🚀 go-pugleaf

On or about 28-Feb-96 23:21:39 Henrik Dissing typed the following words:

> On 21-Feb-96 07:59:50, Allan Purtle wrote:
>> As usual the technically oriented developers of Thor have failed to
>> recognize their target audience in their attempt to promote Thor as
>> a viable Mail/News solution.  Irrespective of the pros/cons of the
>> design decisions implemented in the current incarnation, the fact
>> remains that the target market is looking for something far simpler
>> to resolve a specific requirement, as opposed to something attempting
>> to solve every possibility by throwing in the kitchen sink.

HD> You couldn't be more wrong. If you asked all THOR users why they chose
HD> THOR as their e-mail and news handling application, the most frequent
HD> answer would be:

HD> "Because it was the one that I could actually figure out how to get
HD> going!"

Of course one could take that as characterizing THOR users as being too
dense to figure out how to use the other programs.  ;-)

That's not why I chose to use THOR and I have yet to have a THOR Installer
script work correctly.

HD> Everybody who subscribed to the late THOR mailing list know this to be
HD> true.

I subscribed and it isn't true.

HD> Personally, I find your argument a little backward. How can it be "far
HD> simpler" to find and install a suite of programs for handling POP,
HD> SMTP, NNTP, mail-editing and news-editing than to download THOR and
HD> run a simple installer script?

That's not what he said.  Try reading his post again.  THOR _would_ be
simpler and smaller and a better program for news reading if that was _ALL_
it was designed to do.  A program that is dedicated to a single function
will typically be better _at_that_function_ than the jack-of-all-trades
program.

  Phil

pwright@crash.cts.com