|
> -----Original Message----- > From: pctech-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx / Mike Wills > Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 11:45 AM > > I find the spam filtering in Thunderbird doesn't learn as fast or is > as good as SpamBayes for Outlook. Spambayes is by far the best spam > filter I have used. The I am still trying to teach Thunderbird about > some spam, and I have been using Thunderbird for months. But overall > it catches a good portion of the spam. Do you have a link for SpamBayes? Price? > Outlook 2003 (supposively) has Bayesian filtering, but I don't like > the interface they have in Outlook, it is too clunky. To date at work, > I am using a combination of 3 spam filters. The first is the corporate > Barracuda, then Outlooks spam filter, then as the catch all, I am > using the SpamBayes plugin. I haven't seen a spam in my inbox for a > very long time. How do you know if you're missing any good emails (fales positives?) that the Barracuda filters out? I presume the other two can at least move any "junk" to another folder so you can review? tia, db
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.