powermail-discuss Digest #2872 - Saturday, August 23, 2008
reason for HTML-only?
by "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: reason for HTML-only?
by "Dave N" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: reason for HTML-only?
by "Rene Merz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: reason for HTML-only?
by "Matthias Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: reason for HTML-only?
by "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: reason for HTML-only?
From: "MB" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:19:49 +0200
Do anyone here have clue on what possible reasons there could be to
choosing to send HTML-only messages, instead of mixed messages without a
pure text part as well?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: reason for HTML-only?
From: "Dave N" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 18:11:44 -0700
I don't know, but I'm getting a lot of those. Some look like almost
blank in Powermail, and I have to use Apple Mail to view them. It's
getting harder to stick with PM now.
CTM: Please hurry up with v 6! We need some important features, like
being able to forward an (html) email without ruining it. And printing
that works as expected. And a Find/Replace function.
DN
in reply to ([EMAIL PROTECTED]), MB's message of 7:19 AM, 8/21/08
>Do anyone here have clue on what possible reasons there could be to
>choosing to send HTML-only messages, instead of mixed messages without a
>pure text part as well?
>
>
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: reason for HTML-only?
From: "Rene Merz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:30:40 +0200
MB hat am Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 geschrieben:
>Do anyone here have clue on what possible reasons there could be to
>choosing to send HTML-only messages, instead of mixed messages without a
>pure text part as well?
>
Is stupidity a good reason for it?
A 2004 study by AWeber.com shows that plain text messages are
undeliverable 1.15% of the time and HTML only messages were
undeliverable 2.3%. If sending HTML it is important to always send a
plain text alternative message, also called text/HTML multi-part mime format.
And of course (AWeber.com is in that business):
In the meantime HTML-mails (especially HTML-only mails) are recognised
by mailservers ans mailprograms as SPAM.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: reason for HTML-only?
From: "Matthias Schmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 17:58:55 +0200
Am/On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:30:40 +0200 schrieb/wrote Rene Merz:
>MB hat am Donnerstag, 21. August 2008 geschrieben:
>
>>Do anyone here have clue on what possible reasons there could be to
>>choosing to send HTML-only messages, instead of mixed messages without a
>>pure text part as well?
>>
>Is stupidity a good reason for it?
No.
I meanwhile also get sme messages html only.
And this is increasing......
More and more people do so and some services as well.
So yes, it gets more and more difficult t stick with PM.
One file database (time machine) with its 2GB limit, html messages and
some other missing features would make a major revision imho necessary.
Thanks and all the best
Matthias
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: reason for HTML-only?
From: "Michael Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:05:52 -0500
Matthias Schmidt sez:
>So yes, it gets more and more difficult t stick with PM.
Can you not use the button at the bottom to switch to HTML view or view
the message in a web browser. If neither of those work, than the email
has crappy HTML code and it isn't PM's fault.
--
Michael Lewis
Off Balance Productions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.offbalance.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
End of powermail-discuss Digest
