Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 15:29:03 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> 
>>>> Makes you
>>>> wonder what on Earth you can actually do with a 4KB machine...
>>> Not for those who actually have used 4 KB machines. ;-)
>> Alternatively, "makes you wonder what the **** is using up 4,096 bytes
>> for an *empty* email?!"
> 
> Easy:  Headers.

Index entries, too. And maybe it's counting clusters allocated.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Serving Suggestion:
     "Don't serve this any more. It's awful."

Post a reply to this message

On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 09:47:19 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Oct 2010 15:29:03 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>> 
>>>>> Makes you
>>>>> wonder what on Earth you can actually do with a 4KB machine...
>>>> Not for those who actually have used 4 KB machines. ;-)
>>> Alternatively, "makes you wonder what the **** is using up 4,096 bytes
>>> for an *empty* email?!"
>> 
>> Easy:  Headers.
> 
> Index entries, too. And maybe it's counting clusters allocated.

True

Post a reply to this message

On 07/10/2010 05:47 PM, Darren New wrote:

> And maybe it's counting clusters allocated.

I don't think so. It only tells you the email size to the nearest whole 
number, but I've seen emails listed as 1KB. (Then again, I don't know 
what the cluster size is...)

Post a reply to this message