Spam:****, Re: Re: Any news regarding new generation of WebMail templates

"Surgemail has archiving, which creats essentially
digests of incoming 
and outgoing mail.  The trick is when you are told to
provide all 
communications to and from user 'X' from Jan 1 to June 30,
how do you do 
that?"

within surgemail, you can't. i needed to look at this over a
year ago 
for a customer in the financial industry and i actually
started writing 
a web-based application in perl to do this - reading and
searching a 
surgemail archive, presenting a results list, then giving
the searcher 
the option of downloading a file of the results or viewing
the raw 
emails.  then, the customer told me they found a service
which provided 
regulatory conformant e-mail and archiving, so i abandoned
the project.

i'd submit that the surgemail developers should NOT be
spending their 
time on these types of 'add-ons' but should concentrate on
the mta, 
webmail, etc.

david camm
advanced web systems
keller, tx

Ben Hanson wrote:
> You are absolutely right, of course.  Item 3 is
entirely what I 
> referring to with regards to compliance.  Items 1&2
are simply lumped in 
> by sales, marketing, and those who tend to have the
authority to drive 
> corporate decision making with these things.  My
personal preference is 
> to base decisions around reliability and functionality,
but that doesn't 
> mesh with the other agenda.
> Surgemail has archiving, which creats essentially
digests of incoming 
> and outgoing mail.  The trick is when you are told to
provide all 
> communications to and from user 'X' from Jan 1 to June
30, how do you do 
> that?
> I wish I didn't even have to consider these other
factors; I'm extremely 
> happy with Surgemail, but there is speculation, out of
my hands, based 
> on these other issues, which in my mind all end up with
an annual bill 
> to Microsoft.  That's not where I want to go, both for
reasons of sanity 
> and increased support requirements, and also financial
ramifications.
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Vey wrote:
>> Ben,
>> Perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us how a
"standards compliant" 
>> calendar (is there a written standard for
calendars?), and a less 
>> clunky webmail (I think they are all clunky) would
help with 
>> compliance rules? I am certainly not an expert in
the field of 
>> compliance, but I have been on contract for banks
in the past, so I am 
>> familiar with the concept.
>>
>> From my experience, it seems that whomever is
writing the compliance 
>> rules finds their favorite piece of software, lists
its advantages, 
>> then demands that all other software do what is on
that list. The 
>> favored software disadvantages are always ignored.
>>
>> What ever the favored software does and how it does
it, miraculously 
>> becomes "standard" even though the
procedures may be closed and 
>> proprietary, thus no one will ever be able to use
that "standard."
>>
>> I will agree with you if you mean what I think you
mean when you say 
>> "easily supported restore on demand message
archiving." Archiving has 
>> become very important to government officials in
regulated industries, 
>> to  various courts and even governmental agencies,
but not to the 
>> current White House it seems. Sometimes, an
absolute mirror is run 
>> side-by-side  not just for archiving, but for also
maintenance .  
>> Sometimes, duplicate messages are made on a
different drive that is 
>> rotated out when it is full and put on a shelf as
is -- hard drives 
>> are cheap these days. Are you saying that Surgemail
can't archive 
>> these ways very well? That it can't do either of
these things?
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> Ben Hanson wrote:
>>> As I've noted before, the factors that may
indeed force me in 2008 to 
>>> potentially move away from Surgemail are
>>> 1) Lack of standards compliant Calendar
>>> 2) Clunky webmail
>>> 3) Lack of easily supported restore on demand
message archiving.
>>> Our company may potentially become part of a
public entity soon, and 
>>> various compliance rules are going to make it a
hard sell.  I put 
>>> Surgemail in place due to it's absolutely rock
solid and extensible 
>>> architecture, but those factors mean very
little to the organization 
>>> from a standpoint of Corporate executives and
regulations.  The 
>>> development of these things is going to be
critical in the future. Ben
>>>
>>> Support ChrisP wrote:
>>>> re: new webmail ... it is progressing well
but no eta at this time, 
>>>> we do appreciate how important it is.
>>>>
>>>> re: caldav... we have no immediate plans
for this, but it is on the 
>>>> wish list and your request is definitely
noted.
>>>>
>>>>     ChrisP.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> surgemail-listnetwinsite.com wrote:
>>>>> I agree with this completely, and have
been waiting and hoping for 
>>>>> this future enhancement.  The current
webmail is very outdated 
>>>>> compared to other modern web mail
interfaces.  I also have many 
>>>>> users complain about the speed of web
mail, and when I check it 
>>>>> out, most is due to them having
thousands of messages.  The one web 
>>>>> mail I always say to look at as a model
is Zimbra.  I was VERY 
>>>>> impressed by Zimbra's web mail.
>>>>>
>>>>> The second most requested feature of
mine is a universal way to 
>>>>> access the calendar server.  CalDav
would probably be the best I 
>>>>> see right now.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think Surgemail has the best backend
(SMTP, IMAP, POP) around, 
>>>>> which is why I use it, but really hope
they don't forget about the 
>>>>> webmail and calendar areas. These are
important areas since that is 
>>>>> what the user is exposed to, and where
we get complaints about.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will keep my fingers crossed I see a
new version with an updated 
>>>>> web mail and CalDav support in the near
future 
>>>>> "Adeeb" <adeebkhayal.com> wrote:
>>>>> I have read posts over the past year
that mention that you are 
>>>>> working on new versions of the WebMail
templates that are more 
>>>>> inline with other modern web mail
interfaces (Yahoo, iMail, Gmail, 
>>>>> etc). Is there any news?
>>>>>
>>>>> This remains our customers' biggest
complaint regarding Surgemail. 
>>>>> In particular Look & Feel and very
slow performance with mailboxes 
>>>>> with thousands of messages.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks. 
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
> 

