Re: [guinevere-discuss] GWAVA dropping Guinevere

[Clay Davis <cd...@avionics-specialties.com>]

Has anyone thrown this to the SA wolves... I mean group, to get their
opnion?  (get ready to duck!)
Clay

>>> On 1/25/2007 at 9:49 AM, in message
<45...@hfcc.net>, "Joe Zitnik" <jz...@hfcc.net>
wrote:
Well, I'm going to bite my tongue on this until I hear something else. 
Every time I've used this platform as a bitch-fest, I've upset someone.
What I will say is that with some additional tweaks to my Guin
configuration in the last month, I haven't received a single spam e-mail
in almost a week for the first time in years.  Pretty amazing for
technology that's unable to keep up with the spammers.

>>> On 1/25/2007 at 9:26 AM, "Dan Abernathy"
<da...@claytoncorp.com> wrote:

I received an email from a sales rep letting me know that Guinevere
licensing is coming up for renewal. I replied back and asked about their
timetable for a new release, this was the response from Davin Cooke.
Apologies if this is old news, I hadn't heard about it.

 
Hi Dan
 
Thanks for your email..  We are proud to support Guinevere and and its
effectiveness at anti-Spam..  but sadly Spam is growing faster than
Spamassassin and RBL's can keep up with.  We will unlikely be releasing
a newer version of Guinevere in the near future as we have re-thought
our spam blocking approach in favor of scanning and allowing only good
mail to come through.  This is we believe a better and long lasting
approach.  Guinevere leverages some older Spam Blocking technology that
works still to this day but will not in the future..  Here's an article
that better explains this http://www.gwavanation.com/node/221 (
http://www.gwavanation.com/node/221 ) 
 
GWAVA 4 is a good alternative but costs more money..  We also have
GWAVIX that leverages some of the older technology a little better than
Spam Assassin...
 
Our Tech Support Dept is more than willing to help you tweak Guinevere
to make it better as well.. Let me know if you would like to discuss
some alternatives.

Re: [guinevere-discuss] GWAVA dropping Guinevere

[Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>]

Clay Davis wrote:
> Has anyone thrown this to the SA wolves... I mean group, to get their
> opnion?  (get ready to duck!)
> Clay
Disclaimer: I'm just a community member, and really don't care about
Guinevere or GWAVA, nor do I know much about either.

Their statements about accuracy make me laugh. Really, it sounds like
they're dropping the SA based product to increase sales of their
in-house engines.

Reading the article, their "spam 2.0" solution sounds like a
re-arrangement of how SA works with bayes. Of course the article isn't
technical enough to know for sure, but it sounds like they're using a SA
style rule-based autolearner to train a bayes system, but when it comes
time to score mail they use the bayes only.

How this is any kind of radical departure from SA's existing
autolearning ability is beyond me. Unless they've found some form of
learning categorizer that works better than bayes, I think they'll
eventually find there's a good reason SA uses both static rules and
bayes. Bayes alone causes lag in adapting to new spam trends.