| Have you noticed that few people
bother to use Stuffit or WinZIP to archive attachments they send
any more? Attachment size isn't the issue it used to be,
but security and file integrity still are.
The world of dialup users has expanded as fast as the WWW in the
past 5 years. DSL and cable broadband usage have likewise mushroomed.
V56 modem dialup is a huge improvement over the first old 1200 and
2400 baud modems.
People will say, I have a 40GB HD now, why should I mess with compression
schemes? Dialup may seem slow to broadband users, but almost everybody
in a corporate environment enjoys shared T1 speeds. They use it
for personal email, too. More users are also sophisticated enough
to manually reduce image size before mailing.
Internet mail server protocols are more standardized. Mail clients
like Outlook let us transparently exchange "complex" objects
and documents. We can even embed the objects instream, rather than
as attachments. Is this a blessing?
Standards have dropped in many
ways. To scan attachments, we rely on anti-virus software,
though we rarely update the virus definitions. Expectations on acceptable
ways of sending executables have evaporated, and more and more people
are again sending unarchived executable scripts and programs with
no warnings and no protection.
When will the calamity hit? Archiving (compressing) attachments
is still the best way to "deliver the mail". If the attachment
is an image, complex document, or executable program, Stuffit or
ZIP it. Compression "wraps" the attachment to help protect
it during transmission. There are also special issues between users
of different machine types. Too few people understand what protocol
or courtesies to expect, or what is expected of them.
Unless you already have an understanding
or arrangement with a specific correspondent, compression is still
the expected standard. Maybe we should all get back to that before
the next big virus hits.
copyright © June 9, 2001 by Alex Forbes |