Re: [Evolution] "Why I hate Outlook"

[Adam Clater <aclater amazingmedia com>]

Nathan Straz wrote:
> Pardon while I step in,
>
> I think email completion and correction would be a cool feature, but not
> something that is automatic.  While many Windows users have never tried
> using <TAB> to complete a filename, I use that feature all the time in
> Mutt.

        Personally, I like the idea of auto completing an address, but there
are (as discussed here) a few ways to do it.  When I've used windows, I
have noticed that IE 5.0 and Netscape do different kinds of auto
complete.  I'm much more fond of IE's, in that I can be typing an
address, and if I press end (or tab, or some such key) it completes the
text. If I press  [enter], it just uses what I've typed. With netscape,
if I have typed a string that is also a portion of another address, it
goes to the "Auto completed" address if I press [enter].  e.g.: want to
go to www.amazingmedia.com (just type www - finds it in local DNS
search) so I type "www" and press enter, well it ends up taking me to
www.slashdot.org instead.  that's my annoyance. 


> Here is what I would propose:
>
> 1. Assume that the user knows what he or she is doing.  Yes, that's
> dangerous, but it is not insulting to the user.
>
> 2. Allow completion on demand.  It's a function that many people will
> want to use, but should be expected and predictable.
>
> 3. Use mail bounces as a signal for the program to put in the automatic
> effort.  Every now and then someone will mistype an email address.  If
> it goes to the wrong person, usually you'll have a note that you did
> something wrong.  Sometimes you get a message from MAILER-DAEMON that
> you have to figure out what the problem was yourself.  It would be
> awesome if your MUA could detect a bounce, do a few checks, and
> recommend to you that you probably meant to send a message to someone
> else.

        This is an interesting proposal, and one that deserves some discussion,
but what do we sysadmins do when someone forwards us their bounce
message?  You just have to make it smart enough to recognize if it is
from the daemon, or from a user...

> Given that the message-id is intact, you should be able to check your
> outbox for the message that was in error and bring it up to be sent out
> again.
>
> Feedback?
>
> Nathan Straz

-- 
Adam
aclater amazingmedia com