[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       samba
Subject:    SAMBA digest 551
From:       samba () anu ! edu ! au
Date:       1995-06-01 4:16:24
[Download RAW message or body]

			    SAMBA Digest 551

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: SAMBA digest 550
	by Letcher Ross <letcher@cac.washington.edu>
  2) RE: SAMBA digest 549
	by Charles Fox <cfox@microsoft.com>

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 May 1995 06:30:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Letcher Ross <letcher@cac.washington.edu>
To: samba@anu.edu.au
Cc: Multiple recipients of list <samba@anugpo.anu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: SAMBA digest 550
Message-ID: <Pine.NXT.3.92.950531061838.22932A-100000@jimmy.cac.washington.edu>

John Miller wrote:
>>    I am tempted to write an SMTP/POP MAPI DLL for Windows, if there
>>    is sufficient interest out there.
>> 
>> Are you kidding?  I'll be surprised if you don't get deluged by
>> queries.  I think the lack of a TCP/IP email transport in stock MS OS
>> software points out a glaring oversight on the part of the MS folks.
>> A working telnet/ftp is nowhere near as useful as a working email
>> system.  I can do ftp through email if necessary.  What the hell was
>> MS thinking?
>
>Something similar is on my agenda, too - though I'm not so interested in the
>standalone-workstation end, but more the workgroup/groupware side, where POP
>is definitely the wrong choice of protocol (it's a mail-DUMP, not a
>mail-SERVER) and SMTP-to-the-workstation has some weaknesses as well 
>(security and configurability, to name two).  
>

I agree with John -- I think the best model for mail to the desktop is to
leave the mail on the server.  PCs are just too unstable to trust as mail
repostories.  I lke IMAP because it leaves the mail safely on the server
(professionally managed and backed up I hope). 

-Letcher




------------------------------

Date: Wed, 31 May 95 12:04:24 TZ
From: Charles Fox <cfox@microsoft.com>
To: samba@anu.edu.au
Subject: RE: SAMBA digest 549
Message-ID: <9505311725.AA00949@netmail2.microsoft.com>

FYI,
Windows 95 E-mail client has a POP3 Driver that MS wrote. It will be in 
the plus pack for Win 95... Guess were not as brain dead as you might 
think.....

   Date: Sun, 28 May 1995 22:02:13 +0100 (WET DST)
   From: "Stefaan A. Eeckels" <Stefaan.Eeckels@eunet.lu>
   To: samba@anu.edu.au
   Subject: [MS Mail]

   I am tempted to write an SMTP/POP MAPI DLL for Windows, if there
   is sufficient interest out there.

Are you kidding?  I'll be surprised if you don't get deluged by
queries.  I think the lack of a TCP/IP email transport in stock MS OS
software points out a glaring oversight on the part of the MS folks.
A working telnet/ftp is nowhere near as useful as a working email
system.  I can do ftp through email if necessary.  What the hell was
MS thinking?

Thanks for shedding some light on this subject.
--
Daniel R. Guilderson                 Interleaf, Inc.
SysAdmin/Technical Staff             9 Hillside Ave/Prospect Place
dguilderson@hq.ileaf.com             Waltham, MA 02154
617-290-4990-7166                    FAX 617-290-4960

------------------------------

End of SAMBA Digest 549
***********************


------------------------------

End of SAMBA Digest 551
***********************

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]