Otter
Nothing to see here
Interesting results, I get this guys newsletter twice a week, always informative.
Warning! Email *Unbelievably* Unreliable
Email reliability is even worse than I thought. Much worse! At least,
that's what our recent worldwide test showed!
Remember a while back when I wrote:
...I'd like to gather a group of volunteers... and send each
one a simple non-spam email message, in plain text and with no
attachments, from a personal mail account (not a bulk mailer).
I'd like to see how many of these simple messages actually
make it through the gauntlet of servers, routers, and ISP-
based and local mail filters....
Over 10,000 LangaList readers volunteered as test subjects; I conducted
the test mailings in mid-November, and sorted and analyzed the results
over the holiday break.
The basic test concept was simple: I sent one plain text, attachment-
free email to each volunteer. The content of the email simulated normal,
safe business or interpersonal correspondence. It contained no
deliberate or obvious spam- or virus-filter triggers (e.g. no spamlike
components, such as offers to enlarge this or shrink that; no
attachments; no viruses; no HTML; no embedded scripts; etc.). The
subject line was plain and general, neither designed to trigger nor
avoid spam filters.
Plus: the recipients were expecting the mail: They new it was coming,
although they didn't know the specifics of where, when or how it would
be sent.
Even so, the results were dismal. Some 40% of the test emails didn't
make it through!
Think about that for a minute: This suggests that as many as four out of
ten of your serious emails--- the sort you might exchange with co-
workers, family, friends, business associates, or customers--- may not
be making it to their intended destinations.
Or: Four out of ten emails that others send to you may end up lost
before you ever see them, *even if you expect the emails and are looking
for them!*
There's a lot more to the story. I actually broke the 10,000+ volunteers
into four subgroups to simulate different kinds of email (personal, one-
at-a-time notes; reply mails; mails with large or small BCC lists, etc)
and was able to track how each subgroup did. Some groups lost an
astonishing 70% of the mail, even though all the test mails were plain
text and non-spam, sent from a normal email client (not a bulk mailer);
and even though the volunteers all were expecting a test email to
arrive!
A complete description of the tests, and the group-by-group results, are
posted at
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=17300016 .
Plus, at the end of that article, I also sum up the best-available
techniques to help you ensure successful deliveries, and minimize the
chances that your emails will be lost.
I knew email reliability was getting bad, but a 40% failure rate stopped
me in my tracks. Imagine if 40% of your phone calls failed, or 40% of
your paper mail failed....
Odds are, if you're reading this newsletter, email is important to you.
Please check out the article at
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=17300016
so you'll know what we're all up against, and what you can do about it!
Warning! Email *Unbelievably* Unreliable
Email reliability is even worse than I thought. Much worse! At least,
that's what our recent worldwide test showed!
Remember a while back when I wrote:
...I'd like to gather a group of volunteers... and send each
one a simple non-spam email message, in plain text and with no
attachments, from a personal mail account (not a bulk mailer).
I'd like to see how many of these simple messages actually
make it through the gauntlet of servers, routers, and ISP-
based and local mail filters....
Over 10,000 LangaList readers volunteered as test subjects; I conducted
the test mailings in mid-November, and sorted and analyzed the results
over the holiday break.
The basic test concept was simple: I sent one plain text, attachment-
free email to each volunteer. The content of the email simulated normal,
safe business or interpersonal correspondence. It contained no
deliberate or obvious spam- or virus-filter triggers (e.g. no spamlike
components, such as offers to enlarge this or shrink that; no
attachments; no viruses; no HTML; no embedded scripts; etc.). The
subject line was plain and general, neither designed to trigger nor
avoid spam filters.
Plus: the recipients were expecting the mail: They new it was coming,
although they didn't know the specifics of where, when or how it would
be sent.
Even so, the results were dismal. Some 40% of the test emails didn't
make it through!
Think about that for a minute: This suggests that as many as four out of
ten of your serious emails--- the sort you might exchange with co-
workers, family, friends, business associates, or customers--- may not
be making it to their intended destinations.
Or: Four out of ten emails that others send to you may end up lost
before you ever see them, *even if you expect the emails and are looking
for them!*
There's a lot more to the story. I actually broke the 10,000+ volunteers
into four subgroups to simulate different kinds of email (personal, one-
at-a-time notes; reply mails; mails with large or small BCC lists, etc)
and was able to track how each subgroup did. Some groups lost an
astonishing 70% of the mail, even though all the test mails were plain
text and non-spam, sent from a normal email client (not a bulk mailer);
and even though the volunteers all were expecting a test email to
arrive!
A complete description of the tests, and the group-by-group results, are
posted at
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=17300016 .
Plus, at the end of that article, I also sum up the best-available
techniques to help you ensure successful deliveries, and minimize the
chances that your emails will be lost.
I knew email reliability was getting bad, but a 40% failure rate stopped
me in my tracks. Imagine if 40% of your phone calls failed, or 40% of
your paper mail failed....
Odds are, if you're reading this newsletter, email is important to you.
Please check out the article at
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=17300016
so you'll know what we're all up against, and what you can do about it!
Will that make you feel better??
