Re: What DO you lose with Linux ???
Steve Lamb:
> > Ooooohhhhhh... You mean make it easy for idiot users to send large
> > attachments through a medium that wasn't designed for it, shouldn't be
> > used in that manner, and causes more problems than is needed with each
> > step of the way.
> > If I were to do it I'd have the email client teach them how to send a
> > $#@^%$#@^%$# URL.
Hamish Moffatt:
> Wrong solution. Users should not have to adapt to technology (within
> reason); the technology should allow users to send huge email attachments
> if they need to. Otherwise it should be fixed.
The operative word being `need to'. It'd be a very good feature indeed if
the e-mail client checked the size of the message and said, when
appropriate, something along the lines of "this is an unusually large
message by Internet standards; are you sure? (y/N)" and popped up a wizard
for other ways of transferring the file.
It's one thing to send Christmas gifs to people that are a couple of
hundred bytes long; it's quite a different story when it's a huge,
uncompressed bitmap which does exactly the same job. Sadly, in most e-mail
clients either would be just a filename, with no immediate indication of
how big it really is.
Jiri
--
<jiri@baum.com.au>
We'll know the future has arrived when every mailer transparently
quotes lines that begin with "From ", but no-one remembers why.
Reply to: