The Register® — Biting the hand that feeds IT

Feeds

Outlook.com launch a gold rush for jokers, spammers

'One million people' could be wrong

What you need to know about cloud backup

Analysis Microsoft's servers have been going bonkers processing account requests for its newly launched Outlook.com webmail service, but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that Redmond's Gmail competitor may be less of a breakout success than it would have us believe.

On Tuesday, just six hours after the service launched, the Outlook team took to Twitter to thank its many new subscribers, saying, "One million people have signed up for a new, modern email experience at Outlook.com. Thanks!"

Whether you accept that figure, however, seems to depend largely on how you define "people." If we assume it means "active users," it would be wise to take Microsoft's claims with a grain of salt.

For starters, at least some of those who signed up for Outlook.com accounts say they did so not because they wanted a new experience, but because it just seemed like the thing to do.

"Whenever a new major email service comes out (such as Yahoo, Hotmail, Gmail) I usually sign up to try it out," a reader who goes by "MrP-" tells El Reg in an email. "Also being a Microsoft service and being named Outlook.com it seems like an important address to have."

Chart showing rapid first-day growth of Outlook.com

Could anything with a growth rate like that possibly be human? (Source: Microsoft)

Whether he will use it regularly is another matter. For starters, MrP- says that when he saw his first name was taken, he picked something silly.

"I may use it occasionally, probably just when signing up for sites that I worry may start spamming me," he writes. "That said if I ever were to switch to Outlook.com I'd probably create a legitimate account based on my real name and wouldn't be using satan@outlook.com."

That would leave MrP- with two Outlook.com accounts just for himself, but he says a coworker is already way ahead of him, having signed up for five separate accounts in a single day.

"My coworker set up his accounts to forward to his primary Gmail account. He mainly just wanted them because they're his names on other sites and his first name is usually impossible to get on any site/service," MrP- writes.

Microsoft is clearly already aware of such practices. Kenneth Paul, a consultant cloud architect at EMC, posted to Twitter that he was having trouble signing up:

The error message may have been displayed because of a system glitch, but the fact that it's there at all implies that Microsoft was well aware that individuals would sign up for multiple accounts. How, then, does it justify its "one million people" claim?

Phishers and spammers welcome?

Somewhat more worrying, Microsoft seems to have been particularly lax about withholding certain addresses from circulation. One PC Pro staffer managed to grab steveballmer@outlook.com, but that's not the worst of it.

"I'm now the 'proud' owner of post.master@outlook.com," writes Reg reader "graeme_from_it". And he's not alone. There's also Ross Duggan, owner of no-reply@outlook.com; Ryan Hoffman, who nabbed donotreply@outlook.com; and who knows how many more.

Doubtless none of these three grabbed their addresses with ill intentions, but the fact that they were able to claim them suggests that Outlook.com may be a wide-open market for spammers, cybersquatters, phishers, and anyone else who wants to send deceptive emails.

When contacted for clarification regarding its policies on Outlook.com names, Microsoft responded with a statement, saying:

We appreciate the significant interest (and creativity) Outlook.com has received. Before launching, we reserved a number of addresses for support and administrative purposes, and have a significant number of security tools in place to combat malicious behavior.

Whichever way you slice it, though, at 1 million accounts and counting, Outlook.com still has a long way to go before it can match Gmail's reported 420 million accounts. But if the email address land grab bonanza continues, it may well reach a similar figure sooner than anyone expects.

Let's just be clear, though: We're talking about accounts. Not people. ®

Steps to Take Before Choosing a Business Continuity Partner

Anonymous Coward

How long until....

....@outlook.com has the same pessimistic spamassassin weight as @hotmail.com on the boxes I run? :)

12
0

Re: O.M.G.

So THAT's what stream of conscience writing looks like....

11
0

Re: Does Outlook.com support POP3?

Yup. (we're a small business that moved to using Office365 about a year ago......Outlook.com plays nicely with setting it up on an android device)

POP setting

Server name: XXXX.outlook.com

Port: 995

Encryption method: SSL

IMAP setting

Server name: XXXXX.outlook.com

Port: 993

Encryption method: SSL

SMTP setting

Server name: XXXXX.outlook.com

Port: 587

Encryption method: TLS

12
2

More from The Register

Interwebs taunt Sir Jony over Apple eye candy makeover
Hey Ive, Ive... add more unicorns, willya?
Apple: iOS7 dayglo Barbie makeover is UNFINISHED - report
Plus: You don't like the icons? Blame marketing
Red Hat to ditch MySQL for MariaDB in RHEL 7
So long, Oracle! Don't let the door hit you on the way out
Java EE 7 melds HTML5 with enterprise apps
New release arrives with GlassFish, NetBeans support
 breaking news
'Office Facebook' firm Tibbr wants you to PAY for mobe-meetings app
Great idea. Punters won't cough for it though
SCO vs. IBM battle resumes over ownership of Unix
Zombie lawsuit back and wants to suck the brains out of Linux
 breaking news
The only Waze is Google: Ad giant tipped to gobble map app 'for $1.3bn'
Pac-Man-satnav-ish upstart in bidding war with Apple, Facebook
 breaking news
PM Cameron calls for modern, programmable computers! (We think)
IT education musings to G8 chiefs to mystify IT industry
Apple at WWDC: Sleek new iOS, death of the big cats, pint-sized Mac Pro
CEO Cook: 'The biggest change to iOS since the introduction of the iPhone'
Chrome and Firefox are planet-wreckers, IE cuddles dolphins
Microsoft-commissioned study finds IE sucks less power than rival browsers