On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 06:35:47PM -0900, W.D.McKinney wrote: > > > To each his own though and as I always say, pick a horse and learn to > > > ride. :-) > > > > yes, but it's generally better to pick a good horse rather than a > > three-legged, > > half-blind bad-tempered mule that is well past retirement age. > > > > craig > > Hmm, meaning Hotmail, Yahoo and others run three legged mules ? :-)
yes. the fact that some large sites run a particular piece of software isn't terribly significant. huge companies like Microsoft run Windows, but that doesn't in any way mean that Windows isn't a huge steaming POS. and many large mail sites still use sendmail. ditto. they either don't know any better or it would take too much effort and/or cause too many problems to change that it's not worth it. > "Bloated" means overweight, non essential and not availble to chuck out > the window up here. it's stretching the imagination way beyond credibility to call postfix in any way "bloated". even with all the extra features (many of which are *essential* these days), postfix still out-performs qmail in every way. in fact, some of the extra features help it to outperform qmail. > "Rock Solid" means it's been so long long since we needed to make a > change, it's easy to forget how. the fact that a) qmail makes it hard to make changes, and b) qmail doesn't even support many of the things required in a modern MTA, means that you have no choice but to ignore important things like backscatter and recipient validation. that's not a feature, that's a bug. that doesn't mean you *SHOULD* ignore them, it means that the software you choose to use makes it impossible to do anything about them. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (part time cyborg) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
