delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi   search  
Mail Archives: cygwin/2003/04/10/22:27:36

Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:27:22 -0600
To: Randall R Schulz <rrschulz AT cris DOT com>, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: For The Record: HTML Email on the Internet; RFC 2557
Reply-To: greywolf AT the-junkyard DOT net
References: <5 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20030410160138 DOT 024b4998 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com> <5 DOT 2 DOT 1 DOT 1 DOT 2 DOT 20030410163139 DOT 02e4e220 AT pop3 DOT cris DOT com>
From: "Chalres "grey wolf" Banas" <greywolf AT the-junkyard DOT net>
Organization: the Junkyard
Message-ID: <oprnf03wgbqh427x@localhost>
In-Reply-To: <5.2.1.1.2.20030410163139.02e4e220@pop3.cris.com>
User-Agent: Opera7.0/Win32 M2 build 2637

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 17:04:25 -0700, Randall R Schulz <rrschulz AT cris DOT com> 
wrote:

> Max,
>
> At 16:26 2003-04-10, you wrote:
>>
>> There's nothing wrong with HTML mail when used tastefully and in a way 
>> which
>> enhances communication.
>>
>> Unfortunately, a lot (most?) of the time, HTML mail is used in such a 
>> way
>> that it detracts from the content of the message and is simply a 
>> needless
>> bandwidth sucker.
>
> As to taste, the pattern that typically presents itself is that when a 
> new, richer mode of expression becomes widely available is that they get 
> a little crazy at first. Soon enough, however, they settle down to 
> reasonably moderate usage. Desktop publishing showed this phenomenon with 
> excessive use of multiple fonts, font variation and other goo-gaws. You 
> don't see much of that any more.
>
email from mom.  she has used email for 6 months.  she sends unreadable 
pink text.

your argument becomes moot when you consider all the necomers to email who 
consistently use unreadable fonts and colors.

though i do see your point.

> I'm unsympathetic to the bandwidth waste argument. There's abundant 
> bandwidth on the Internet (in fact, there's a lot of dark fiber out there 
> just waiting to be used). I have only a dial-up modem and I have no 
> trouble doing the usual Internet browsing (in fact, probably more than 
> usual, and I'm a bit of troller, actually--as in trolling for resources 
> as a fisherman trolls for fish, that is). On top of my Web use, I get 
> upward of 500 email messages each day including the distributions of 25 
> mailing lists. Except for the 100 or so that are spam (I kid you not), I 
> save them all.
>
as do i.  though, i've moved up to cable.  (before that, DSL.)  some people 
(i'm sure even on this list) dial up to a long-distance number or get 
chaged per megabyte they use.  sucks for them when they need access to a 
list like this and they have to deal with emails that jack up their bill 
sky-high.

or what about people using palm pilots who can't read fancy emails?  or the 
system administrators who use Pine to remotely read their email because 
they don't have the ability to use a remote client?

you'd be jacking them all by sending HTML.  parsing bad HTML that clients 
like Outlook output is painful.

> By far most of the HTML mail is UCE. Some of that is grotesque (not for 
> its message content, but for its presentation) but even the spam is 
> mostly decent HTML. For the few pieces of mail that I actually solicit in 
> HTML mode (newsletters such as those published by the Java Developer 
> Connection or WinXPnews or the New Scientist newsletter) I enable the 
> Microsoft viewer in Eudora. Otherwise for simple font variations, bullets 
> and indents, Eudora's built-in rendering is fine (though not without its 
> glitches).
>
case in point.  it's annoying.  you've said so yourself, though not in so 
many words.  you have to configure your client to use the MS parser or else 
it's a little buggy.  that'd be enough to annoy me.

i solicit several newsletters, but i get them plaintext.  why?  my client 
of choice, Opera 7, does not display embedded images in email (backgrounds, 
the <img> tag, etc.).  i like that.  i want it to stay that way.  so, i get 
my newsletters in plaintext so they actually display right.  if HTML is the 
only option, then suck.  i don't need it.

it's my choice and i stick by it.  you're forcing your opinion on us.

> A decent dial-up modem (by which I mean a well-designed v.92 modem) will 
> compress HTML to the point where 10 to 11 kilobytes per second throughput 
> is readily achieved. This is almost twice the speed that most of the 
> links in the original ARPAnet used (not that it's very significant--I 
> just think it's interesting).
>
interesting, but useless information.  it bears no meaning to your 
argument.  besides, not everyone is on a connection clean enough to 
transfer at full speed, or their ISP doesn't have support yet for v.92.  
sorry, it's a moot point.

>
> Randall Schulz
>

-- 
Charles "grey wolf" Banas
http://the-junkyard.net  tech advisor

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -


  webmaster     delorie software   privacy  
  Copyright © 2019   by DJ Delorie     Updated Jul 2019