Matt, I tried all that. It seemed like they didn't want to listen, or that the whole concept was just foreign to them. It's like the support people are multitasking and are unwilling to take the time to properly listen to the customer and dissect the problem.
I've had very strange results dealing with their support. One day I get the perfect response to my questions, and the next day it is like I am talking to someone on another planet. Maybe their focus has changed somewhat as well. Their online forums used to be very useful. They were very well organized, and the support people participated on a daily basis. Around the time that 3.0 came out they changed the organization of their forums, lumping a lot of separate secitons together. Now you get the newbie user questions mixed together with the questions from server administrators. Also, it seems that over the past two weeks the support people have stopped posting on the forums altogether, the only ones posting now are the users. If this is an indication of a major policy shift on their part, this does not bode well for the future. Which is a shame considering that SmarterMail seems to be taking off as a product. Deja vu all over again. I've been going over another problem with them regarding Yahoo Groups. For some reason mail sent from SmarterMail to Yahoo Groups gets bounced by Yahoo as a 554 error stating that the message was sent as a BCC (which it most definitely was not). When I talked to Yahoo, they said it was a SmarterMail problem, and of course, SmarterMail insisted it was a Yahoo problem. Everyone is ready to wash their hands of the problem rather than try to get it solved. Sorry if I've gone off on a rant, but both of these problems seem to me to be indicative of potentially significant bugs, but I can't seem to get that message across. Gary -------- Original Message -------- > From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:39 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > > Gary, > > I've had some issues getting them past the part where they assume "user > error" or something else that is outside of their immediate control so > that they can actually look at the issue at hand. It may be just simply > an issue of them not listening/reading carefully enough. > > All I can say is that you might want to go back to square one and > re-explain the issue. I think that Kevin made the essence of that clear > in his reply, but I would then add to it the unfortunate issues that can > result from displaying plain text as HTML, and suggest that if they are > displaying a plain/text only message, to do some bracket replacement in > order to keep plain/text elements from becoming functional in the HTML view. > > Showing a message that is plain/text as HTML is fine just so long as > they replace the brackets. > > Matt > > > > Gary Steiner wrote: > > >I can't get SmarterTools to see this as a bug. Their answer is that their > >web mail is set to HTML by default, and you should just click on the "plain > >text" link to view it. Their support doesn't seem to be able to grasp the > >wider implications of this problem. > > > >Gary > > > > > > -------- Original Message -------- > > > > > >>From: Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 6:31 PM > >>To: [email protected] > >>Subject: Re: [Declude.JunkMail] OT: port forwarding > >> > >>That's surely a bug. Dave sent his message as plain/text and > >>SmarterMail should be replacing the brackets with HTML encoding before > >>displaying it as HTML so that it should not be a functional element when > >>displayed., i.e. > >> > >> <meta http-equiv="Refresh" content="5; > >>URL=http://www.mydomain.com"> > >> > >>If Dave had sent it as an HTML message, his client would have done the > >>replacement for him. > >> > >>This should probably be reported to SmarterMail. There are a lot of > >>potential consequences, for instance, virus scanners won't generally > >>consider code in plain/text segments to be executable, yet it can be in > >>SmarterMail webmail if it is working the way that you reported. > >> > >>Matt > >> > >> > >> > >>Gary Steiner wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>>It is interesting how SmarterMail's web mail interprets Dave's message. > >>>It sees the META statement in his message as embedded code, and runs it > >>>when I read the message. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>--- > >>This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > >>unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > >>type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > >>at http://www.mail-archive.com. > >> > >> > > > > > > > >--- > >This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To > >unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and > >type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found > >at http://www.mail-archive.com. > > > > > > > > --- This E-mail came from the Declude.JunkMail mailing list. To unsubscribe, just send an E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], and type "unsubscribe Declude.JunkMail". The archives can be found at http://www.mail-archive.com.
