Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 12th Apr 2012 08:59 UTC
Internet & Networking I would honestly serve at the altar of the person that did this. Keep the debugging information, but for the love of god, make your email client do something pretty and useful with it.
Thread beginning with comment 513797
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
tupp
Member since:
2006-11-12

This isn't part of the email - the email client parses the error bounce email and turns it into this.

Well that's certainly better for the Internet.

However, it would be more advantageous if people would merely know better than to send such a huge email -- we still have the bandwidth wasted with the original outgoing email, plus the size of the bounce back.

And the world would be much improved in general if people would must use their brains more -- it won't hurt to much to try to read and understand the horrible "machine" response.

Instead of "Think Different," a wiser slogan is "Just... Think."

Edited 2012-04-12 10:15 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

daedalus Member since:
2011-01-14

True, although usually these bouncebacks don't include the original attachments, so the reply should've only been a few KB at most. What I do find interesting is that the limit is something like 34MB - a limit which may have convinced the poster in the past that it *was* ok to be sending uncompressed Photoshop documents as attachments.

I've had to spend considerable time and effort over the phone to various people to explain to them about filesizes, how to find them out for files, and why they are important. In these times of 100Mbit broadband, multithreaded email clients and terabytes of hard drive space, the average user has no need to worry about file sizes in everyday life... Which is fair enough in most cases, but shouldn't mean they end up completely ignorant to it either.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Jon Dough Member since:
2005-11-30

Even the email itself, without attachments, can be made more "bandwidth-friendly" by using plain text. It's rare that I use anything other than plain text to send emails.

Reply Parent Score: 3

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

And the world would be much improved in general if people would must use their brains more -- it won't hurt to much to try to read and understand the horrible "machine" response.


If everyone thought like this, we would be still using DOS.

I cannot fathom why anyone would think that displaying a friendly error is a bad idea.

You are also assuming that someone using the client has a conceptual understanding of how email works, beyond "I create a message and send it".

Whether it is feasible is an entirely differently subject.

Edited 2012-04-12 10:49 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

"differently subject", I suck at Grammar.

Reply Parent Score: 2

tupp Member since:
2006-11-12

And the world would be much improved in general if people would must use their brains more -- it won't hurt to much to try to read and understand the horrible "machine" response.

If everyone thought like this, we would be still using DOS.

That's like saying, "if everyone knew math, we would still be using pen and paper to calculate, instead of calculators or spreadsheets."

No. If people used their brains more, we would probably have greater advancements, and people wouldn't have to schedule an appointment at the "Genius" bar every time they need to have their fly zipped.


I cannot fathom why anyone would think that displaying a friendly error is a bad idea.

Because it uses more resources, and it is unnecessary, if one merely reads the text error.

Also, using a "friendly," interactive, graphical interface in place of something that is easily explained in a brief text message tends to make Johnny stupid and helpless.


You are also assuming that someone using the client has a conceptual understanding of how email works, beyond "I create a message and send it".

Somehow the point was missed. I am not assuming anything -- I am suggesting that we put efforts in to educating people in basic computer literacy and that we encourage people to think.


Whether it is feasible is an entirely differently subject.

Educating people in rudimentary literacy is certainly feasible. Literacy was much greater in the middle of the 20th century (when there were no GUIs).

Likewise, there have been several ages of enlightenment and independent thinking, throughout history.

Edited 2012-04-12 20:39 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4