...are still the "Customer Reviews" of just about anything by Bil Keane. For example, check out The Family Circus by Request, which was reviewed just this past August.
Some days, I really miss the DFC. These Amazon reviews kinda help.:-)
"People misuse Perl too--if you can call spammers people. Perl is the language of choice for network abuse. That doesn't mean Perl isn't a net win for the world."
From the classic old joke list "How To Shoot Yourself In The Foot" in various programming languages and computing environments, here's the entry for Unix:
% ls
foot.c foot.h foot.o toe.c toe.o
% rm *.o
rm:.o: No such file or directory
% ls
%
Ok, so maybe the annoying TNEF attachment isn't quite as evil as this article leads you to believe. Outlook 2000 has more than enough other problems to be heckled for.
My favorite example is what it does when parsing an RFC 822 From: field - it more or less ignores the spec, and tries to make it's own best guess about what an address looks like. Try this (probably requires a bit of SMTP wizardry - don't try this at home, kids): send mail to an Outlook 2000 user with the following header:
From: Elvis (TheKing@RockAndRoll.com) <Elvis@Graceland.org>
When you reply to this email, what address should the reply go to? TheKing@RockAndRoll.com? No, that's a comment, according to the spec - but Outlook 98 will pick it anyway.
At least Outlook 98 makes a choice, though. Outlook 2000 can't make up it's mind, so, in a classic burst of programming ingenuity, it glues the two addresses together. That's right, your reply will be addressed to:
To: TheKing@RockAndRoll.comElvis@Graceland.org
I don't know about you, but in my world, that address isn't going to get very far before some MTA barfs on it. Naturally, I've found nothing in the M$ KnowldgeBase about this.
Finally, I'm dying to know if anyone can figure out how to make Outlook display the raw text of the message I'm viewing, without trying to grok it for me. I don't think it can be done.
Slashdot Mirror
...are still the "Customer Reviews" of just about anything by Bil Keane. For example, check out The Family Circus by Request, which was reviewed just this past August.
Some days, I really miss the DFC. These Amazon reviews kinda help. :-)
--Larry Wall, Third Annual State Of The Onion address, 1999
Peace,
-McD
"Hey boss, the feds must be getting suspicious - they're trying to send us the Magic Lantern virus again."
Peace,
-McD
% ls .o .o: No such file or directory
foot.c foot.h foot.o toe.c toe.o
% rm *
rm:
% ls
%
Same bug. Welcome to the world, Apple. :-)
Peace,
-McD
My favorite example is what it does when parsing an RFC 822 From: field - it more or less ignores the spec, and tries to make it's own best guess about what an address looks like. Try this (probably requires a bit of SMTP wizardry - don't try this at home, kids): send mail to an Outlook 2000 user with the following header:
When you reply to this email, what address should the reply go to? TheKing@RockAndRoll.com? No, that's a comment, according to the spec - but Outlook 98 will pick it anyway.
At least Outlook 98 makes a choice, though. Outlook 2000 can't make up it's mind, so, in a classic burst of programming ingenuity, it glues the two addresses together. That's right, your reply will be addressed to:
I don't know about you, but in my world, that address isn't going to get very far before some MTA barfs on it. Naturally, I've found nothing in the M$ KnowldgeBase about this.
Finally, I'm dying to know if anyone can figure out how to make Outlook display the raw text of the message I'm viewing, without trying to grok it for me. I don't think it can be done.
Peace,
-McD