Not to knock the vendor but seriously



  • Email used as an FTP Substitution

    Specifically "Who Else Thinks Email Should Not be a FTP Substitute?" so there is some solution the person is selling, but is anyone really using email as a substitution to an FTP server?

    I know we aren't we send very small files at most, and many of our clients won't accept an email attachment larger than 10 Mb.

    So how common is this supposed practice...



  • Depends what you mean... we don't use FTP at all and never did. Why not? Um... I have no idea, why would you use FTP anyway? We do use email. So, I guess you could say we use it instead of FTP. Right?



  • FTP isn't a use case, so this is a very confusing question. People use FTP for all kinds of reasons. It's standard use case is for fast, open, zero security downloads. Email can't do that at all, so no we don't use it for that. But we don't use FTP either. So not sure what they mean.



  • @scottalanmiller But it clearly isn't a replacement to FTP.

    Unless you're sending an email with attachments to a bunch of people. But even that still isn't even close. Because it's still email. The content is static, and provided one way, until someone responds.

    With FTP often both parties can upload / download. Email clearly isn't this.



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @scottalanmiller But it clearly isn't a replacement to FTP.

    Unless you're sending an email with attachments to a bunch of people. But even that still isn't even close. Because it's still email. The content is static, and provided one way, until someone responds.

    With FTP often both parties can upload / download. Email clearly isn't this.

    You could email back and forth. And each download of FTP is static, too. So you COULD replace one with the other if you came up with some automation. Weird, but you could do it.



  • Go ahead and knock that vendor. Everything they post is "hey, here's the latest month old malware thing, buy our software that kills macro attachments for $450/year for 40 users!!!"



  • @scottalanmiller said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @scottalanmiller But it clearly isn't a replacement to FTP.

    Unless you're sending an email with attachments to a bunch of people. But even that still isn't even close. Because it's still email. The content is static, and provided one way, until someone responds.

    With FTP often both parties can upload / download. Email clearly isn't this.

    You could email back and forth. And each download of FTP is static, too. So you COULD replace one with the other if you came up with some automation. Weird, but you could do it.

    And that is still email, you're attaching a file to the communication each time with changes as needed. Adding some words to it, designating a few mailboxes to hit and then sending it.

    Which then hits those email servers, and depending on the server rules is allowed / denied finally landing at the users mailbox.

    FTP is wide open file upload / download and by passes all of the email security.



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @scottalanmiller said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @scottalanmiller But it clearly isn't a replacement to FTP.

    Unless you're sending an email with attachments to a bunch of people. But even that still isn't even close. Because it's still email. The content is static, and provided one way, until someone responds.

    With FTP often both parties can upload / download. Email clearly isn't this.

    You could email back and forth. And each download of FTP is static, too. So you COULD replace one with the other if you came up with some automation. Weird, but you could do it.

    And that is still email, you're attaching a file to the communication each time with changes as needed. Adding some words to it, designating a few mailboxes to hit and then sending it.

    Same as with FTP. You make a connection and transfer the file each time. If it gets updated, you need to download again. Same static issue.



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    FTP is wide open file upload / download and by passes all of the email security.

    Likewise email is wide open file upload / download and bypasses all of the FTP security.

    I think they are more alike that you are thinking. FTP and SMTP are not all that different, really, when it comes to file transfers. You have to make a lot of assumptions about both to make them as different as you are supposing.



  • Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    FTP is wide open file upload / download and by passes all of the email security.

    Likewise email is wide open file upload / download and bypasses all of the FTP security.

    I think they are more alike that you are thinking. FTP and SMTP are not all that different, really, when it comes to file transfers. You have to make a lot of assumptions about both to make them as different as you are supposing.

    The general assumption I make about email is that they are generally small 10Mb or so, have a dedicated recipient in most cases and don't allow the rapid transfer of files.

    IE: Download an entire folders contents upwards of 10Mb (or so)



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    The general assumption I make about email is that they are generally small 10Mb or so, have a dedicated recipient in most cases and don't allow the rapid transfer of files.

    IE: Download an entire folders contents upwards of 10Mb (or so)

    That's an email assumption, though. FTP can have the same limitations. FTP uses mget to do that with a folder. Email doesn't have a "selection interface" is the current issue. BUT anything you do with email to make it able to do this, you can easily add mget as easily as not adding it. So that covers that base.



  • @gjacobse said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.

    You should see the users here get confused when I send them 1) a link to install Filezilla and 2) instructions on how to use FTP (with Filezilla). It never fails that I have to go to someone's desk and have them give a lengthy explanation of all the steps they did right, but now FTP won't work... 100% of the time they are trying it from IE or windows explorer. "What's a filezilla" is often heard... I just point at their Outlook on the screen and say "follow instructions and it will work right first time, every time." Users are FTP-tarded.



