NetNews Offline 2/NetNews Offline Volume 2.iso/news/comp/sys/amiga/networking/58

Text File | 1996-08-05 | 3.9 KB | 87 lines

Path: news-m01.ny.us.ibm.net!usenet
From: [e-mail] (Frederick V. Heitkamp)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.networking
Subject: Re: Best Mail Program for use with SLIP, SMTP, POP, AmiTCP?
Date: 2 Jan 1996 11:09:30 GMT
Organization: Home Site
Distribution: world
Message-ID: <4cb3pa$[e-mail]>
References: <4bu7f9$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4c1gtb$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4c4p6i$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <4c8sgu$[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: slip37-208-106.ibm.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.6

In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail]
says...
>
>Fred Heitkamp ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: John Kelly ([e-mail]) wrote:
>: :
>: :  [e-mail] (Frederick V. Heitkamp) writes:
>: :
>: :  Yes, that is what your mail READER does. It gives you an enjoyable
working
>: : environment for using mail. The *underpinnings* such as UUCP, SMTP etc
are
>: : nasty and unfriendly, but you never have to use those programs manually;
>: : your reader interfaces with them.
>: :
>: I didn't mean to sound "Well Duh!", but I have been frustrated with this
>: sending mail on the Amiga business.  I have used programs on my PC such as
>: Eudora where a requester box pops up when you start.  It asks for your POP
>: mail box and your smtp machine, a few other things, then you're done.
>:
>: I was hoping there was something this easy on the Amiga.  What is
>: the problem?  No defined TCP/IP interface? I mean, the Amiga has a fairly
>: full featured OS and GUI.  You'd think it would not be a problem.
>
>The TCP/IP interface is of course defined. The problems arise because there
>are so many different methods available to transfer news and mail. Some
>programs (e.g. THOR) try to integrate lots of these different methods into
one
>package, which is probably a good thing if you are just starting out and
need
>an easy, integrated way of doing things. The downside is that there are lots
>of features in there which no single user is ever going to use (all the BBS
>stuff, for example, if you are mainly using Internet e-mail). The downside
for

I don't care much about BBS's.  Maybe the Thor author should split his
package into BBS and none BBS versions.  Or perhaps make it an install
option.

>the _programmers_ is that they have to spend a lot of time getting all these
>various transfer methods working properly.
>
>Voodoo, on the other hand, concentrates on one thing - producing a nice
>environment to read and reply to your mail. By leaving all the other parts
of
>the process to other programmers, the author can devote all his time to just
>this one task. This produces a lean program, and removes the need for
>including (and spending time developing, which is important) functions which
>you (the user) are never going to use. The downside for the user is that he
>has to configure all these external programs himself, and although the
Voodoo
>docs give extensive details on how to do this, new, inexperienced users
might
>be scared off. If, like many people, you have SMTPPost/SMTPd/AmiPOP set up
>_already_, and were using some other reader program before, you don't have
to
>worry about it - you just plug the necessary commands into the program
>settings.
>
I got Voodoo to send mail yesterday afternoon.  It didn't seem to be reading
mail from my POP account correctly though.  I am confused about the Mail Box
text gadget on AmiPOP.  Is that the mail box on the POP server or a mail box
on my machine?  The previous time I tried AmiPOP, I had "None Given" in the
box and it seemed to work.  Now it didn't seem to.

>In the end, which you choose is up to your personal taste, your existing
>setup, and your ability to set new programs up. YMMV
>
I hear you.

Fred Heitkamp