Re: All emails delivered to either account
From: Vanguardx (see_signature)
Date: 09/21/04
- Next message: trevor: "Folder Views"
- Previous message: Sanjay Singh: "Re: Contact Problems"
- In reply to: Brian Tillman: "Re: All emails delivered to either account"
- Next in thread: Brian Tillman: "Re: All emails delivered to either account"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2004 21:47:37 -0500
"Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com>
wrote in news:%23$$wa$xnEHA.2340@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl:
> Vanguardx <see_signature> wrote:
>
>> As you said, you had to handle big e-mails (that were not download
>> and thus never listed in OE) using a different e-mail client, but
>> that assumes you actually checked your mailbox periodically with
>> that other client because you wouldn't know it was there waiting in
>> your mailbox with OE and when using the "do not download" action in
>> a rule that triggered on that big message.
>
> Well, naturally I checked. Who wouldn't? People who use the "do not
> download" action generally understand its implications for the message
> store.
People "generally understand" something that they are not told (which
was that they will not be informed when there are new messages waiting)?
People "generally understand" something that is hidden from them (both
by no documentation and hiding the status of their mailbox)? Wow! You
must be a genius for knowing everything that you've never been told.
Note that the "do not download" action cannot even be triggered unless
the message headers actually DID get downloaded, so OE is throwing away
the headers that it already downloaded. Nothing got saved for the time
to download the headers or the bandwidth consumed to get them. The
download of headers is so quick that there is no point in not keeping
those that already got download (so you could actually test against them
using your rules AND know the status of your mailbox). Showing you the
headers for a pending message in your mailbox is NOT the same as
downloading the *body* of the message. You cannot avoid downloading the
headers for your messages. Your rules can't do anything without those
headers. Rules that test on the headers, well, obviously they need the
headers. Rules that test against the content of the body are also going
to end up downloading the headers.
Why would anyone *assume* that "do not download" also means "do not tell
me"? You claim users "in general" (which obviates a subset of users
based on some arbitrary minimim expertise level) will just instinctively
know that they need to employ some other e-mail client or interface to
their mailbox whenever they use a "do not download" rule. Not a
believable argument. Our experience of users are worlds apart. Most
users for whom I have handled support requests only use ONE e-mail
client; i.e., in my experience, few users employ more than one e-mail
client, know about or seldom use the webmail interface to their mailbox,
if one is provided, don't know about using telnet or know the POP3
commands, or use concurrent or substitute e-mail programs or monitoring
tools. They just use ONE e-mail client.
-- _________________________________________________________________ ******** Post replies to newsgroup - Share with others ******** Email: lh_811newsATyahooDOTcom and append "=NEWS=" to Subject. _________________________________________________________________
- Next message: trevor: "Folder Views"
- Previous message: Sanjay Singh: "Re: Contact Problems"
- In reply to: Brian Tillman: "Re: All emails delivered to either account"
- Next in thread: Brian Tillman: "Re: All emails delivered to either account"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
