Talk:Comparison of webmail providers

Inconsistency between tables

Several tables list La_Poste_(France), but not the first table. The last table lists Seznam.cz. Each provider included should be listed in every table — even if the rows have to be temporarily filled with "?" as placeholders. —DIV (1.145.112.83 (talk) 01:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC))

Also, GMX is missing from the Features table. —DIV (1.145.112.83 (talk) 05:55, 16 April 2024 (UTC))

Seznam.cz is now only in Verification and Features tables. Laposte.net is all tables except General and Supported protocols. Both products should be added to at least the General table or deleted altogether. ~2026-39597-91 (talk) 20:01, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Posteo jmap support source?

I can't find any evidence that Posteo.de supports JMAP. Nothing on their website about it, nothing on Google, nothing in their knowledge base.

I'm going to submit a change to the page until someone provides a source. Stefan Midjich (talk) 18:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I think the table column headers got swapped. I don't think many other services that are listed as supporting JMAP support it. I'll swap it back. Eternaltyro (talk) 07:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

Somebody messed up here - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Comparison_of_webmail_providers&oldid=1209580705

Comparison - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1209580705&oldid=1209183175&title=Comparison_of_webmail_providers Eternaltyro (talk) 07:21, 28 July 2024 (UTC)

This is fixed now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:BD00:200:C957:C8AE:54F1:25CF (talk) 23:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

IPv6

What does Support of IPv4/6 mean?? Itu (talk) 07:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion: A new table on "Content Restrictions"

I've been looking to switch my email provider recently, and I've been reading their Terms of Service. I noticed that while several say nothing about what the user is allowed to email using their service, some are quite restrictive. For example, here's Mailfence's:

Member conduct

(...) It is strictly forbidden to use the Service for: (...) Uploading, sending or promoting any Content related to nudity, sexuality, sex, pornography (...)

General conditions

(...) The Service may, but has no obligation to, remove by its sole discretion, content which is (...) pornographic, obscene or otherwise objectionable (...)

And here's Fastmail's:

4. Member conduct

(...) By way of example, and not as a limitation, you agree not to:

3. Publish, distribute or disseminate any inappropriate, profane (...), obscene, indecent (...) material or information.

(...) Fastmail reserves the right at all times to monitor, review, retain, prevent the transmission of, and/or disclose any information as necessary to monitor compliance with these Terms (...).

(The many ellipses are due to my own filtering criteria for content that isn't otherwise illegal.)

I think it'd be a good idea to add a table with columns detailing this kind of thing. With the two services above, for example, we'd have two columns, "Sexual Content" and "Blasphemy". For Mailfence, they'd respectively show, I dunno, "Forbidden" and "Allowed", while for Fastmail they'd show "Forbidden" and "Forbidden".

What do you think? -- alexgieg (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Suggestion: adding good-to-have information

It would be good to have columns for

• is the service Open Source (with green for yes, red for no and white for unknown),
• is the service based on Free Open Source Software (FOSS), (with green for yes, red for no and white for unknown),
• what is the Country of Legislation (whith colours for level of privacy protection),

VanderlekD (talk) 10:11, 14 June 2026 (UTC)