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