>
	<atom:link href="http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:27:42 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: onerythym</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398593</link>
		<dc:creator>onerythym</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:25:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398593</guid>
		<description>This is exciting news.  Why arent all gmail accounts getting this?  Ive had a gmail for years now...  It still has only  POP...    

Are they rolling it out in phases?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is exciting news.  Why arent all gmail accounts getting this?  Ive had a gmail for years now&#8230;  It still has only  POP&#8230;    </p>
<p>Are they rolling it out in phases?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398451</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2007 19:34:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398451</guid>
		<description>Thanks CHI! That makes sense now; it will be nice to read a message on Mail and then see it marked as &quot;read&quot; on my web app.
Thanks for the concise answer!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks CHI! That makes sense now; it will be nice to read a message on Mail and then see it marked as &#8220;read&#8221; on my web app.<br />
Thanks for the concise answer!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chi</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398400</link>
		<dc:creator>Chi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 21:13:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398400</guid>
		<description>@Michael

  IMAP supports a two way connection between the mail server and your mail client.  Thus with IMAP, messages read on your client (whether it&#039;s Outlook, Thunderbird, or iPhone) are also marked as read on the server (so you don&#039;t have to reread the message again on  gmail.com via web browser).

  POP typically either downloads (and deletes the original copy) or duplicates e-mail on the client and the server.  In the first scenario of deleting the original copy, it defeats the purpose of Gmail&#039;s excessive storage space (and their claim to never have to delete e-mails again).  And in the second scenario, this would mean that even after you read/archive a e-mail on your client, you&#039;d have to do it again on the server via the web browser.

  IMAP seeks to eliminate this.  Which is quite nice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Michael</p>
<p>  IMAP supports a two way connection between the mail server and your mail client.  Thus with IMAP, messages read on your client (whether it&#8217;s Outlook, Thunderbird, or iPhone) are also marked as read on the server (so you don&#8217;t have to reread the message again on  gmail.com via web browser).</p>
<p>  POP typically either downloads (and deletes the original copy) or duplicates e-mail on the client and the server.  In the first scenario of deleting the original copy, it defeats the purpose of Gmail&#8217;s excessive storage space (and their claim to never have to delete e-mails again).  And in the second scenario, this would mean that even after you read/archive a e-mail on your client, you&#8217;d have to do it again on the server via the web browser.</p>
<p>  IMAP seeks to eliminate this.  Which is quite nice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398380</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 16:18:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398380</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m a little slow with the acronyms and technology, but what does this mean for me? I have been using gmail through my &quot;Mail&quot; app on Mac OSX for a year now, and I can check and reply to all my messages without using google&#039;s web interface. I guess that&#039;s POP? What do I get differently if I set up email with IMAP?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m a little slow with the acronyms and technology, but what does this mean for me? I have been using gmail through my &#8220;Mail&#8221; app on Mac OSX for a year now, and I can check and reply to all my messages without using google&#8217;s web interface. I guess that&#8217;s POP? What do I get differently if I set up email with IMAP?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ronald Poi</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398354</link>
		<dc:creator>Ronald Poi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 05:38:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398354</guid>
		<description>Great news!... hope to use it soon on my Google Apps</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great news!&#8230; hope to use it soon on my Google Apps</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dominik</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398353</link>
		<dc:creator>Dominik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 05:37:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398353</guid>
		<description>Well - it makes me extremely excited.

I think it took them so long because they needed to anwer two questions first:

* How to serve ads over IMAP?
* How to map their whole label system to the &quot;classic&quot; folder system that IMAP supports?

Since I can&#039;t switch to IMAP yet - how did they do it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well &#8211; it makes me extremely excited.</p>
<p>I think it took them so long because they needed to anwer two questions first:</p>
<p>* How to serve ads over IMAP?<br />
* How to map their whole label system to the &#8220;classic&#8221; folder system that IMAP supports?</p>
<p>Since I can&#8217;t switch to IMAP yet &#8211; how did they do it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chad</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398352</link>
		<dc:creator>chad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 05:05:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398352</guid>
		<description>bout damn time... only took them what... 4 years?  Just shy of a half decade?!

You&#039;d think a multibillion dollar company with some of the best and brightest at the reigns would have gotten shit pushed out in ... oh I dunno... at least 05&#039;

whatever though, I&#039;m cynical ... hooray for IMAP *FINALLY*</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bout damn time&#8230; only took them what&#8230; 4 years?  Just shy of a half decade?!</p>
<p>You&#8217;d think a multibillion dollar company with some of the best and brightest at the reigns would have gotten shit pushed out in &#8230; oh I dunno&#8230; at least 05&#8242;</p>
<p>whatever though, I&#8217;m cynical &#8230; hooray for IMAP *FINALLY*</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abraham Estrada</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398351</link>
		<dc:creator>Abraham Estrada</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 04:48:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398351</guid>
		<description>Of course I´m excited because with IMAP support now I can have push-gmail in my Treo using Chatteremail.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course I´m excited because with IMAP support now I can have push-gmail in my Treo using Chatteremail.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Howard</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398350</link>
		<dc:creator>Howard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 04:41:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398350</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s not working atm but I hope it&#039;ll work soon... I don&#039;t see &quot;Enabling IMAP&quot; under my gmail settings yet. But, FINALLY.... something worth using... kudos to Google</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not working atm but I hope it&#8217;ll work soon&#8230; I don&#8217;t see &#8220;Enabling IMAP&#8221; under my gmail settings yet. But, FINALLY&#8230;. something worth using&#8230; kudos to Google</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian</title>
		<link>http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/comment-page-1/#comment-398348</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2007 03:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://uneasysilence.com/archive/2007/10/12537/#comment-398348</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s about F&#039;ing time!  Maybe I can finally quit the web interface for something a little faster.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s about F&#8217;ing time!  Maybe I can finally quit the web interface for something a little faster.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
