Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!uunet!intercon!news
From: kdb@macaw.intercon.com (Kurt Baumann)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.comm
Subject: Re: UUCP for the mac? (was Re: Letter to Unix Today )
Message-ID: <27039301.E05@intercon.com>
Date: 28 Sep 90 18:14:25 GMT
References: <1990Sep25.074105.12875@chinet.chi.il.us> <1990Sep27.014419.4169@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <27025972.5B6@intercon.com> <1990Sep28.150025.11854@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>
Sender: usenet@intercon.com (USENET The Magnificent)
Reply-To: kdb@macaw.intercon.com (Kurt Baumann)
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation, Herndon, VA
Lines: 19

In article <1990Sep28.150025.11854@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>,
mha@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Mark H. Anbinder) writes:
> Saying that all
> that's involved is "writing some forms and a gateway for QM" demeans the
> efforts of the programmers and designers by implying that this did not
> involve significant effort.

Please read again what I said.  It was simply that writing a MailGateway
for QM is not the level of effort of writing a complete UUCP connectivity
application for the Mac.  You are doing very little user interface with the
MailGateway, on the other hand there was most likly a large effort put into
the UI of the UUCP application that is being sold commercially.  They are
not the same effort.  As I also said that was not to put down the level of
effort for the MailGateway.

--
Kurt Baumann                       InterCon Systems Corporation
703.709.9890                      Creators of fine TCP/IP products
703.709.9896 FAX               for the Macintosh.