The drive behind features

You know how there's a warning tag on hairdryers that says not to use it while showering? I've always figured that the reason for those stupid warnings is that someone somewhere did use it while showering, and then the relatives of the deceased then sued the hairdryer company who agreed to put warnings on their product to prevent such a mishap in the future and cover their own asses in the case of a future lawsuit. Whenever I see something so blatantly dumb, I give the benefit of the doubt to the company and assume that in today's increasingly litigious society, they're either doing so because they were already burned, or because they're gunshy and afraid to get burned.

So with that background aside... My birthday was last week, and an old friend sent me an e-card. I went to the site to view the card, and was thinking to myself "I'll have to send her an email to let her know I got it...". Then I noticed that at the bottom of the form, it already had an easy way for me to do this. Hrm, that's handy.

But what I was incredibly amused by, and why I'm posting this, was the fine print below the 'respond via email' feature:

I just know that they first developed the feature because users asked for it or they thought it was handy, and then I assume shortly thereafter they got negative feedback from users who thought that the sender of the card had requested it and the receivers thought that was rude, etc etc... It probably caused someone at this company quite a headache. I feel for them, I really do.

On the bright side, I think it's super-cool that the designer of the card in question got such a top billing. And on that note, have you seen the Exchange 2007 Credits page? I forget how many pictures I'm in in there, one of my favorites is a coworker and I in a park in France mimicking a statue - we're sitting on either side of a statue of a man sitting with his legs drawn out and head down to his knees. One of the reasons we did the credits page this way rather than put it in the core product is that we didn't want to get into the whole easter egg mess or muddy up product code with such a thing. I think it's a rather nice solution.

Comments (6)

  1. Robert – I’m afraid your research is correct, if you have a clean forest that’s never had e2k3 in it, and then you install e2k7, you can’t go back to e2k3. Can you confirm that the forest in question never had e2k3 in it? And if not, why not – i assume it’s not the forest you’re using today? And so then if it’s not the forest you’re using today, my next question is what the cost to you to bring up a new one?

  2. Daniel – doh! Let me see if I can figure out why and get that fixed.

  3. Robert – what mail server are you running today, if not e2k3?

    Wow… interesting turnaround to the end result 🙂 Glad to hear you will be able to get to it after all, but i’m bummed you had to have this annoying experience in order to get there.

  4. Daniel says:

    Alas, the credits page is badly broken in Firefox.

  5. Robert K. says:

    That’s funny… I always have the same thoughts when I see dumb warning stickers, or as I’m unpacking new computers and throwing away manuals on how to properly use a keyboard and monitor so as to avoid injuries, etc.

    On a completely unrelated topic (asking here out of desparation). I installed the 32-bit evaluation version of Exchange 2007 in a production environment, but we don’t have the hardware resources necessary for 2007 so we are going to use Exchange 2003 for now (you probably already know where I’m headed here). We cannot get the forest prepped properly on the DC now, and our research seems to indicate that once you prep the forest for Exchange 2007, it is not possible to prep it for Exchange 2003. It appears that our only option might be to configure a new DC and migrate all of our users to a new forest, etc. That’s a huge project and all I’m hoping you can tell me is whether it is true or false that once the forest is prepped for 2007 it can no longer be prepped for 2003. Sorry to bring this up here and I will never do it again if prefer I didn’t!

  6. Robert K. says:

    Thanks so much KC… I really appreciate your response. Unfortunately I prepped our primary DC forest for e2k7, and the forest had never been prepped for e2k3. And, yes, I am sad (embarrassed) to say that it is the forest we are using today… which means I would have to migrate everything to the new forest?

    The good news in all of this is that it is now too difficult and time consuming to rebuild our DC, and so we are going to spring for a 64-bit server and now I will be able to install e2k7! Which is what I had really wanted to do all along, but this is for my church and pretty much everything is done with hardware that is donated to us (this will be the first server we actually have purchased… and even then it’s just a basic $1,300 server).

    Now I’m looking forward to playing with all of the cool new features in e2k7!

Skip to main content