On Mon, 03 Mar 2003 12:43, Mark Weaver wrote:
> Michael Adams wrote:
> > On Sat, 01 Mar 2003 07:00, Ron Stodden wrote:
> >>Simone Riccio wrote:
> >>>Dear Ron,
> >>>html is of course nice 2 see and maybe look professional but please
> >>>consider that not everyone on this list has broadband, and goes on
> >>>with 56Kbps modems. So, that's more than a cosmetic or geek or old
> >>>fashion thing... It involves respect for those who can be eased by the
> >>>lesser size of text messages!
> >>
> >>The greater size of html messages causes me, for one,  no extra cost or
> >>problem, and all I have is an old age pension - nobody could be worse
> >>off for resources.
> >>
> >>html does not require broadband, since it makes no perceptible
> >>difference in message download time.
> >
> > UTTER TRIPE
> > The overhead of HTML alone approximately doubles the size of an e-mail,
> > and then HTML can be used to embed so many different objects
> > <IMG
> > SRC"http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/gemini/gemini11/hires/s65-
> >58504.jpg">
> >
> > Ah - don't try this link folks. It is a 5.5 Meg pic. Dang i hope this
> > doesn't start loading into everyones client.
>
> who are those guys and what are they grinnin about?

LOL i went to NASA looking for a 10MB TIF, They have reorganised the pics 
recently and so i found this instead. This is the crew of one of the gemini 
missions. Imagine the size of this as a tif. Hopefully leaving out the "=" in 
the SRC attribute prevented it loading for anybody (netscape Mail users?).

-- 
Michael

Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Reply via email to