[EMAIL PROTECTED] tapped out this message on 1/24/2003 3:14 PM >Just curious... has anyone that has had these problems with AT&T verified >that in fact their servers ONLY work with OE, or rather they just only >offer "support" for OE.
That's their claim: we can use any POP client we want, so long as we don't need support which we did not before. The only one that does not give me an error is OE, and like I said, if you can show me how to import 100 domains/addresses into that like you can with address books, I'll move to it....but until then, I can't. >There is a HUGE difference. It might be illegal to deliberatly make sure >that your systems only WORK with one product. But last I knew, there is >nothing illegal about only offering support for one product. Well, where does support begin and end? If we can prove they did something to their servers that changed the way our client connects, then the only way it can be fixed is on their end. Otherwise it is forcing us to use OE. Which as I said, is the only one that works right now for me. (Who knows, maybe that abominable mail.app thing works, but I don't have time to mess with it and it won't pick up AOL) >Last I knew, AT&T was only limiting "support" to OE, but in fact was >actively attempting to find out why Eudora wasn't working correctly, >which shows that they are not limiting their servers to only "work" with >OE. Only because there have been tons of complaints on the BBS (which isn't working right now) from PC users who like Eudora. >Also, there has yet to be anything sent back to this list in the way of >stream logs for POP sessions that might help show why Emailer has a hard >time collecting email from AT&T. I thought we determined that it was the send not being recognized? Or the domain not being used with smtp verbiage? I failed at doing this because I couldn't figure it out. Hell I'm just a stupid web designer not a geek. :-) >Although, there IS a ton of info on AT&T's web site that implies why >Emailer can't do it... simply because Emailer doesn't support SSL >connections. Aha, and where is that? Their site is so slow, even on cable. > Again, this isn't illegal, it isn't AT&T's problem if OE is >the only email client that supports a public secure transmission standard >(BTW: OE is NOT the only client that supports SSL) I wish I could find one that did but again, it's the AOL issue that keeps so man of us with Emailer, as well as the import accounts option being nil in my case with 100 bloody domains to manage.. >And as for the Network Stream error incorrectly being reported by >Emailer... this isn't entirely AT&T's fault. Yes, their servers are >disconnecting without giving a final ack... but Emailer really should >know not to report that as an error. OE apparently knows not to report it >as an error, as I'm sure other email clients do as well (if I was writing >an email client, and I found mine was reporting this as an error, I would >fix it on MY client, and not bother trying to get the ISP to change what >they are doing wrong.) I am not sure why Mediaone was not using SSL before AT & T came along? They were pretty good and everything worked flawlessly.. >I'm sorry, currently, I haven't seen any significant evidence that >indicates AT&T has done anything wrong. The only thing they seem to be >guilty of is having poor server software, and having made the business >decision to limit their tech support costs by only offering support for >one free multi-platform email client. Nothing illegal in my opinion, but >then, I'm not a lawyer, so what do I know. So you think their server can't accept other connections if configured to accept SSL? I don't know how that works but it would seem to me..............there would be backward compatibility seeing so many PCs out there are so old and using W 95 ___________________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe send a mail message with a SUBJECT line of "unsubscribe" to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
