Your complaint might have more validity if you didn't send it from a closed source
operating system using a closed system mail client (Moron Mail aka Outlook Express). I
also found it very hard to read because the font size is far too small and you commit
the major faux pas of sending HTML.
BTW, just on the subject of Outlook (this is offtopic, so ignore it if you're not
interested):
<rant>
Outlook is the worst mail client ever invented. It is probably the most expensive
program ever invented, costing billions in viruses, which the braindead people who
implemented Microsoft's scripting built to be insecure, untold billions in network
bandwidth (the morons who made it decided to default in posting in Outlook Rich Text
or HTML, which increases the size of messages roughly six times; furthermore the fact
that it doesn't let you quote in context, instead forcing you to leave the whole
message in, vastly bloating the message), and billions in lost productivity because it
runs so slowly (and the virus checkers added (in email goddamn it) at great cost to
the program slow it down so much), and because people don't quote in context, thereby
increasing the amount you have to read. It also sets out to undermine the existing
conventions for email by only letting you prefix emails with '>' (i.e. to post in
context) and post in plain text by going through TWO dialog boxes, an!
d even then it says 'Don't do this, because then the program can't distinguish your
message from the old one' (even though there is a script in spellutils that does this
(have Microsoft never heard of writing an algorithm)). Finally, even if you do jump
through sufficient hoops to get your message prefixed, it doesn't like you replying in
context and so prefixes the message with six lines of crap (thereby further
undermining email: the convention was xxxx wrote:), thereby ensuring the old message
remains a useless thing at the end of the file.
It is also very buggy; for example, if you put an email straight in the trash unread,
it still pops up with an unread message indicator. In addition, it defaults to posting
in blue, which, if anyone making it had the most basic knowledge of GUI design, would
know is ****ing stupid, because blue is one of the hardest-to-read colours there is;
furthermore, it puts everything in illegible and tiny sans-serif fonts, which take
longer to read.
Why they decided to inflict this POS on the world is beyond me; their previous
program, Internet Mail, was very civil, warning you not to post HTML, warning if your
message was more than 80% the old message, etc.
Every time I see a message marked RE: (again determined to undermine existing
conventions for the more aesthetically pleasing Re:), I know it will probably be full
of shit, because its come from Outlook.
I don't know what the total cost of this piece of trash is, but it must be tens of
billions in terms of lost productivity, lost work, lost operating systems (viruses),
etc.
PS. If anyone can think of a program that sucks more than Outlook, do tell me, because
I think it's probably the worst program ever made.
PPS. I hated Outlook because of the crap it sent me before ever used it, but having
used it ([former!] company) policy, I hate it even more.
</rant>
