The OS/2 hoopla.

[Darin McBride]

On Tue, 19 Oct 1999 14:12:10 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:

>    The problem is people are holding BSW to Southsoft's promises and
>disregarding the fact that Southsoft may or may not have been working on those
>promises before handing it over to BSW.  People just do not have the facts yet
>they are expressing disappointment *in BSW* because of it.

My impression, and it may be somewhat (or completely) off base here, is
that people have expressed disappointment in *PMMail*, *regardless* of
its owner.

Further, when one company purchases a debt-loaded company, the first
company *does* assume all debts and obligations of the second.

Arguably, we should be kinder to shareware providers.  However, our
hopes were higher based on the statements (or perceived statements) of
the (accepted) authority: who we thought the owners were.  When these
obligations were not fulfilled to our expectations by the new owners,
we feel, rightfully, IMO, disappointed.  Like I said - a new company
*does* assume all debts and obligations of the old company unless the
old company passed through bankruptcy first (when special rules come
into play about how much of the old debts/obligations are assumed). 
This was not a bankruptcy firesale...

Don't get me wrong - I'm not unthankful that someone who may have more
time for this project has taken it over.  But I am very understanding
of the hopes and expectations.

For me, PMMail works great.  But I do wish it could encrypt my
attachments when I ask it to... (I'm MS-free - so this is for PMMail/2,
obviously.)  This was on the list of requests, and ... slight
disappointment that it's not there yet.