09 Dec 97 13:13, Kim Lykkegaard (2:235/203.26) wrote to Colin Stewart:

 > Well.... I did look at it, but sort of dropt it again.... I didn't
 > thourth it was so importen - on a personal level, I have never be abel
 > to se thy JAM is better what squish.... But I will think about it
 > again.

About the only thing I found that the JAM format was quicker at than Squish
was MSGID/REPLY threading, which is only relevant during mail processing.

Still, the JAM format is very popular, thanks to RemoteAccess and Proboard,
and other readers like timEd and GoldED.  JAM support would be good to see.

-- randy{at}zws.com

--- Msged/386 4.20 beta 4