On Friday 17 December 2004 10:44 pm, Enrico Zini wrote: > I've been reported that Outlook on Windows is more efficient in > storing mails with attachments, as it stores them in unencoded 8-bit > format while the various Unix tools[1] store them as they've been > received, so a big attachment would be stored mime-encoded taking 1/3 > more disk size.
Are you sure? The odds of Microsoft getting something down to the point of being more efficient than the competition happens roughly as often as I win a prize over $5 from the Oregon Lottery. Odds of winning a prize over $5 is something like 1:800 if you play, significantly worse if you don't (and I don't regularly play). I would confirm this before you take it as gospel, I think someone's yankin your chain. -- Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ursine.dyndns.org/~baloo/
pgpx9UgrZ4f2N.pgp
Description: PGP signature
