Anyway, the only thing _I_ can point out that I tried several mail
servers before I came to post.office, and it has worked flawless on both
our own and on several customers systems for over a year now.
Post.Office is by far not the cheapest Mailserver, but I'm looking for
an acceptable 'cost of ownership' where the purchase price is about
5-10% of this costs, not more. P.O. ISP deals are AFAIK ~995$ for 2.500
users, do you think that's too much? I'd prefer paying more than being
stuck with a software where the producer goes out of business because
his revenue was too low !
Concerning the 'anti-spam' feature there have been some very unfriendly
posts from users because software.com refused to make a
'quick-and-dirty' fix: I fully understand that an Admin who is actually
hit by SPAM gets upset, but in the current version (Post.office 3.1)
they included a good _solution_ to the SPAM problem, not just a hack.
Took them <3month, seems 'reasonable' to me :)
Once again: P.O 3.1 is a software that's really worth a look!
Dale, since you are the 'authority' of this mailing list i think you
should be careful what you say here, since it's always like the word of
God :) About 6 month ago you strongly recommended P.O, now
_your_opinion_ has changed. Usually not a problem, but P.O is a product
with a large installed user base, also for ISPs that use your Emerald
software.
What I'd like to see is that you continue your previously good support
for P.O, especially by adding an external authentication DLL like you
made it for NTmail. If you see problems in getting the required
information from software.com, drop me a note and I'll see what I can
do.
Thank's for reading , have a nice day :)
cu, Peter
-
Peter A. Sang
SANG Computersysteme GmbH * Kruppstr. 82-100 * 45145 Essen * Germany
T: +49-201-82020-0 * F:-40 * http://sang.net * mailto:pesa@sang.net
* Microsoft Solution Provider * Intel Systems Integrator *
>----------
>Von: Dale E. Reed Jr.[SMTP:daler@iea.com]
>Gesendet: Mittwoch, 28. Mai 1997 09:08
>An: ntisp@emerald.iea.com
>Betreff: Re: Good Mail Server for NT?
>
>On Wed, 28 May 1997 petar@escape.net.au (Petar Nikolich) wrote:
>
>> No matter what others may say I have stuck by Post.Office since the start
>> while other have been and gone. I am comfortable with the scalibility of
>>this
>> product although it is not cheap
>
>Until you grow, it starts corrupting your mail files, and Software.Com
>says "I dunno, put it on UNIX. UNIX doesn't exhibit this behavior".
>I bought an NT mail server, not a UNIX mail server! :(
>
>I just finished testing NTMail with the Emerald Authentication DLL.
>You can create a FARM of servers to scale with, all authenticating
>off the Emerald/SQL Server database. Thats what I call "scalibility".
>Post.Office has a very small, finite number of simultaneous connections
>it can handle, which is very memory intensive at that.
>
>Oh yeah, IS also fixed problems (can you say spam) in a reasonable
>amount of time.
>
>Dale
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> NTISP Mailing List listserver@emerald.iea.com
>
>