Email could have been X.400 times better
buttondown.com
Email could have been X.400 times better
1–10 of 211 posts
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#2> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on.
Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken.
And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha.
rant over
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#3> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over
Not trying to be rude, but If you put your unsubscribe page behind a captcha I am going to mark you as spam and move on.
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#4> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over
No, it’s largely broken because of spam. I don’t want to be signed up to your useless email marketing list, and I want to use an email client that makes unsubscribing as easy as possible.
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#5This is an example of how simplicity won over features.
Not even then, when people with access to computers were probably in the thousands, would anyone liked to type "C=no; ADMD=; PRMD=uninett; O=uninett; S=alvestrand; G=harald" just like in the example of the article.
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#6> C=no; ADMD=; PRMD=uninett; O=uninett; S=alvestrand; G=harald
that would be very annoying way to write e-mail and no less prone to typosquatting (if anything, more)
Both standards lacked hindsight we have today but x.400 would just be added complexity (as years of tacked-on extensions would build upon it) that makes non-error-prone parsing harder
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#7> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over
If I cannot just click a button and unsubscribe, guess what, you are malicious spam.
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#8> You could have been notified when the message was read a full 15 years before email had something similar tacked on. Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken. And so are single click to unsubscribe links. So much so that we have to put our unsubscribe page behind a captcha. rant over
> Thanks to email security scanners this feature is largely broken.
One person's feature is another's anti-feature. I'm glad it's dead.
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#9My first business card when I was working for a tech company had an X.400 address on it. Nobody was memorising that. Or writing it down quickly.
Re: Email could have been X.400 times better
#10> C=no; ADMD=; PRMD=uninett; O=uninett; S=alvestrand; G=harald that would be very annoying way to write e-mail and no less prone to typosquatting (if anything, more) Both standards lacked hindsight we have today but x.400 would just be added complexity (as years of tacked-on extensions would build upon it) that makes non-error-prone parsing harder
Plus, having to change email addresses when you physically move, in addition to when you change providers, would be immensely annoying.