On 2/16/05 12:23 PM, Allen Watson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The "untrainable" nature of the filter may seem restrictive or > short-sighted, but actually it makes sense. If I as an individual > train my filter, I will always be getting newly spawned spam that > sneaks past the filter. Microsoft's crew, on the other hand, is > sieving the Internet deliberately looking for spam and updating the > filter to prevent it from ever reaching me. I might sift through > hundreds of spams, but they will process and prohibit thousands. The > only drawback I can see is that my filter gets updated every few > months instead of every day.
The Junk Mail Filter in Entourage 2004 has been updated once (in January 2005) since its release on May 19, 2004. For those that prefer to receive the same spam for eight months straight, that might be fine. I prefer to not receive the spam that Entourage misses, and SpamSieve is my solution. Checking SpamSieve's statistics, I can see that it has captured 382 spam messages since 1/1/05 that Entourage missed, despite the Junk E-Mail Filter being set to High. During that same time, SpamSieve has only missed 3. That's not what I'd call "always getting newly spawned spam." Due to the disparities in those two stats, I fail to see how Entourage's non-trainable nature makes sense. Eddie Hargreaves -- To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> archives: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.letterrip.com/> old-archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
