Why does a "Reply" to a sent mail, send back to me only...

  • Thread starter oweri02
  • Start date Views 2,897
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

oweri02

Hello...

I'm used to using Google's GMail, and a reply to a sent message has the

intelligence to say "clearly you want to send this to the original

recipient"... why doesn't Microsoft's Outlook do this by default?

Likewise, a reply-all to a sent message, puts me in the recipient, when "as

I'm sending it, I clearly get a copy in my sent-items anyway" - why would

outlook put me as a recipient?

Any thoughts?
 
C

Cody Jarrett

oweri02 <oweri02> wrote:


> Hello...

> I'm used to using Google's GMail, and a reply to a sent message has the
> intelligence to say "clearly you want to send this to the original
> recipient"... why doesn't Microsoft's Outlook do this by default?


Because the software writers didn't think that Outlook users would be

so stupid as to reply to a message they had themselves sent and not

expect it to be sent to themselves?


> Likewise, a reply-all to a sent message, puts me in the recipient, when "as
> I'm sending it, I clearly get a copy in my sent-items anyway" - why would
> outlook put me as a recipient?

> Any thoughts?


Same explanation.
 
O

oweri02

How very kind of you Cody...

"Software writers didn't think that Outlook users would be so stupid as to

reply to a message they had themselves sent..."

So you are saying you've never replied to a message, and then followed it up

with an update before someone else has replied... oh how "stupid" of me for

even thinking to be proactive...

In Q1, it was a simple reply...

In Q2, it was a reply to all (clearly better than a forward, and then

copy/paste all the recipients)

Both scenarios Google Mail clearly felt that their "user base" had

intelligence to be proactive... perhaps the stupidity is more with the

application, rather than the user base?
 

Brian Tillman

Senior Member
"oweri02" <oweri02> wrote in message

news:D919CB3F-0223-47A9-99D3-1C223B477BFD@microsoft.com...


> I'm used to using Google's GMail, and a reply to a sent message has the
> intelligence to say "clearly you want to send this to the original
> recipient"... why doesn't Microsoft's Outlook do this by default?


A reply to a sent message always goes only to the original sender. That's the

definition of a reply. I don't know of any real mail clients that reply to

anyone besides the sender. I don't consider web interfaces to be mail

clients. They don't use any mail protocols to communicate with the server

because you're interacting directly with the server.


> Likewise, a reply-all to a sent message, puts me in the recipient, when "as
> I'm sending it, I clearly get a copy in my sent-items anyway" - why would
> outlook put me as a recipient?


Are you using gmail as a POP account or an IMAP account? Gmail has some

peculiarities that can make you get copies of messages you send, independent

of Outlook's saving of Sent Items. On top if that, if the address used to

deliver the message (i.e., the one that appears in the recipient field)

doesn't match exactly the address you hve defined as the sender address in the

account, Outlook can't tell the recipient address is yours and so includes it

in the Reply All. For example, if you have two mail addresses and forward one

to gmail, using Reply All on a message sent to the second address but received

via the gmail account will cause Outlook to include that address in the reply

because it doesn't match the address of the account that is replying.

--
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top