Both do a very good job.
Brightmail is commercial software, and is sold with a contract that automatically updates it, often. Many customers are more comfortable with this approach than they are with open source software, like SA.
Brighmail is now owned by the Symantic folk, and also can be purchased with full integration with their virus scanning package.
Personally, I use SA on my system, for my wife's company. I had some difficulty getting everything installed, compiled, and integrated, but once it's in, it works very, very well, here.
Brightmail indeed seems to live up to their claims for effectiveness and performance. SA may be somewhat lower in performance, but I can't claim to have benchmarked it. Since SA depends on outside resources for some tests, it must be slower at least at times, while Brightmail simply updates an internal database to refer to.
jay
Gray, Richard wrote:
Brightmail seems to be getting a lot of good press on the SPAM front.
So I'm wondering, why do people running large mail systems choose SA over corporate offerings. Is it cost? Is it configurability, or performance?
Can anyone shed any light on how Brightmail achieves the rather impressive statistics it is quoting, or do you think it is just smoke and mirrors?
Is it possible to reproduce the other features without spending the cash?
---------------------------------------------------
This email from dns has been validated by dnsMSS Managed Email Security and is free from all known viruses.
For further information contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
