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
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 installed SA on my system
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
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 article on:
http://www.infoworld.com
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
tml?s=feature
, InfoWorld uses Spamassassin for themselves
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
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 the
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
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wonder he had a hard time finding support, that software is outdated!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.
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
--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
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 company
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
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 advocates
14 matches
Mail list logo
