4 ms·
This isn’t universally true, although your broader point (it could change at any time!) is a risk. As a data point, I have run my own email servers for years.
by edmundsauto 5y ago
This isn’t universally true, although your broader point (it could change at any time!) is a risk.
As a data point, I have run my own email servers for years. Both professionally (couple million transactional emails per year) and for my personal.
If you follow best practices (which is a pain to setup!), deliver ability is generally on par with other providers, unless you got unlucky and got a bad IP.
- dqv 5y agoMailinabox is a great package that makes the best practices very easy. I always recommend it or similar packages.
- mcbishop 5y agoThis looks awesome, thanks.
- fiddlerwoaroof 5y agoThis is my experience too: there are a couple providers that are more difficult (Verizon, iirc), but I’ve never found a personal email server much of a hassle to maintain.
- boplicity 5y agoI run my own email server, and have for many years. More recently, Verizon/Aol/Yahoo have been a pain in the butt for our larger email lists, even though we run a very clean operation. Still, our deliverability is, on the whole, better than through the much more expensive providers, such as Mailchimp.
- jesterson 5y agoI second that. Around 10 years ago it did consumed some time to set up everything, but since then I didn't touch it at all. Much better and more flexible than any proprietary mail system.
- _blu 5y agoI've recently given up on running my own email server and changed to postmark. The deliverability has gone up, but most importantly I spend less time managing it.
- boplicity 5y agoPostmark would cost us around $10k a year. I spend maybe 10 to 20 hours in a year dealing with the server and deliverability issues. It's not clear to me that Postmark could improve our deliverability much either, as it is already pretty good. How much did it improve for you?