Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: What Thinkest Thou Of LO Donate Banner? Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 12:44:42 +0200 Lines: 28 Message-ID: References: <1864d8e7ae136b94$115$2498948$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com> <10a4ph3$obcm$2@dont-email.me> <68c5ef9f@news.ausics.net> <10a5sou$1360o$7@dont-email.me> <10a8gkd$25q4b$1@news1.tnib.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: individual.net Dle1sdPtcOZ8M1bMfBGhqQJ7tDc2yWG6gRfq1mL2evPq3P9VhW X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:u5Gz1ct/4we+dbJDHIkU1jhSjyM= sha256:l8//62hLvVkYAZk/DKD/zOKojSj9qUYPsv7rmHQnTXY= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: <10a8gkd$25q4b$1@news1.tnib.de> Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:74240 On 2025-09-15 09:52, Marc Haber wrote: > "Carlos E.R." wrote: >> In the 2000 we were sharing .doc files at Lucent, via exchange email. >> The IT people did not like it, because the size of mail folders exploded >> and the servers could barely cope. >> >> The docs were sent to multiple recipients. And each reply saying "got >> it" resent the same documents back and forth multiplied many times. It >> was crazy. > > Exchange always had the reputation of being quite smart with > attachments, storing them separated from the original message, and > doing with the attachments what we today call deduplication. Are you sure they did that on yr 2000? The IT department was angry at all of us and constantly bitching to please put the doc files instead on shared folders, not on the email, because the servers could barely cope with all that traffic. So that was not automatic. What they did was split us on different servers. And provide a default network folder for each person and groups. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;