Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!emory!ogicse!cs.uoregon.edu!ns.uoregon.edu!news
From: rhaller@phloem.uoregon.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.comm
Subject: Re: appletalk mail programs
Message-ID: <1991Mar15.190155.27523@ns.uoregon.edu>
Date: 15 Mar 91 19:01:55 GMT
References: <91MAR13.235543@ducvax.auburn.edu>
Sender: news@ns.uoregon.edu
Organization: University of Oregon
Lines: 54

In article <91MAR13.235543@ducvax.auburn.edu> smenzel@ducvax.auburn.edu
(MENZEL_SANDRO) writes:
>-> Heavens, yes! There is a package that's a much better alternative in
>-> MANY ways: QuickMail, from CE Software. Even despite Microsoft's new
>-> version, I feel that QuickMail is the better, more consistent, more
>-> useful product... and it's getting even better with THEIR new
>-> version later this year.
>
>How easily will QuickMail (or any other Mac-based AppleTalk EMail package)
>allow a person to sit down at any machine on the network and send/receive
>mail?
>
>I'm looking for something that will work in a lab situation where a user 
>will have to 'sign' in to a machine to send/receive mail. Anyone have any 
>suggestions/clues?
>
>
>                Sandro
>

There is a serious 'security' problem with QuickMail in that sort of
environment. You can log in to your QM mailbox from any machine that has the
software installed. However, once you have done so, you remain logged in unless
you exit from QM by selecting the "Disconnect" command from the QuickMail menu
(or using command-L). Quitting QM leaves you logged in (this is how QM knows to
tell you when you have new mail automatically). The next person to run QM on
that machine does not go through a login proceedure (unless the machine is
rebooted). Instead, they are taken directly to your mailbox where they can
read, delete, etc., your mail. Also, while it is supposedly possible to install
QM on a floppy based system, it is really meant for machines with a hard disk
(it installs as a DA and current systems are so large that even a stripped down
version with a minimal system is difficult to fit on a single floppy).

If I were you, I would seriously consider using Eudora instead. Most such
installations provide mail service to Eudora via a unix box running a pop
server, but I believe there is a pop server for Macs that runs under MOS (not
AUX). I prefer the Eudora interface (I use both on a daily basis) and it gives
you email access to the Internet world as well. One thing QM does give you that
Eudora does not is a white pages capability for all other QM users. On the
other hand, Eudora is PDS while QM must be purchased. Current cost is something
on the order of $35 a mailbox if you buy a ten pack, and you will need a
separate mailbox for each person, not for each machine. You can install the
software on as many machines as you want, but it will only allow you 'n'
mailboxes.

Is there a downside to Eudora? Well, depending on how people configure their
individual clients, old mail can build up on your unix box (i.e., "leave mail
on server" delivers a copy to the mac without deleting the originals on the pop
server). Unfortunately, the users can't delete it retroactively from Eudora .
They have to log on to a unix account on your pop server and do it that way or
your system administrator has to do it for them. Maybe it is possible to hack
on Eudora to remove the option in question or maybe the author, Steve Dorner
(s-dorner@uiuc.edu), could be persuaded to deal with this problem in a future
release.