Hello, I really don't see how Spamassassin is not "up to par", considering many high end Net App's use Spamassassin and promote corporate level products that include it. Maybe it needs to be configured correctly?
In fact, I don't think I've seen any real rival to Spamassassin - except, maybe, for DSPAM (but I've never used it) - And I don't see how that is going to be any "easier to drive" than Spamassassin. The only good Spam tagging applications for Windows all seem to have Spamassassin inside them somewhere. None of my users know how to use Spamassassin, in fact, none of my co-workers do either. I wouldn't even pretend to try and get them to do anything to it, apart from send Missed Spam back for Bayes training. If it is other Admins you're giving the product to, and they don't/can't understand it, then they shouldn't be running it. "no clue how to use it and what it's designed to do" - sounds like they need some education, these naïve people that you give Spamassassin to. Cheers, Mike -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 12 September 2008 5:12 a.m. To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: MagicSpam Does anybody have any experience with this product? My company wants to replace SpamAssassin with this product, due to SpamAssassin being not being up to par other products. My argument is that people we give SpamAssassin to have no clue how to use it and what it's designed to do, therefore they think it sucks.
