Rick Merrill wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
Rick Merrill wrote:
Ed Mullen wrote:
Rick Merrill wrote:
SM 2.22 is much slower "loading messages" that
contain jpg files.
Slower than what?
I just looked a the email source code and see that
it was actually downloading the images - I had at
imagined that they were embedded, thus I
thought they were slower than SM2.21!
So, nevermind, but thanks.
Confused! Inline or not, the data is there and needs to be
downloaded. Same data
xfer amount, yes?
Ed,
Conclusion is that emails with embedded pictures show faster than to
emails with embedded links which then have to be re-downloaded each time
the cache has been cleared.
Rick
Ah! Embedded "links." Yes, if the message just contains URL(s) to
graphics then, yes, much faster, less data. However, if you mean
embedded, attached, or remote graphics, then not.
http://edmullen.net/mozilla/moz_remote.php
So, three possibilities that all mean the image data is the same in each
case:
- image inline in message body
- image as attachment
- image as a remote image
Then, of course, the least data-burdensome is a fourth possibility of
just an URL link to an image: That's just text in the email.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
UnHallmark Card: How could two people as beautiful as you ... have such
an ugly baby?
_______________________________________________
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey
