Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread 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? A 2004 study by AWeber.com shows that plain

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Matthias Schmidt
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

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael Lewis
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

powermail-discuss Digest #2872 - 08/23/08

2008-08-23 Thread PowerMail discussions
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

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Tim Lapin
On Saturday, August 23, 2008, Michael Lewis sent forth: 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

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael J . Hußmann
Tim Lapin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: You miss the point, I think. These messages cannot be displayed by PM in any mode. I have received a few myself. So far, this thread was about HTML-only mails, and PM has no problems displaying HTML-only mails that I am aware of. There is an issue with

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael Lewis
Tim Lapin sez: You miss the point, I think. These messages cannot be displayed by PM in any mode. I have received a few myself. I don't think that point was made. The original message only asked about HTML-only messages not being sent with text parts. If they aren't formatting the multipart

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Tim Lapin
On Saturday, August 23, 2008, Richard Hart sent forth: Tim Lapin wrote: These messages cannot be displayed by PM in any mode. I have received a few myself. Are you sure you meant to write that? I believe you might be experiencing problems, but I have never received a message in PowerMail

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael J . Hußmann
Tim Lapin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Exactly what I and others have written. This thread started with the question: 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? Then the

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Tim Lapin
On Saturday, August 23, 2008, Michael J. Hußmann sent forth: Tim Lapin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Exactly what I and others have written. This thread started with the question: Do anyone here have clue on what possible reasons there could be to choosing to send HTML-only messages,

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Matthias Schmidt
Am/On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 12:05:52 -0500 schrieb/wrote Michael Lewis: 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

Re(2): reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Peter Lovell
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? ... As to the original question, I don't know, given that such messages are more likely to be considered spam. Actually, I see

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread MB
Richard Hart said: Are you sure you meant to write that? I believe you might be experiencing problems, but I have never received a message in PowerMail that cannot be displayed. What does that mean: cannot be displayed? Well, if the HTML-message ends up in an attached file and there's no pure

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael J . Hußmann
Matthias Schmidt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Regarding the database, weather people prefer monolithic databases or not, it doesn't matter. The current backup technology doesn't prefer this structure. Same thing with priority and some other features. All mail clients do support that stuff, PM

HTML capabilities (was: reason for HTML-only?)

2008-08-23 Thread MB
Michael J. Hußmann said: PM's just fine. I would hate it to turn into a replica of one of the competing clients. Diversity is a good thing, and certainly preferrable to following standards that aren't even standards. Improving PowerMails HTML-capabilities is hardly a call for anything of what

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael Lewis
Tim Lapin sez: What are you talking about? RE-READ the part you quoted. I have received some HTML-only e-mails that did NOT open in PowerMail. Not often, mind you but more than once. What are you talking about? I responded to another message. Not yours. The original message said some

Re: reason for HTML-only?

2008-08-23 Thread Michael Lewis
Tim Lapin sez: Ah, my mistake. Apologies. I have a summer head cold and clearly, I am not reading things carefully enough. :) I sent out my last message before reading through the thread. Tried not to seem snarky, but may have come across that way anyway, especially after this had already