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!

 
Charles Mims
http://www.the-sandbox.org
 
 
_______________________________________________
Sndbox mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://a8.mewebdns-a8.com/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net

Reply via email to