Gary VanderMolen, you are a MS MVP. You could please clarify something for me?
When MSN contracted with Qwest, or when Qwest contracted with MSN, who
pays whom? Who is in charge between the two entities ? Would you care to
elucidate, or at least enumerate, what part of "Qwest with MSN Premium" (now
Qwest Mail by Windows Live) is Qwest responsible for, and what part is MSFT
responsible for ? I have heard that MSFT pays Qwest, but the converse might
be true as well. Because seemingly, neither party is responsible.
I get sent back and forth between the two entities.
Another thing, since you mentioned the "myriad of different mail servers"
and there
"unique settings", I think that MSN ought by all means and by all rights
obtain the
names and settings of each name server that each contracted ISP uses. And
it should publish it. Why, the internet would make such an effort cheap and
efficient.
In "pre-computer days" such an index was known as a "phone book". Now we, the
people, have "diddly-quat" Of course MSFT could help, but that would
require a sense of responsibility.... no, we don't have that.
Or lets make another comparison between "computer mail servers" and "the
people known as United States Post office mail delivery personnel"
Now, to explain further, each of these categories of "mail delivery
mechanisms",
the "computer kind" and the "human kind" have both "a myriad of names and
unique
settings". However, if my mail-man oops mail-person, decides to burn my mail
or eat it, or open it, after a very short while I will make inquiries at the
post office,
and I will find out who is responsible and the crazy post-person will get
fired.
With the "computer-kind" of mail servers, which it seems are run by humans
as well, there is no responsibility, no list, nobody who is in charge, no one
cares. Because when you are a "computer mail server", then nobody knows
your name, and nobody can ever touch you. What a great system you people put
together there.
So by and large, the conclusion is that MSFT is not responsible, because a
whole attitude of "not being responsible runs straight from top to bottom
thorughout the Microsoft organization". This is legally cemented in each
and every
EULA, etc. When you say the primary responsibility for e-mail support
should
rest with the ISP, then this simply a cheap cop-out on the part of Microsoft.
Why ? Because if MSFT writes and encodes the software, then generally only
MSFT can know what it does, and how it does it, and how it can be fixed.
There are no experts at Qwest that would know how to fix Microsoft software.
I challenge you: Name one ! Finally, Qwest may quite well be legally
prevented from
making any changes to MSFT software, even it had the know how to do so. It's
all in the EULA.
So may be this tells you something, may be that it's time for the cheap cop
outs to stop, and that people at MSFT and Qwest will actually work
together.... (Well in my dreams, I guess).
(Of course "Qwest with MSN Premium" changed it's name to "Qwest with MSFT"
(was that because the "premium part" of the service was missing ?) and now
on screen, they refer to themself as "Qwest Mail by Windows Live".) Are
these
frequent name changes made just to obfuscate who is responsible for what?)
Sign me as "slightly annoyed".
