Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 6th Dec 2007 16:27 UTC
Mac OS X Since my Cube could not run Leopard, and I did not have any other Macs, I was unable to delve into Leopard right away. Apple NL was kind enough to fix this problem for us, by generously loaning me a brand new MacBook with Leopard installed so I could review it for OSNews. Read on for the findings.
Thread beginning with comment 289061
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Stationary
by nevali on Thu 6th Dec 2007 21:44 UTC in reply to "Stationary"
nevali
Member since:
2006-10-12

When people tell me HTML email is evil, I always press them to tell me why.


I'll tell you why: because it's obnoxious and rude.

I want to read e-mail in the format and style that's most comfortable to me; anything else and you're immediately hindering any chances of me dealing with your message in an efficient fashion.

Businesses don't send people letters by post set in Comic Sans, or in magenta-coloured type, or in 16pt text for exactly the same reasons: you are in no position to judge how the recipient would best prefer to read the messages you're sending them, and so the only sensible option is to be as neutral as possible and allow them to make that decision for you.

Every GUI e-mail client lets you choose how exactly plain-text messages should be rendered: typeface, colour, size, etc. In contrast, very few allow you to override how “rich” messages should be rendered.

If it's that vitally important that rich formatting in something related to the message be preserved, send an attachment. My experience suggests that sending attachments isn't something anybody has any difficulty with, after all (indeed, I regularly receive screenshots which are pasted into Word or PowerPoint documents and then attached, presumably because people don't realise they can usually just paste directly into their e-mail client and it'll create an attachment automatically…)

after all, their browsers usually use the same rendering engine as their email client.


Yes, the geeks do, but a good proportion of the business world uses an e-mail client whose rendering engine is paralleled with its companion word processor's, rather than any web browser in production (and another portion uses an e-mail client whose rendering engine is like nothing else on the planet, mentioning no IBM Lotus Noteses)


Back on-topic… I don't find the MacBook only having one touchpad button the slightest bit of a problem: two-finger tap on the touchpad itself is (if you switch the option on) a right-click.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Stationary
by djst on Sat 8th Dec 2007 10:49 in reply to "RE: Stationary"
djst Member since:
2005-08-07

"When people tell me HTML email is evil, I always press them to tell me why."

I'll tell you why: because it's obnoxious and rude.

I want to read e-mail in the format and style that's most comfortable to me; anything else and you're immediately hindering any chances of me dealing with your message in an efficient fashion.


I think it's hilarious that your case against HTML formatting uses both italics and bold text. Thanks for proving yourself wrong. Saves a lot of time for the rest of us. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Stationary
by nevali on Sat 8th Dec 2007 11:32 in reply to "RE[2]: Stationary"
nevali Member since:
2006-10-12

I think it's hilarious that your case against HTML formatting uses both italics and bold text. Thanks for proving yourself wrong. Saves a lot of time for the rest of us. ;)


I didn't make against against HTML formatting, just its use in e-mail.

(FWIW, I make my living as a web developer, so making against HTML as a whole would be somewhat ridiculous).

Reply Parent Score: 2