Not quite, though. Gmail uses labels, but translates that to folders on IMAP. You can set your client to download the folders automatically, and if an email goes into a specific folder don’t put it in the app’s Inbox. Then you just check your inbox and folders just like you would on Gmail’s webclient.
Honestly, I don’t use gmail much, but I really just want a normal inbox, folders, and rules I can define to filter stuff. Netscape E-Mail circa 1998 was all I ever wanted, and I still miss the PITA trying to get even close to that interface today.
I can’t speak for others, but I typically don’t use email on the PC. When it is more convenient to use the PC, usually because of an attachment, I will log into the browser version.
Wouldn’t a locally installed IMAP client produce less traffic than any web UI? I only use those.
Yes, it would and I will never understand why someone would use the web interface.
Because Gmail filters emails by type. Receiving emails on a client throws all the garbage in one inbox.
Not quite, though. Gmail uses labels, but translates that to folders on IMAP. You can set your client to download the folders automatically, and if an email goes into a specific folder don’t put it in the app’s Inbox. Then you just check your inbox and folders just like you would on Gmail’s webclient.
Honestly, I don’t use gmail much, but I really just want a normal inbox, folders, and rules I can define to filter stuff. Netscape E-Mail circa 1998 was all I ever wanted, and I still miss the PITA trying to get even close to that interface today.
I can’t speak for others, but I typically don’t use email on the PC. When it is more convenient to use the PC, usually because of an attachment, I will log into the browser version.