Re: For your Information Lotus CC:-mail X.500 plans Fri, 13 November 1992 18:31 UTC

Received: by (5.65/1123-1.0) id AA18578; Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:31:02 -0500
Received: from [] by (5.65/1123-1.0) id AA18570; Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:30:45 -0500
Received: by (5.59/25-eef) id AA08226; Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:19:39 EST
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 13:19:39 EST
Message-Id: <>
Subject: Re: For your Information Lotus CC:-mail X.500 plans
Cc: disi,

I am so sick and tried of CC:Mail claiming some kind of x.500 directory
This is only a trick, if one was to even entertain the idea that 
cc:mail has x.500, I am sure profs could make the same claim based
on the ability to make nicknames. If I were in management I would be
on the phone to lotus right now, because I would not know the difference
between what Lotus is trying to pawn off as x.500 and what I believe
I am using/trying to use ( quipu ) now. 
Let me be honest CC:mail is basically a DOS/Windows software development
company. they same they want to be conformanant to the standards and
so does ibm. the problem i believe is they want to be conformant to
their own standards. X.500 and X.400 for these vendors is a great 
big pain in the ASN.1. I believe by putting out messages of so called
x.500 like systems simply detracts from the real work which is going on
I apologized for the tone of this note if it makes it to you.
I am just angry since it seams that every vendor including retix
that is trying to get access to the dos world is trying sell
an x.500 like system.

Stop trying to make x.500 like systems and implement x.500 systems
or at least use or provide access to quipu or retix's oem x.500

If people don't like isode or retix will respond to commercial pressure

thank you
raymond jacob