Re: OT: Possible Entourage e-mail client problem

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: Jeff Wiseman (abuse_at_127.0.0.1)
Date: 03/19/05 

Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2005 12:59:19 -0600

Paul Berkowitz wrote:
> Good catch, John. I never noticed that.
>
> Actually, it makes no difference which view (Preview Pane, i.e. 3-pane view,
> or separate message window). The difference is whether you click "Reply to
> All" (or same in Message menu) - meaning Reply to Newsgroup and also CC
> sender - or do Reply to Sender in Message menu - meaning email only. In the
> first case, the cc email does go to the Reply-To header entry. In the second
> case, it goes to the From.
>
> That's a BUG. I'll report it, but MacBU is known for not being too active to
> fix news-only bugs since news is a very low "convenience" priority.

Exactly. I prefer the term FAULT, since that is far more
descriptive of what it really is. "Bug" is a cute term that tends
to play down the fact that the software company is selling broken
software and expecting to get big bucks for it. This is because
in the software profession, a "bug" is usually a coding error.
Logical or feature level faults are far more serious (and usually
involve more systems level failures in specifying requirements IMHO).

I've done a little research and I've found that this fault goes
back to at least summer 2001 where I've found other complaints on
line about this.

> In email, clicking Reply will send the reply to the Reply-To header entry,
> as it should. It's a mistake that Reply to Sender in news (a special
> feature, to be sure, but still...) does not work the same way, even though
> Reply to All does. I'm sure this was an oversight, not intentional.

All bugs are oversights. Intentional "bugs" are usually grouped
in the same catagory as viruses and worms. The problem is why the
oversight occured and why it has been around so long. Incompetent
systems definition, Bad corporate testing policies, inexperienced
programmers being left to "define all the rules" are all reasons.
The fact is, a functional flaw as basic as this should never
appear in any product.

All just IMHO of course. 

-- 
Jeff Wiseman
to reply, just remove ALLTHESPAM

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Every software defect should be able to reproduce??
    ... > bug cannot be reproduced every single time for the same input, ... distinguishes between the notions of 'fault' and 'defect'. ... write problem where heap memory is trashed by an out-of-bounds write. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: [Full-disclosure] 0-day PDF exploit
    ... scenario where this bug is actually useful, ... The first fault is Adobe's. ... Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html ... Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ ...
    (Full-Disclosure)
  • Re: Fix for sparc64 cpu hangs.
    ... [FUTEX]: Fix address computation in compat code. ... would lock up a cpu looping forever in the fault handling for the ... Compat userspace runs with address masking (wherein the cpu zeros out ... Because of this compat futex layer bug we get into the following loop ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Ada noob here! Is Ada widely used?
    ... I.e. you have a certain probability of fault (due ... to physical processes involved in production and function of the given ... On the contrary, a software fault is not stochastic, ... Whether the bug is encountered is sometimes stochastic. ...
    (comp.lang.ada)
  • Re: crashme fault
    ... I'm really starting to suspect some early EM64T bug, ... the CPU claimed it was a user access or not, ... where some complex fault ...
    (Linux-Kernel)