Sorry, but that's a good thing. If the revenue wasn't based on something real to begin with, it should rightly be eliminated. All of this is an expected step in the normalization of a process that has spiraled out of control and become the target for abuse over the past few years. It's frankly about time that Google takes this step.
We had IHateSpam for a few months and wow what a piece of crap that product was. We got BrightMail after that and although it worked very well for us, it (as others have mentioned) gobbled up ridiculous amounts of server resources which made it undesirable for the long term. We've been using Cloudmark Server Edition (http://www.cloudmark.com) for the past 1.5 years and although it allows a few more messages through than BM did, overall it's a better value and much easier on CPU resources. And, there is a client-side add-in which further increases the effectiveness if you choose to employ it.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but that's a good thing. If the revenue wasn't based on something real to begin with, it should rightly be eliminated. All of this is an expected step in the normalization of a process that has spiraled out of control and become the target for abuse over the past few years. It's frankly about time that Google takes this step.
We had IHateSpam for a few months and wow what a piece of crap that product was. We got BrightMail after that and although it worked very well for us, it (as others have mentioned) gobbled up ridiculous amounts of server resources which made it undesirable for the long term. We've been using Cloudmark Server Edition (http://www.cloudmark.com) for the past 1.5 years and although it allows a few more messages through than BM did, overall it's a better value and much easier on CPU resources. And, there is a client-side add-in which further increases the effectiveness if you choose to employ it.