Hi Allie, DB>> I can make plain text messages look OK in TB! but I'm aware whenever I DB>> send mail that the P.T. usually looks pretty dreadful on recipient's DB>> machines.
AM> Would you explain this further? I was thinking back to my Outlook Express days ... plain text messages looked, well, plain. I either didn't know or didn't care that I could configure the display font, and the different colours for lines of reply which TB is capable of was not so in OE, for instance. Many end users don't know enough/have enough time/have the inclination to delve into the plain text display settings of their client, and so plain text messages with fixed width fonts and no bold & italics and font sizes/colours look very plain indeed beside their HTML counterparts. AM> The problem with HTML mail is its overwhelming abuse. The ability to AM> make it the default editor encourages such abuse. Hmmm. While some people who use HTML mail may abuse it, it is the spammers etc themselves who are at fault, not HTML, I think. AM> I hate when HTML mail forces me to read it with a particular font and font AM> size. Well yes, that's precisely my point. TB too makes it difficult for people to exercise the choice of HTML over plain text, for those prefering HTML who are also responsible users. But this is a political issue as well as a preferential one. Having said all this, if it really is an issue of principle, I applaude TB! for not selling out. The purist attitude to me does seem a little groupy, though ... and I wonder how sustainable it is in reality. -- David Boggon [EMAIL PROTECTED] Narcissism is a necessary transitional phase during the consolidation of the ego. - Eric Neumann Using The Bat! 2.00 on Windows 2000 Service Pack 4 ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.00 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
