ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz (Ian Hoyle) (11/04/88)
Could someone please shed some light on the pros and cons of Macintosh mail
utilities ? The two that I am considering are Microsoft Mail and CE Software's
QuickMail.
Thanx in advance :-)
--
Ian Hoyle
/\/\ Image Processing and Data Analysis Group
/ / /\ BHP Melbourne Research Laboratories
/ / / \ 245 Wellington Rd, Mulgrave, 3170
/ / / /\ \ AUSTRALIA
\ \/ / / /
\ / / / Phone : (03) 560 7066
\/\/\/ ACSnet : ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz
Internet: ianh%merlin.bhpmrl.oz@uunet.uu.netsinger@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) (11/05/88)
In article <256@merlin.bhpmrl.oz> ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz (Ian Hoyle) writes: > >Could someone please shed some light on the pros and cons of Macintosh mail >utilities ? The two that I am considering are Microsoft Mail and CE Software's >QuickMail. Why not InBox? Rich Siegel Staff Software Developer THINK Technologies Division, Symantec Corp. Internet: singer@endor.harvard.edu UUCP: ..harvard!endor!singer Phone: (617) 275-4800 x305 Any opinions stated in this article do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of Symantec Corporation or its employees.
sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) (11/07/88)
In article <256@merlin.bhpmrl.oz> ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz (Ian Hoyle) writes: >Could someone please shed some light on the pros and cons of Macintosh mail >utilities ? The two that I am considering are Microsoft Mail and CE Software's >QuickMail. Question: What's the difference between a dog and Microsoft Mail? Answer: A dog barks. Everything I've heard about QuickMail has been good; also, you might look into InBox. QuickMail is very much cheaper, though, and I suspect it's probably better as well. -- Steve Baumgarten | "New York... when civilization falls apart, Davis Polk & Wardwell | remember, we were way ahead of you." cmcl2!esquire!sbb | esquire!sbb@cmcl2.nyu.edu | - David Letterman
holland@mips.csc.ti.com (Fred Hollander) (11/08/88)
In article <785@esquire.UUCP> sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) writes: >In article <256@merlin.bhpmrl.oz> ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz (Ian Hoyle) writes: > >Everything I've heard about QuickMail has been good; also, you might >look into InBox. QuickMail is very much cheaper, though, and I suspect >it's probably better as well. > Before you buy InBox, open a manual, look at the end of the "Welcome" section, and make sure they recommend using it under MultiFinder. :) Sorry about the cut, but I just finished talking to Symantec's customer service. I explained that I've heard of serious (disk crashing) problems with SUM. Also that fixes were posted but, people complained about them before I even had time to download them. I told her that I sent in my registration card and that I wanted an official bug fix from Symantec. It went something like this: me Why haven't I received an update to SUM? her We've just been sending updates if people have problems. me Should I call you back when my disk crashes? ... Fred Hollander Computer Science Center Texas Instruments, Inc. holland%ti-csl@csnet-rela The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments.
singer@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) (11/08/88)
In article <62935@ti-csl.CSNET> holland@mips.UUCP (Fred Hollander) writes: >Before you buy InBox, open a manual, look at the end of the "Welcome" section, >and make sure they recommend using it under MultiFinder. :) Though the manuals are out of date, you can use InBox under MultiFindr (I do, all the time). Version 2.2 of InBox comes with an installer and shell program to use the InBox DA under MultiFinder. >Sorry about the cut, but I just finished talking to Symantec's customer >service. I explained that I've heard of serious (disk crashing) problems >with SUM. Also that fixes were posted but, people complained about them before I even had time to download them. I told her that I sent in my registration >card and that I wanted an official bug fix from Symantec. It went something >like this: Customersupport problems aside, what does this have to do with InBox? I'm in the process of trying to nail down the latest INITs and so forth, and when I do, I will post them. --Rich Rich Siegel Staff Software Developer THINK Technologies Division, Symantec Corp. Internet: singer@endor.harvard.edu UUCP: ..harvard!endor!singer Phone: (617) 275-4800 x305 Any opinions stated in this article do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of Symantec Corporation or its employees.
mcp@drutx.ATT.COM (Mike Paugh) (11/09/88)
In article <785@esquire.UUCP>, sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) writes: > In article <256@merlin.bhpmrl.oz> ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz (Ian Hoyle) writes: > >Could someone please shed some light on the pros and cons of Macintosh mail > >utilities ? The two that I am considering are Microsoft Mail and CE Software's > >QuickMail. > > > Everything I've heard about QuickMail has been good; also, you might > look into InBox. QuickMail is very much cheaper, though, and I suspect > it's probably better as well. > Steve Baumgarten Take it from someone who has used both, QuickMail is a much better product than InBox. We bought InBox and have since trashed it and use QuickMail exclusively. Some of the things InBox does not do (and does not document): If you want to use a MacII as a server, that is all that machine can do. That right, nothing else. SEs and Pluses can be used in the background, but not a MacII. I was setting up a completely new network of MacII systems, so this was unacceptable to me. The indicator that you have mail waiting is an InBox logo where the Apple logo usually is. This does not work if you have a color monitor. If you choose once to tell InBox to remember your password, you cannot go back and reverse that decision. This is not a large complaint, just an annoying aspect. When I called the people at CE and asked them if QuickMail could do the above things that InBox could not, they sent me a QuickMail package to try free for 30 days. We sent them the money after using it for one day. Sorry to rant and rave so, but I felt like InBox was a waste of my time. I think CE did a much better job of testing their product and making it comform to the type of interface that Mac users are used to. Mike Paugh 20 degrees and the hockey game's on AT&T Bell Labs Nobody cares, they are way too far gone Denver -- Jimmy Buffett --
holland@mips.csc.ti.com (Fred Hollander) (11/10/88)
In article <556@husc6.harvard.edu> singer@endor.UUCP (Rich Siegel) writes: >In article <62935@ti-csl.CSNET> holland@mips.UUCP (Fred Hollander) writes: >>Before you buy InBox, open a manual, look at the end of the "Welcome" section, >>and make sure they recommend using it under MultiFinder. :) > > Though the manuals are out of date, you can use InBox under MultiFindr >(I do, all the time). Version 2.2 of InBox comes with an installer and >shell program to use the InBox DA under MultiFinder. > >>Sorry about the cut, but I just finished talking to Symantec's customer >>service. I explained that I've heard of serious (disk crashing) problems >>with SUM. Also that fixes were posted but, people complained about them before I even had time to download them. I told her that I sent in my registration >>card and that I wanted an official bug fix from Symantec. It went something >>like this: > > Customersupport problems aside, what does this have to do with InBox? > I guess you didn't notice the :). I'm not really complaining about InBox. I was simply upset with Symantec. Last weeks message about SUM's notice in the "Welcome" chapter about not being MultiFinder friendly was the last straw. I was already upset that Symantec hasn't sent me an upgrade (or notice) when there are serious problems with SUM. The attitude of waiting until people call with problems (like disk crashes) is unforgiving. I sent in my registration card and even if the upgrade is not free, I expect to be notified automatically when an upgrade is available. I don't have the time to periodically call in reference to each software package that I own, nor would I expect that companies would want that much phone traffic, all asking the same question, "Where is my upgrade?". At least I have access to this newsgroup, so I will not use the Inits until I receive a reliable version. What about everybody else, that is not even aware that people are having problems? Doesn't Symantec (and other companies with critical bugs in their software) have a responsibility to notify their customers? A fair analogy is recalls in the auto industry. Imagine if Ford didn't recall Pintos (remember the exploding gas tanks?) but, told people to call if they have a problem... > I'm in the process of trying to nail down the latest INITs and so >forth, and when I do, I will post them. That would be appreciated. > > --Rich >Rich Siegel >Staff Software Developer >THINK Technologies Division, Symantec Corp. >Internet: singer@endor.harvard.edu >UUCP: ..harvard!endor!singer >Phone: (617) 275-4800 x305 > >Any opinions stated in this article do not necessarily reflect the views >or policies of Symantec Corporation or its employees. Fred Hollander Computer Science Center Texas Instruments, Inc. holland%ti-csl@csnet-rela The above statements are my own and not representative of Texas Instruments.
singer@endor.harvard.edu (Rich Siegel) (11/11/88)
In article <9272@drutx.ATT.COM> mcp@drutx.ATT.COM (Mike Paugh) writes: >Some of the things InBox does not do (and does not document): > > If you want to use a MacII as a server, that is all that machine can do. Agreed that it's a nuisance to not be able to configure a Mac II as a background Message Center; however, if you have some other server (TOPS, AppleShare) you can configure the message center to run in the foreground on top of the server program. This works quite well and reliably. > The indicator that you have mail waiting is an InBox logo where the > Apple logo usually is. This does not work if you have a color monitor. It doesn't work if you are running in more than monochrome mode, regardless of whether you have a color monitor or not. However, the visual InBox symbol is not the only mail indicator; there are also audio and visual indicators, which can be set to repeat as long as you have mail waiting. >If you choose once to tell InBox to remember your password, you cannot go >back and reverse that decision. This is not a large complaint, just an >annoying aspect. This is simply not true. When you double-click the InBox Startup program after having already logged in, InBox presents you with an options dialog; you can enter name and password, and set options like turning off remembrance of name and password, as well of what type of alerts you want. >When I called the people at CE and asked them if QuickMail could do the above >things that InBox could not, they sent me a QuickMail package to try free for >30 days. We sent them the money after using it for one day. I would respond, but it's not sporting for me to make comments about a competing product. We've also tried QuickMail in-house. --Rich Rich Siegel Staff Software Developer THINK Technologies Division, Symantec Corp. Internet: singer@endor.harvard.edu UUCP: ..harvard!endor!singer Phone: (617) 275-4800 x305 Any opinions stated in this article do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of Symantec Corporation or its employees.