I just accidentally ran across this thread... a FYI on one
of the subject 
matter on this post...

> and outgoing mail.  The trick is when you are told to
provide all 
> communications to and from user 'X' from Jan 1 to June
30, how do you do 
> that?"
>
> within surgemail, you can't. i needed to look at this
over a year ago

The current archive search facility is not ideal but it
should be perfectly 
functional to do the type of queries that you are referring
to. Just press 
the search field next to each archive rule on the archive
definition page 
and it gets you to the tellmail page with a bunch of
information on archive 
searching and extraction.

To see how many messages there are:
tellmail archive_search archive_name dummy_field to=Xmydomain.com from=* 
subject=* range=01/01/2007-30/06/2007
tellmail archive_search archive_name dummy_field to=*
from=Xmydomain.com 
subject=* range=01/01/2007-30/06/2007

Then to extract them:
tellmail archive_extract archive_name resultmydomain.com to=Xmydomain.com 
from=* subject=* range=01/01/2007-30/06/2007
tellmail archive_extract archive_name resultmydomain.com to=* 
from=Xmydomain.com subject=* range=01/01/2007-30/06/2007

and use the imap mail client of your choice - or webmail to
browse the 
messages in question.

Of course you can also issue the above tellmail commands on
the command 
line.

And regarding new webmail. Please let me know what
specifically you are 
looking for in non "Clunky" webmail client. I am
spending all my time on the 
new webmail so any constructive input you provide will
definitely have a 
high chance of getting in and speeding the development
process along.

Marijn

--------------------------------------------------
From: "David Camm" <dcammadvwebsys.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 3:03 AM
To: <surgemail-listnetwinsite.com>
Subject: Spam***,
Spam***, Re:
[SurgeMail List] Re: Any news regarding 
new generation of WebMail templates

