Mark wrote:
> Gervase Markham wrote:
>
>>> Now, as for newsgroup posts, that's a different thing, and I understand
>>> that I probably should send in text format. How much of an issue is that
>>> these days?
>>
>> Still a big one.
>
> Which prompts the question . . . why is it still, or should it be? I
> can understand, back in the days of BBS popularity, where it would be a
> financial burden on the SYSOP to send packets of larger size than they
> needed to be. But today, many years later, why the resistance to change,
> when (at least in my opinion) HTML makes for a more pleasing page to
> read. Certainly, web browers/sites are not plain text based, so why then
> should messages be so? I'm playing devil's advocate here, but I'm still
> curious about it.
I remember back during the age of a BBS program called Fido when a new
program came out called Opus. The big change was adding ANSI capability
to messages for color and cursor control. Oh the uproar; the turmoil!
Are we just fighting change? Or does HTML make certain people think of
Outlook Express... Microsoft... and Bill Gates?
Does anyone remember the Opus mascot?
