Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Matt Kettler
At 02:32 PM 11/23/2003, Jeremy Dold wrote: It gets even funnier, because according to this article, http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/07/18/28FEspamassassin_1.html?s=feature , InfoWorld uses Spamassassin for themselves! According to InforWorld, "SpamAssassin is easy to install and customize". D

RE: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Chris Santerre
, November 23, 2003 2:32 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; > Jeremy Dold > Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article > > > It gets even funnier, because according to this article, > http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/07/18/28FEspamassassin_1.h tm

RE: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Mark Spieth
. Mark Spieth -Original Message- From: Fred [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 7:30 AM To: Kenneth Porter; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article Kenneth, Here is my original response to this editor. Hello, I recently read your articl

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Jeremy Dold
It gets even funnier, because according to this article, http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/07/18/28FEspamassassin_1.html?s=feature , InfoWorld uses Spamassassin for themselves! According to InforWorld, "SpamAssassin is easy to install and customize". Do they even proofread the articles before t

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Terry Milnes
remy Dold Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article And now for the real world. I was asked a year ago to come up with a solution for spam filtering, in a multiple domain, multiple user environment ( > 4,400 users). After extensive research I recommended SA. I in

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Fred
Kenneth, Here is my original response to this editor. Hello, I recently read your article on: http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/14/45FEspam_2.html I just need to say a few things, First of all, why did you use such an old version of SpamAssassin? You compared last years SpamAssassin with t

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-24 Thread Terry Milnes
The company I did this for is a small company, a large user base doesn't mean a large company. The same can be said for the larger companies, they may have an admin who makes 20 bucks an hour so their costs would be in the $30 an hour range. There were other considerations I didn't even mentio

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Antony Stone
On Sunday 23 November 2003 9:05 pm, Kenneth Porter wrote: > --On Sunday, November 23, 2003 8:35 AM -0500 Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I gave this guy a piece of my mind! > > Care to cc a copy to the SA list? Hopefully you don't mean that you were > antagonistic. Too many open source advocat

RE: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Upwood, Jim
hours, if that, at my convenience... -Jim -Original Message- From: Terry Milnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, November 23, 2003 11:16 AM To: Jeremy Dold Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article And now for the real world. I was asked a year ago

RE: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Bill
> And now for the real world. > > only 50 or less users: > > Brightmail$ 2,998 for 2 years > FrontBridge $ 2,700 for 2 years > Postini $ 2,700 for 2 years > ProofPoint$ 2,000 for 2 years > SpamAssassin $ 3,100 for 2 years > That assumes that the small co

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Kenneth Porter
--On Sunday, November 23, 2003 8:35 AM -0500 Fred <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I gave this guy a piece of my mind! Care to cc a copy to the SA list? Hopefully you don't mean that you were antagonistic. Too many open source advocates sound like the crazy aunt in the attic, which alienates the corpo

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Terry Milnes
And now for the real world. I was asked a year ago to come up with a solution for spam filtering, in a multiple domain, multiple user environment ( > 4,400 users). After extensive research I recommended SA. I installed SA on my system and ran it for about a month, it was an older version

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Fred
I gave this guy a piece of my mind! The guy wasn't smart enough to update his SA install, he used 2.44 because it came with the RH9 disks he had. No wonder he had a hard time finding support, that software is outdated! Frederic Tarasevicius Internet Information Services, Inc. http://www.i-is.com

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Carl R. Friend
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003, Jeremy Dold wrote: > Does someone want to respond to this guy and point out the obvious? > http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/14/45FEspam_1.html?s=tc I haven't been able to properly ascertain the author's various connections to commercial ventures, but in this inst

Re: [SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Martin Radford
At Fri Nov 21 23:34:35 2003, Jeremy Dold wrote: > > Does someone want to respond to this guy and point out the obvious? > http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/14/45FEspam_1.html?s=tc It's a bit embarrassing for the journalist that he was happy to contact technical support for at least one of t

[SAtalk] Really bad Infoworld article

2003-11-23 Thread Jeremy Dold
Does someone want to respond to this guy and point out the obvious? http://www.infoworld.com/article/03/11/14/45FEspam_1.html?s=tc --- This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback Program. Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive?