At 15:08 07.05.1998 -0400, David wrote/replied...

 [ good stuff snipped ;-) ]

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HP3000-L
>> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 1998 6:58 AM
>> To: HP3000-L
>> Subject: ODBC Link/SE ver. E.55 & 'Timeout on data error'

 [ snip of *copy of message* that was replied to ]

>........................................................................
>
>Item Subject: WINMAIL.DAT
>Could not convert Microsoft Mail Message Data item to text.
>Will attempt to 'shar' item as file '01eqltr' at end of msg.

 [ *huge* snip of shar/uuencoded version of winmail.dat ]


Okay, if I had one or two wishes in regard to eMail and standards,
then I'd love to see many, most or all people responding to a posting
reduce the quoted parts of the original messages to only those few
passages that are essential and not append a verbatim copy of the old
message (which makes reading the list or even list digest a pain and
wastes a lot of bandwith -- just like this "rant" does ;-)

AND I'd love to see Microsoft educate their customers how to configure
their products in such a way that they adhere to established internet
standards instead of raping all netizens to pay (time, bandwidth, disc
space etc) for receiving unwanted and/or useless WinMAIL.DAT attachments
or RTF attachments or some.VFC cards and alike.

Oh, by the way, the excuse "I'm using MS Outlook now, please ignore the
WinMAIL.DAT attachment" doesn't make a good .signature in my opintion ;-)

Lars

(Will this ever end? Now that "industry leaders" are trying to -ahem-
 "convince" governments or courts to not delay Windows 98 delivery... ?)