Re: [NTISP] Imail vs post-office

Tim Pitman ( (no email) )
Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:28:12 -0600

I used Post.Office, various versions for the last 2 years. Overall I was
satisfied with the web administration, and lack of problems. I had the same
problems that others have mentioned with Outlook Express being unable to
retrieve certain email messages. This was a problem with Outlook Express
and not Post.Office as I would ask some clients to use a different email
client when they had this problem, and mail was retrieved fine.

Another option I would offer for email which is what I have switched to this
last month is go with RedHat linux 5.2, Sendmail 8.9.3, and IMAP (for POP2,
POP3, and IMAP support). This has been very stable for me. It lacks the
web interface for admin, which can be easly done by telnet, and yet there is
packages available for Web access to email accounts. Best of all Unlimited
users for free.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christian Schmit <>
To: <>
Date: Saturday, March 13, 1999 3:53 AM
Subject: RE: [NTISP] Imail vs post-office

>We have a lot of problems with customers using
>Outlook Express, but this is due to Microsoft not
>being conform to the standards. It had nothing to do
>with small or large mails. For example if you have a mail
>which contains a line with only a "." Outlook cannot retrieve
>the message. (this is 100% reproducible)
>At 03:01 AM 3/13/99 -0600, you wrote:
>>Have you had any problems with customers not being able to retreive Email
>>... some small in size, but mostly 2-5 meg attachments????
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From:
>>> []On Behalf Of Christian Schmit
>>> Sent: Saturday, March 13, 1999 2:31 AM
>>> To:
>>> Subject: RE: [NTISP] Imail vs post-office
>>> Hi,
>>> We also run postoffice 3.5.3. All in one Postoffice is very stable.
>>> We never had a problem. But what is really missing is IMAP4 support
>>> which was promised a long time ago according to the PO FAQ that used to
>>> be on their site. A web interface for customers would also be a good
>>> thing but as they develop so slowly, we moved to dmailweb from
>>> to offer our customers a webmail interface to their
>>> postoffice e-mail address. This works pretty well. So for me IMAP4
>>> is the only important feature missing. It is not serious that a company
>>> that claims to be the leader in Internet messaging does not support
>>> in their baseline product. But as someone said they seem to focus on
>>> large ISP's.......
>>> Another thing is that Postoffice is VERY expensive, even the upgrades
>>> cost a hell lot of money!
>>> Christian
>>> At 04:07 AM 3/13/99 , you wrote:
>>> >Yep, your right, we on 3.1 I believe. I still use it on a backup
>>> >They seemed to loose their interest in anything other that large
>>> ISP's, that
>>> >as well as the non support of IMAP and a web interface is what
>>> prompted our
>>> >switch. When they stored everything in the registry it was kind
>>> of a pain
>>> >in the a** to move a box. I think the companies change in
>>> attitude was one
>>> >of the bigger factors. Ipswitch has it's problems, but I can converse
>>> >directly with the programmers to help resolve problems. The IMail
>>> >community contains allot of bitchers that paid next to nothing for the
>>> >product, but want the everything a much more expensive package would
>>> >include. I don't thing it's suited for very large ISP's, but
>>> with designed
>>> >for the small to medium size company. It fills a product niche
>>> and I feel
>>> >does it well. If money were no object, I probably look elsewhere, but
>>> >far as bang for the buck, I don't think you can beat it.
>>> >
>>> >Kurt A. Butzin
>>> >President
>>> >
>>> >Molarnet Technologies, Inc.
>>> >1936 Bay Street
>>> >Saginaw, MI 48602
>>> >
>>> >(517)249-INET Fax (517)792-9158
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Authorized iPSwitch WebVar, Allaire Alliance Member
>>> >Internet Services, Cold Fusion Hosting and Developement
>>> >ISP Discounts on Allaire and Ipswitch Products
>>> >Custom Systems, Hardware and Software
>>> >
>>> >-----Original Message-----
>>> >From:
>>> []
>>> >Sent: Friday,
>>> March 12, 1999 8:53 PM
>>> >To:
>>> >Subject: RE: [NTISP] Imail vs post-office
>>> >
>>> >We just moved one of our post-office mail servers to a new box...
>>> >
>>> >Took all of an hour with over 500 accounts and dozens of
>>> supported domains.
>>> >
>>> >Maybe you had the old version of post-office that kept the users in the
>>> >registry... but we had no trouble whatsoever... We run
>>> Post.Office v3.5.2
>>> >release 221
>>> >Also disagree with you about "set up" difficulty. It's a breeze.
>>> >The lack of a web interface is an issue, we are currently
>>> looking into third
>>> >party packages to accomplish this.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> As a follow-up to my previous message, we dumped postoffice a
>>> >> year ago do to their lack of features, especially a good web
>>> >> interface for the users to access their mail. The configuration
>>> >> was easy with Post Office, but took much longer to set up than
>>> >> IMail. Backing up the registry, moving the accounts to a new box
>>> >> is very easy with IMail and a nightmare with PostOffice. Hope
>>> this helps.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> For more information about this list, including removal,
>>> see this url:
>>For more information about this list, including removal,
>>see this url:
>For more information about this list, including removal,
>see this url:

For more information about this list, including removal,
see this url: