On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 07:37:14AM EST, Chris Green wrote: > On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 07:12:05AM -0500, David Yitzchak Cohen wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 03:53:48AM EST, Chris Green wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 22, 2004 at 03:56:33PM -0500, Dave wrote: > > Another possibility is that they're > > more likely to stop using Outlook if they see how many neat features it > > provides to others and how few it provides to them. Most of them aren't > > likely to switch directly to Mutt anyway, but at least they might switch > > to a more standards-friendly GUI MUA. That's the first step on the road > > to Mutt :-) > > > Not a terribly plausible scenario IMHO, they're much more likely to be > annoyed and just go somewhere else. You may well feel that's a good > thing but I don't think that's a very positive way of looking at > things. If they get annoyed and go somewhere else when somebody takes advantage of cool features in their MUAs, they obviously don't have one bit of sense. Good software should provide the dudes who're running it with features, not the people who're SPAMming said dudes. Anybody with half a brain would ditch his email program as soon as he saw how exploitable it was. - Dave -- Uncle Cosmo, why do they call this a word processor? It's simple, Skyler. You've seen what food processors do to food, right? Please visit this link: http://rotter.net/israel
Attachment:
pgpudMTxYLQ5V.pgp
Description: PGP signature