<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>diginc &#187; SpamBayes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://diginc.us/tag/spambayes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://diginc.us</link>
	<description>\'dij-iŋk\</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Jun 2010 20:17:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Spamato vs SpamBayes [Win7]</title>
		<link>http://diginc.us/2009/10/spamato-vs-spambayes-win7/</link>
		<comments>http://diginc.us/2009/10/spamato-vs-spambayes-win7/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2009 20:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>diginc</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Outlook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spamato]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SpamBayes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://diginc.us/?p=132</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Which spam prevention product wins: SpamBayes vs Spamato? SpamBayes is the clear winner in my mind. I used Spamato with my outlook 2007 first and recently switched to Spambayes because Spamato simply wouldn&#8217;t work with Windows 7 even after going &#8230; <a href="http://diginc.us/2009/10/spamato-vs-spambayes-win7/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Which spam prevention product wins: <a href="http://spambayes.sourceforge.net/">SpamBayes</a> vs <a href="www.spamato.net">Spamato</a>?  SpamBayes is the clear winner in my mind.</p>
<p>I used Spamato with my outlook 2007 first and recently switched to Spambayes because Spamato simply wouldn&#8217;t work with Windows 7 even after going through an enormous hassle of <a href="http://saranspot.blogspot.com/2009/02/installing-dotnet-framework-11-on.html">hacking Microsoft&#8217;s .NET Framework 1.1 installer</a> to get it to install in Windows 7.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m really glad I switched, SpamBayes has amazing accuracy when trained with your Spam/Ham folders.  It even has a &#8216;Junk Suspects&#8217; folder which has caught all (1 or 2) my ham messages which is mistook for spam.  I don&#8217;t think any Ham has ended up in the Junk folder unless it was an automated mail/newsletter and those quickly stopped going to junk after useing the &#8216;recovering from spam&#8217; toolbar button to improve training.</p>
<p>I used Spamato for more than a year and it works fairly well, I liked it and recommended it to others.  Every time I recommended it to a non technical person I cringed a little bit after remembering the fact that it requires a couple, not so simple to explain over the phone, prerequisites.</p>
<p>The finite accuracy seems better in SpamBayes and the installation is definitely a hell of a lot easier than Spamato.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://diginc.us/2009/10/spamato-vs-spambayes-win7/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
