Mail failure
Wed, 10 Jun 1998 08:00:00 +1000

TO: DATE: 10-06-98
TIME: 08:01
SUBJECT: Mail failure

[002] Mail was received that was addressed to unknown addresses.
Mail item was not delivered to:

------------------Internet Headers------------------
Received: from ([]) by (InterScan E-Mail VirusWall NT)
Received: from by (8.6.14/
id HAA02349; Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:26:08 +1000
Received: from (unverified []) by
(Rockliffe SMTPRA 2.1.5) with ESMTP id <>
for <>
Tue, 09 Jun 1998 14:32:53 -0700
Received: from jgdn (unverified []) by
(Rockliffe SMTPRA 2.1.6) with SMTP id <> for
Tue, 09 Jun 1998 14:28:36 -0700
From: "John Davies" <>
To: "Ntisp@Iea-Software. Com" <>
Subject: RE: Postoffice 3.5 released
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 1998 14:27:35 -0700
Message-ID: <003d01bd93ed$6ba54f50$>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Content-Type: text/plain;
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi Eric,

You might want to look at moving to MailSite:

We have many customers that have moved from Post.Office. We value our
and offer very reasonable upgrades.

>The pricing is simply ridiculous. We like Post.Office 3.1.2 very much. But,
>at that sort of price, there is no way we are going to even consider
>upgrading. Most vendors give their customers free, or very low cost,
>upgrades within version types. Apparently doesn't think this
>way, and doesn't care about customer loyalty. This pricing structure will
>drive customers away in droves.
>On the other hand I must admit that the Postoffice E-Mail server works
>>flawlessly since we are using it. Rock solid never had a problem, but the
>>pricing strategy of is becoming a problem for us.
>I'm in full agreement with you. It should have been a free upgrade for 3.x
>customers. Their pricing is leading us to IMail faster than
>would have ever believed.