On Saturday, July 10, 2004, 12:10:05 AM, Russell L. Farabee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
RLF> jwayne, RLF> Friday, July 9, 2004, 6:25:25 PM, you wrote: ============================== RLF> It's a mess. I have a work around that involves inserting the html code via search and replace, but it is cumbersome at best. What I have also done, which is fairly easy is to create my messages and save them in a subfolder. You could save them anywhere. I then copy them to my outbox, change the subject, recipient, and whatever else I need to modify and then resave them to the outbox. I can't tell you how, but when I do that, the message id changes, and of course the date changes. <snip> (other workarounds/problems relating to TB's numerous HTML editor problems) </snip> RLF> I have never used outlook, so I can't comment on whether its easier or harder, but I did check PocoMail and Becky and a number of others and for my purposes concluded that The Bat is still a better choice. I think the HTML editor and rendering is just way down on their list of things to fix, but trust that they will finally devote the resources to fix it. I'd be happy as a clam if they would just fix the spell checker. ============================== Ya, know, I used to be a die-hard text-only email user and composer. But after delving more into usability studies, the importance of font and layout control in _email_ became very apparent. (And the pseudo-underlining of that previous email is a trivial example!) I know that this is almost a religious topic to many, but I hope that the TB authors recognize the importance of HTML email and continue to improve its capabilities. jon -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________ Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
