> Chuq Von Rospach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said...
I already deleted your message, but it was the one where you
compared fancy HTML graphics email/plain ASCII text to colour
television vs. black and white.
I don't know about you, but I was around when they started going
from b&w to colour (in the mid-60s) and I don't recall any
negative outroar. I hear there was when television first came
out and it was tv vs. radio. But it seems that this still would
be more aptly applied to the WWW vs. Gopher thing.
I have a hi-res colour monitor and this pretty spiffy X-windows
client, but my text windows are black on white. I like them that
way. I find it odd this attitude that if I'm not using Netscape
to read mail, then somehow I'm crippled. I find it the exact
opposite, I have read mail with Netscape and find it exasperating.
I don't have the nifty features that I have with elm and I'm severely
restricted without my editor (vi). (if there's a way to use vi as
my default editor with Netscape, please tell me how). On top of
that, Netscape is an amazing resource hog, it's huge, it's slow,
it's cumbersome, and it's the most unreliable application I run (it
crashes a lot).
If people want to use HTML in their email, that's fine with me.
I don't see this technology as being rampant or anything and it
really doesn't bother me anymore than getting some attachment in
Base 64 that I when figure out how to unpack, find it's something
in MS Word. It's a matter of finding the right tools to be able
to read this stuff. It's annoying, but I can deal with it (well,
html mail is less annoying as it's readable to begin with). I'll
do it as the occasion arises, but I'm not quite ready to adopt
it 100% of the time. Dunno if I will. There's more people using
NT than Unix now isn't there? But I'm still on a Unix machine....
[Oh, and I have used Windows 98 and Windows NT. They crash even
more often than Netscape!]
