[X4U] Damn Comcast

[Robert MacLeay]

What we need is viable alternative to Comcast.

Along with just about everyone else, my email and web service have been
seriously sub-par for months now. About one in five attempts to log in to my
three mail services fails ("cannot connect to the server")

I have been using port 587 on all my accounts for over a year.
I switched to openDNS weeks ago when my email and web page loading began to
slow down. Didn't help much.

Today, I received a form letter (Comcast Customer Security Assurance Notice)
with return address <abuse-noreply at comcast.net> telling me that "Comcast has
determined that your computer(s) have been used to send unsolicited email
("spam"), which is generally an indicator of a virus. For your own
protection and that of other Comcast customers, we have taken steps to
prevent further transmission of spam from your computer(s)."

Yeahrightsure.

"This can be done by using the FREE McAfee Antivirus and Firewall software"
for PeeCee only. Thanks heaps.

"If you are using a third-party client other than Outlook Express (Outlook,
Eudora, Thunderbird, etc.), please click here for instructions."

I followed their link to instructions. All I could find was instructions for
"Macmail" and Entourage X. Not Entourage 2008. Not Entourage 2004. An
8-year-old Microsoft mail client. Their version of Mail is obsolete as well.

The instructions had the basic data I needed, however. And I checked every
single mail account and the settings were already set to what Comcast asked
for.

I went to Comcast's Help page and chose the "Send us an Email" option. I
typed in a question asking them WTF they were talking about, and adding a
harsh criticism regarding their timeliness in updating their help pages.
Only then did I notice there was no SEND button...

BTW, Security Conscious Comcast does not appear to support SSL for mail.

All this for $600 a year.


On Wed, 08 Oct 2008 07:21:27 -0700, "Gene Steinberg" <gene at macnightowl.com>
wrote:

>> On 10/8/08 6:39 AM, "Robert Ameeti" <robert at ameeti.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Because it is not a universal fix. Port 587 is sometimes also
>>> blocked. Each port is blocked as they see fit. Each remote
>>> destination SMTP server may or may not be allowed depending on the
>>> desire of the admin at the local ISPs office.
>>> -- 
>>
>> Well, we need some standards, clearly. :)
>> 
>> Peace,
>> Gene