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    have a dedicated recipient in most cases and don't allow the rapid transfer of files.

    SMTP does do a rapid transfer; and FTP is always to a single recipient. So they are very much alike.



  • @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @gjacobse said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.

    You should see the users here get confused when I send them 1) a link to install Filezilla and 2) instructions on how to use FTP (with Filezilla). It never fails that I have to go to someone's desk and have them give a lengthy explanation of all the steps they did right, but now FTP won't work... 100% of the time they are trying it from IE or windows explorer. "What's a filezilla" is often heard... I just point at their Outlook on the screen and say "follow instructions and it will work right first time, every time." Users are FTP-tarded.

    Filezilla is to FTP as Outlook is to Email.



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @gjacobse said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.

    You should see the users here get confused when I send them 1) a link to install Filezilla and 2) instructions on how to use FTP (with Filezilla). It never fails that I have to go to someone's desk and have them give a lengthy explanation of all the steps they did right, but now FTP won't work... 100% of the time they are trying it from IE or windows explorer. "What's a filezilla" is often heard... I just point at their Outlook on the screen and say "follow instructions and it will work right first time, every time." Users are FTP-tarded.

    Filezilla is to FTP as Outlook is to Email.

    Essentially, yes. But one they HAVE to use all the time, one they do not. Normally, anyway.



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @gjacobse said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.

    You should see the users here get confused when I send them 1) a link to install Filezilla and 2) instructions on how to use FTP (with Filezilla). It never fails that I have to go to someone's desk and have them give a lengthy explanation of all the steps they did right, but now FTP won't work... 100% of the time they are trying it from IE or windows explorer. "What's a filezilla" is often heard... I just point at their Outlook on the screen and say "follow instructions and it will work right first time, every time." Users are FTP-tarded.

    Filezilla is to FTP as Outlook is to Email.

    Some of them have the f[moderated]ing audacity to ask me "but why won't it work in IE??? I use IE for everything!!!". It's hard not to choke some of them on a weekly basis.



  • @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @gjacobse said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.

    You should see the users here get confused when I send them 1) a link to install Filezilla and 2) instructions on how to use FTP (with Filezilla). It never fails that I have to go to someone's desk and have them give a lengthy explanation of all the steps they did right, but now FTP won't work... 100% of the time they are trying it from IE or windows explorer. "What's a filezilla" is often heard... I just point at their Outlook on the screen and say "follow instructions and it will work right first time, every time." Users are FTP-tarded.

    Filezilla is to FTP as Outlook is to Email.

    Some of them have the f[moderated]ing audacity to ask me "but why won't it work in IE??? I use IE for everything!!!". It's hard not to choke some of them on a weekly basis.

    Carol?

    G3B7y67.gif



  • @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @DustinB3403 said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @RojoLoco said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @gjacobse said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Sadly - most 'users' would choke if you tried to get them to use FTP - Even if you gave them pictures... Sending via email strips so many security points... but users are more apt to use it.

    You should see the users here get confused when I send them 1) a link to install Filezilla and 2) instructions on how to use FTP (with Filezilla). It never fails that I have to go to someone's desk and have them give a lengthy explanation of all the steps they did right, but now FTP won't work... 100% of the time they are trying it from IE or windows explorer. "What's a filezilla" is often heard... I just point at their Outlook on the screen and say "follow instructions and it will work right first time, every time." Users are FTP-tarded.

    Filezilla is to FTP as Outlook is to Email.

    Some of them have the f[moderated]ing audacity to ask me "but why won't it work in IE??? I use IE for everything!!!". It's hard not to choke some of them on a weekly basis.

    Carol?

    G3B7y67.gif

    I could get a lot of use out of Krieger's chokebot... but, I could get a lot of use out of Carol as well... 😉



  • @RojoLoco That chokebot would be used 24/7 at my current place.

    Carol, Pam, and even Ms. Archer would be well used too.



  • To be clear I'd have Pam go around and break knuckles for stupid users, Mr. Archer would be my HR person and Carol would be my secretary - figuring out how well the beatings were going to reduce the number of hours the chokebot was working...



  • Clear case of "just because you can does not mean you should"



  • @MattSpeller said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Clear case of "just because you can does not mean you should"

    But that could apply to not using FTP at all, too.



  • @scottalanmiller said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    @MattSpeller said in Not to knock the vendor but seriously:

    Clear case of "just because you can does not mean you should"

    But that could apply to not using FTP at all, too.

    Correct.


Log in to reply