16 Jun
2000
16 Jun
'00
1:09 p.m.
On June 16, William Donzelli wrote:
I'm curious - what will some of us folks do when
HTML in email is used by
99 percent of the population? Is anyone writing mailers for the old
systems that can handle the HTML properly? Let's face it, HTML in email
is here and its growing. I would venture to say it is a natural
evolution, and all of the complaining we as a group do will have no
effect on the rest of the world. The rest of the world can use the excuse
"get a modern computer" - and for the most part they are right.
I still insist that it has nothing to do with "old" or "new"
computers...or even "old" or "new" mailers!
"Get a modern computer" doesn't do the trick...I can spin up X on a
twenty-year-old MicroVAX-II and run state-of-the-art GUI-fied email
software (kmail, vm under xemacs, whatever you want!) that will deal
with HTML email.
It really does seem to me that it's very much a Windoze/non-Windoze
thing. Next time someone emails you HTML crap, look at the headers.
It *all* comes from Windoze boxes. On the other hand, everyone I
associate with around here (home and work) uses Unix boxes of one
form or another...for the most part, they're all running perfectly
*NEW* modern hardware, running current, state-of-the-art
software...and I get NO HTML crap from any of them.
Non-HTML email is not exclusive to those of us who are into classic
computing. Non-HTML email isn't a "dying, quaint old way of doing
things" like some of the sold-on-Microsoft people seem to think.
-Dave McGuire
16 Jun
16 Jun
1:43 p.m.
It really does seem to me that it's very much a
Windoze/non-Windoze
thing. Next time someone emails you HTML crap, look at the headers.
It *all* comes from Windoze boxes. On the other hand, everyone I
associate with around here (home and work) uses Unix boxes of one
form or another...for the most part, they're all running perfectly
*NEW* modern hardware, running current, state-of-the-art
software...and I get NO HTML crap from any of them.
Hey, its a Windoze world, like it or not, and the public follows it. Same
with Macs. This list may be heavily slanted towards older systems
(understatement of the day), and I certainly can see why most of us do not
want HTML, but really, this is now in the minority. Most mailing lists I
am on do not discourage HTML at all - I just have to live with it. Same
with mail from my non-computer friends. I figure that one of these days I
will actually start using a modern mailer, rather than moan about it.
Non-HTML email is not exclusive to those of us who
are into classic
computing. Non-HTML email isn't a "dying, quaint old way of doing
things" like some of the sold-on-Microsoft people seem to think.
Well...yes it is. I would venture to say that these days, more use it
than not.
There really is no technical need to restrict HTML in email - the net is
not nearly as choked as it used to be, so the argument of "wasted
bandwith" is not really valid, and almost everyone has the ability to read
HTML email as it is to be viewed, including most of the Unix people. If
nearly everyone can read it without heavy demands on the net - what's
wrong with it?
William Dnzelli
aw288(a)osfn.org
1:38 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, William Donzelli wrote:
There really is no technical need to restrict HTML in
email - the net is
not nearly as choked as it used to be, so the argument of "wasted
bandwith" is not really valid, and almost everyone has the ability to read
Ahh, William, so spoiled by your high speed net connection :)
Think about the poor slobs in other parts of the world who still have to
pay by the minute.
I pity them as I download 20 megabyte AVIs over my cable modem paying only
$39.95 (plus franchise tax) a month ;)
Sellam International Man of Intrigue and Danger
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking for a six in a pile of nines...
Coming soon: VCF 4.0!
VCF East: Planning in Progress
See http://www.vintage.org for details!
9:25 p.m.
Ahh, William, so spoiled by your high speed net
connection :)
Think about the poor slobs in other parts of the world who still have to
pay by the minute.
Hasn't been that way for over a year now. I left ANS.
I pity them as I download 20 megabyte AVIs over my
cable modem paying only
$39.95 (plus franchise tax) a month ;)
Well, OK, RCS/RI has a decent connection as well, but I only use that
when at the Mill.
William Donzelli
aw288(a)osfn.org
2:42 p.m.
On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Dave McGuire wrote:
On June 16, William Donzelli wrote:
I still insist that it has nothing to do with "old" or "new"
computers...or even "old" or "new" mailers!
Yes; lots of people are running brand new systems running different
varieties of UNIX, not to mention the much smaller number of
new systems running other non-microsoft operating systems that rely
upon regular ASCII text for e-mail.
When one thinks about it, does it really make much sense to send
anything other than text in e-mail? After all, when I get out my
fountain pen and stationary to write someone a letter, it doesn't have
various fonts, graphics, etc. in it - which in no way makes it less
useful as a form of communication.
Also, plain old ASCII text e-mail takes less space to store, and
searching through it is quicker when one needs to find something ten
years later.
Non-HTML email is not exclusive to those of us who
are into classic
computing. Non-HTML email isn't a "dying, quaint old way of doing
things" like some of the sold-on-Microsoft people seem to think.
Well said!
--
R. D. Davis
rdd(a)perqlogic.com
http://www.perqlogic.com/rdd
410-744-4900
8980
days inactive
8980
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
aw288＠osfn.org -
foo＠siconic.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
rdd＠smart.net