Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(January 1997)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Re[2]: PGP attachments (WAS: Re: funky list processors)
From: "Nathan J. Mehl" <nmehl @ leftbank . com>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:09:57 -0500 (EST)
To: brad @ his . com (Brad Knowles)
Cc: brian @ ilinx . com, martin @ mrrl . lut . ac . uk, list-managers @ GreatCircle . COM
In-reply-to: <v0300780daf0582348a90@[205.177.25.174]> from "Brad Knowles" at Jan 17, 97 02:41:51 pm

In the immortal words of Brad Knowles:

> 		1.  PGP has too large an installed base.  S/MIME simply
> cannot go from zero to millions of users fast enough to overtake this
> base before the PGP target moves again.

Not even if one or more of AOL, Netscape or Qualcomm adopted it? :)

You're probably right, mind you, but it's worth remembering that
mail "standards" are kinda transient these days.  Netscape's move
to IMAP4 strikes me as a relevant example...

-n

--
Don't blame me -- I voted for the Unabomber!
Nathan J. Mehl -- The Left Bank Operation 
(work) nmehl@leftbank.com -- http://www.leftbank.com   
(play) memory@blank.org   -- http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nmehl/


References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: threading list archives
From: Bonnie Scott <bonnie@staff.prodigy.com>
Next: Re: Netcom's dynamically changing addresses
From: "Michael C. Berch" <mcb@postmodern.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Re[2]: PGP attachments (WAS: Re: funky list processors)
From: Martin Hamilton <martin@mrrl.lut.ac.uk>
Next: Re[4]: PGP attachments (WAS: Re: funky list processors)
From: Brad Knowles <brad@his.com>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com