From: jjmckay@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jim McKay)
Subject: Re: QM vs Eudora/POP (was Re: QM vs MS Mail)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:04:46 GMT

sdorner@qualcomm.com (Steve Dorner) writes:

>In article <C01IK5.64A@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, jjmckay@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jim
>McKay) wrote:

>> *  Eudora is a solid and well-crafted piece of programming. 

>Thanks for the vote of confidence; from my vantage point things don't
>always look so good.  :-)

The artist is always his own biggest critic.  Steve--such the perfectionist.
> 
>> *  Addressing in Eudora tends to rely more heavily on textual input 
>> while QuickMail tends to rely more heavily on graphical, point and click 
>> addressing schemes.

>Dunno.  Eudora has menus from which mail can be generated, and a Nicknames
>window (in 1.3) from which mail can also be generated, no typing necessary.
> Finally, the "Make Nickname" command (also in 1.3) lets you make new
>nicknames with a minimum of fuss.

>It's my understanding that it's (somewhat) awkward to address mail to
>someone not already on a QM menu.  

It may not be as easy as typing in the "To:" field like one can with Eudora.
It's just not straight forward for a Mac app, though not diificult once 
one knows how.

>> *  QuickMail has a NameServer database that is easily editable to include names 
>> and address both on and off campus.

>How many names?

Supposedly unlimited.  Of course I've personally never tested that so I can 
just say that about 200 users works fine and with quick service.  Argonne
National Lab has one of the largest QuickMail systems I know of and would 
guess they have quite a few more users than that on their QM "Nameserver",
geussing at least 500.

>> *  With a POP3 Server/Eudora solution, one needs to be the administrator of the 
>> POP3 server in order to have control and customize it's nameserver.

>You mean you need to be administrator of the 'ph' server, don't you?

Indeed I do mean "ph" in the case of a POP mail server while on QM, the 
equivalent of ph, including off site internet address added by the QM
administrator is part of the QM Nameserver.

>> *  QuickMail users can search the NameServer database by just typing a 
>> few characters of part of the name.

>You can do this with Eudora nicknames.

Yes, but it is handled a little differently and to some is not quite as
intuitive.

>Once again, a feature that's nice for a LAN, irrelevant for an internet.

Seen this used once where someone sent out an erroneous message to about 180
folks.  The lmail was "Unsent" before it was sent through the SMTP gateway.

>> *  QuickMail's Mail Log of outgoing messages resides in the same window 
>> as the active mail.  Eudora requires one to go to the Mailbox menu and 
>> select and open various mailboxes/folders.

>On the other hand, I do not believe QuickMail has the same organizational
>capability for mail that Eudora does.

QuickMail's folder organization is similar in that users can create and 
organize into as many folders as they like; yet they cannnot (to the best 
of knowledge) organize into subfolders as one can in Eudora.  How much 
nesting and "foldering" one needs is one individual consideration. 

>> *  QuickMail has Voice Mail capabilities.  Eudora does not.

>Personally, I'm not sure voice mail is a plus, but that's a whole different
>story. :-)

Exactly.  For one thing, I personally find it to be a novelty for most 
people's needs at this point in practical computing history.  Also it takes
up a lot of disk space and a lot of users feel awkward getting audible mail
due to privacy and the attention it draws to a user in an office environment.
It's a social context most folk aren't used to. 

>> *  QuickMail has a conferencing feature.

>On the local LAN, right?

Exactly.  Sorry to vague about that.

>> *  An option to send QM messages to pagers will shortly be available from 
>> a third party.

>Qualcomm does this now with Internet mail.

>I think the choice between Eudora and QuickMail boils down to a few things:

>1. What percentage of mail is exchanged with the world outside your LAN? 
>The bigger the percentage, the less attractive QM's features are.
>2. Do you now run a UNIX or other mainframe-type operating system?  If the
>answer is no, Eudora is much less appetizing.

On one site, the co-admisitrator of the QM mail system could never deal 
with UNIX.

>3. How many users will you have to support?  The bigger the number, the
>more likely you want Eudora.

>4. How much money do you want to spend?  (This used to be a clear win for
>Eudora, since Eudora is free.  However, now that Apple charges a LOT for
>MacTCP, you have the same trade-off as for the other things; QM is better
>(cheaper) for a small number, Eudora is better (cheaper) for a large
>number, or a site already with MacTCP.)

Speaking of dollars there's also the issue of the cost of a Mac mail host 
versus a Unix host.  And yes, Eudora is free now but someday...

At the same time, I feel QuickMail (and MS Mail and cc:Mail) are overpriced.

>Which really all are the same question:  Are you more interested in your
>LAN or the Internet?

>(I don't mean that as a rhetorical question; rather, it's a very practical
>question, that different people will answer in different ways.)
>--
>Steve Dorner, Qualcomm, Inc.

A couple of additional issues:

CE is working on a Netware based QM host.  But I wouldn't plan on it until it
is released. 

It is extremely awkward to run QuickMail on a PC that also needs to 
run other protocols besides AppleTalk.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.comm