Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!news.informatik.hu-berlin.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: polygonum Newsgroups: comp.misc Subject: Re: Email Is Still the Best Thing on the Internet Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 22:20:52 +0100 Organization: me Lines: 31 Message-ID: References: <20140818150855.46c8c94a.rsw@therandymon.com> Reply-To: rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net +I6lqitSNUmzyQogtFGMjAqDka04mq0f3OpcuZ0ETMIq1V9bg= Cancel-Lock: sha1:Dp43QS3nDY3xN/8XfqBjwS6JgFo= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:4497 On 19/08/2014 22:10, Rich wrote: > polygonum wrote: >> On 19/08/2014 21:46, Rich wrote: >>> So possible, but it is something that can't simply be implimented in >>> the client only. > >> I really don't see why it couldn't be pure client. > >> The bit of the client that allows you to attach simply has to say "Would >> you like to post this file to Dropbox and insert a link into the email?" >> - maybe with "If the file you are trying to attach is > 100 kb". > >> What am I missing? > > Oh, you meant when sending the email initially. > > The context of the rest of the thread was synchronizing an empty client with > an existing server, holding existing emails, that already have > attachments in the emails sitting on the server. > > Yes, doing a "put it into dropbox, link in the email" at the client > side, for sending an email with an attachment, is easily doable. > Ah you didn't mean that! :-) I was thinking that reducing the volume of what appears to be email (but is actually attachment - however that is implemented) would end up reducing the sheer volume to be synchronised. Probably dramatically. -- Rod