🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <785@esquire.UUCP>, sbb@esquire.UUCP (Stephen B. Baumgarten) writes:
> In article <256@merlin.bhpmrl.oz> ianh@merlin.bhpmrl.oz (Ian Hoyle) writes:
> >Could someone please shed some light on the pros and cons of Macintosh mail
> >utilities ? The two that I am considering are Microsoft Mail and CE Software's
> >QuickMail.
> 
> 
> Everything I've heard about QuickMail has been good; also, you might
> look into InBox.  QuickMail is very much cheaper, though, and I suspect
> it's probably better as well.
>    Steve Baumgarten             

Take it from someone who has used both, QuickMail is a much better product 
than InBox. We bought InBox and have since trashed it and use QuickMail 
exclusively. 

Some of the things InBox does not do (and does not document):

	If you want to use a MacII as a server, that is all that machine can do.
	That right, nothing else. SEs and Pluses can be used in the background, 
	but not a MacII. I was setting up a completely new network of MacII 
	systems, so this was unacceptable to me.

	The indicator that you have mail waiting is an InBox logo where the Apple
	logo usually is. This does not work if you have a color monitor.

	If you choose once to tell InBox to remember your password, you cannot go
	back and reverse that decision. This is not a large complaint, just an
	annoying aspect.

When I called the people at CE and asked them if QuickMail could do the above
things that InBox could not, they sent me a QuickMail package to try free for
30 days. We sent them the money after using it for one day.

Sorry to rant and rave so, but I felt like InBox was a waste of my time.
I think CE did a much better job of testing their product and making it
comform to the type of interface that Mac users are used to.

Mike Paugh                20 degrees and the hockey game's on
AT&T Bell Labs            Nobody cares, they are way too far gone
Denver                      -- Jimmy Buffett --