Complaint: large attachments (was Re: browser fonts )
david at davidsatchell.net
Wed Sep 13 01:14:05 UTC 2006
Peter Garrett wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 18:36:28 -0400
> Paul Kaplan <pkaplan1 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> Here we go.
>> T41 works, T43 doesn't
> Sorry but this is one of my pet hates. You sent 2 (two) image attachments.
> One of them was 2.43MB in size... [T43snapshot1.png image/png (2.43MB)]
> Have you any idea how long that ties up people's dialup connections?
> Hint: it takes over *ten* minutes to download 2.4MB on the average dial-up
> Please, *never* do this again. If you have screenshots, put them on a
> server and link to them.
> You have wasted the bandwidth and time of countless dialup users with your
Thoughtlessness? How about just not realising or not knowing better? I'm
not making any assumptions about the original post that started this,
nor am I attacking you Peter - but many users who come on here aren't
going to know how to upload their screenshots to a server, or know why
that is a good idea.
Fair enough it's hard to download large attachments but this is the list
people are directed to if they are new to Ubuntu and have issues. The
only thing that will ever keep a Linux distro alive is the support from
mailing lists / forums / etc. so how about before people start a huge
rant about thoughtlessness and not posting attachments, that they
consider that maybe the people doing such things don't know otherwise...
If a newbie comes along and tries to ask a question, but instead gets a
bounce mail or a rant from some sick and tired list member, how often is
it likely they are going to come back? This might even mean they ditch
Ubuntu for something that will help and work for them. The only thing
that really sets Ubuntu apart to the basic end user is the ease-of-use
and great support. Next time, try sending a message that helps (even if
it just asks for more information) them answer their question, and post
a little note down the bottom about the correct ways to do attachments.
For those who didn't want or "shouldn't have to" to set a limit on the
size of downloads in their client, I hate to tell you, but if you've got
the luxury of such an option, enable it and use it - that's what it's
More information about the ubuntu-users