-=> Quoting Stu Turk to Bob Juge <=-
 BJ> Heather James wrote in a message to Bill Shaughnessy:
 
 HJ> Not a valid reason to switch to MAX - good reasons include freeing 
 HJ> up drive space with the Squish message format and being able to 
 HJ> run it under WIN - but Max has its own share of quirks to deal 
 HJ> with ...               ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
 BJ> Those being???
 ST> Does not have the ability to look up node numbers in netmail like
 ST> Opus could.
A stated V7 nodelist limitation, yes.
 ST> Can only use either a area number OR a area name in the file and message
 ST> areas, unlike Opus which could use both (and even multiple area names)
 ST> at the same time.
????  Are you sure of this?  I haven't tried it, but I didn't think it
was a Max limitation.  Also, you failed to mention Max 3.x's hierarchal
message and file "division" ability.
 ST> Opus has better files information in the files database. None of the 
ile
 ST> area managers I've tried for Max come close to what I've been used to
 ST> with Opus-FAM.
As long as you're willing to live with the fact that Opus' file database
is 100% proprietary and completely replaces the FILES.BBS files that 3rd
party utilities need.
 ST> Max 3.0x's changes broke the Xpress offline mail door, which was
 ST> working great with Opus 1.73a. Probably a few others I've forgotten.
Hector hasn't gotten around to porting the Xpress door to Max 3.x yet.
Opus 1.73a broke the previous Opus-specific Xpress door, too, but a
revision was quickly forthcoming.  I wouldn't blame Max for Xpress
shortcomings.
 ST> All minor nits of course, and I do currently run Max.
VERY minor, indeed.  When you weigh Max 3.x's advantages/improvements
over Opus 1.73a's feature set, and the fact that Max has an active author,
Max becomes pretty hard to resist (as I know you will agree)  :-)
Plus, the interface is very familiar  :-)
                                        - Bob
--- Blue Wave/386 v2.30
---------------