> "Surgemail has archiving, which creats essentially
digests of incoming and 
> outgoing mail.  The trick is when you are told to
provide all 
> communications to and from user 'X' from Jan 1 to June
30, how do you do 
> that?"
>
> within surgemail, you can't. i needed to look at this
over a year ago for 
> a customer in the financial industry and i actually
started writing a 
> web-based application in perl to do this - reading and
searching a 
> surgemail archive, presenting a results list, then
giving the searcher the 
> option of downloading a file of the results or viewing
the raw emails. 
> then, the customer told me they found a service which
provided regulatory 
> conformant e-mail and archiving, so i abandoned the
project.
>
> i'd submit that the surgemail developers should NOT be
spending their time 
> on these types of 'add-ons' but should concentrate on
the mta, webmail, 
> etc.
>
> david camm
> advanced web systems
> keller, tx
>
> Ben Hanson wrote:
>> You are absolutely right, of course.  Item 3 is
entirely what I referring 
>> to with regards to compliance.  Items 1&2 are
simply lumped in by sales, 
>> marketing, and those who tend to have the authority
to drive corporate 
>> decision making with these things.  My personal
preference is to base 
>> decisions around reliability and functionality, but
that doesn't mesh 
>> with the other agenda.
>> Surgemail has archiving, which creats essentially
digests of incoming and 
>> outgoing mail.  The trick is when you are told to
provide all 
>> communications to and from user 'X' from Jan 1 to
June 30, how do you do 
>> that?
>> I wish I didn't even have to consider these other
factors; I'm extremely 
>> happy with Surgemail, but there is speculation, out
of my hands, based on 
>> these other issues, which in my mind all end up
with an annual bill to 
>> Microsoft.  That's not where I want to go, both for
reasons of sanity and 
>> increased support requirements, and also financial
ramifications.
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric Vey wrote:
>>> Ben,
>>> Perhaps you could enlighten the rest of us how
a "standards compliant" 
>>> calendar (is there a written standard for
calendars?), and a less clunky 
>>> webmail (I think they are all clunky) would
help with compliance rules? 
>>> I am certainly not an expert in the field of
compliance, but I have been 
>>> on contract for banks in the past, so I am
familiar with the concept.
>>>
>>> From my experience, it seems that whomever is
writing the compliance 
>>> rules finds their favorite piece of software,
lists its advantages, then 
>>> demands that all other software do what is on
that list. The favored 
>>> software disadvantages are always ignored.
>>>
>>> What ever the favored software does and how it
does it, miraculously 
>>> becomes "standard" even though the
procedures may be closed and 
>>> proprietary, thus no one will ever be able to
use that "standard."
>>>
>>> I will agree with you if you mean what I think
you mean when you say 
>>> "easily supported restore on demand
message archiving." Archiving has 
>>> become very important to government officials
in regulated industries, 
>>> to  various courts and even governmental
agencies, but not to the 
>>> current White House it seems. Sometimes, an
absolute mirror is run 
>>> side-by-side  not just for archiving, but for
also maintenance . 
>>> Sometimes, duplicate messages are made on a
different drive that is 
>>> rotated out when it is full and put on a shelf
as is -- hard drives are 
>>> cheap these days. Are you saying that Surgemail
can't archive these ways 
>>> very well? That it can't do either of these
things?
>>>
>>> Eric
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ben Hanson wrote:
>>>> As I've noted before, the factors that may
indeed force me in 2008 to 
>>>> potentially move away from Surgemail are
>>>> 1) Lack of standards compliant Calendar
>>>> 2) Clunky webmail
>>>> 3) Lack of easily supported restore on
demand message archiving.
>>>> Our company may potentially become part of
a public entity soon, and 
>>>> various compliance rules are going to make
it a hard sell.  I put 
>>>> Surgemail in place due to it's absolutely
rock solid and extensible 
>>>> architecture, but those factors mean very
little to the organization 
>>>> from a standpoint of Corporate executives
and regulations.  The 
>>>> development of these things is going to be
critical in the future. Ben
>>>>
>>>> Support ChrisP wrote:
>>>>> re: new webmail ... it is progressing
well but no eta at this time, we 
>>>>> do appreciate how important it is.
>>>>>
>>>>> re: caldav... we have no immediate
plans for this, but it is on the 
>>>>> wish list and your request is
definitely noted.
>>>>>
>>>>>     ChrisP.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> surgemail-listnetwinsite.com wrote:
>>>>>> I agree with this completely, and
have been waiting and hoping for 
>>>>>> this future enhancement.  The
current webmail is very outdated 
>>>>>> compared to other modern web mail
interfaces.  I also have many users 
>>>>>> complain about the speed of web
mail, and when I check it out, most 
>>>>>> is due to them having thousands of
messages.  The one web mail I 
>>>>>> always say to look at as a model is
Zimbra.  I was VERY impressed by 
>>>>>> Zimbra's web mail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The second most requested feature
of mine is a universal way to 
>>>>>> access the calendar server.  CalDav
would probably be the best I see 
>>>>>> right now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think Surgemail has the best
backend (SMTP, IMAP, POP) around, 
>>>>>> which is why I use it, but really
hope they don't forget about the 
>>>>>> webmail and calendar areas. These
are important areas since that is 
>>>>>> what the user is exposed to, and
where we get complaints about.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will keep my fingers crossed I
see a new version with an updated 
>>>>>> web mail and CalDav support in the
near future 
>>>>>> "Adeeb" <adeebkhayal.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I have read posts over the past
year that mention that you are 
>>>>>> working on new versions of the
WebMail templates that are more inline 
>>>>>> with other modern web mail
interfaces (Yahoo, iMail, Gmail, etc). Is 
>>>>>> there any news?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This remains our customers' biggest
complaint regarding Surgemail. In 
>>>>>> particular Look & Feel and very
slow performance with mailboxes with 
>>>>>> thousands of messages.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>