On 23 August 2017 22:10:10 GMT+02:00, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 23/08/2017 21:26, Dale wrote: >> Alan McKinnon wrote: >>> On 23/08/2017 09:03, Thomas Mueller wrote: >>>> You (Dale) seem to have corrected the multipart/alternative >problem, except one message (Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: downgrading >glibc) where multipart/alternative went through. >>>> >>>> I would never design an email client to send multipart/alternative >by default, and might design an email client to not support >multipart/alternative at all in composed messages. >>> >>> And that's why your mail client will never rule the world, but >Outlook >>> and GMail's web interface does. >>> >>> I think it's high time we techies all got over the HTML thing now. >We >>> all have high speed internet these days, you can't buy a spinning >drive >>> smaller than 1TB anymore and apart from a few holdfasts like decent >>> Mailman lists (eg this one and kernel.org), email is a thing that >idiots >>> at work use like it was IM. Most other folks moved on... >>> >> >> I tend to agree with that. Mine shows both plain text and HTML just >> fine. Either one works. By default, it blocks remote content which >> generally results in a somewhat plain text email anyway, until I tell >it >> to show remote stuff. The only reason I do set it up this way is for >> gentoo.org and kde.org. Everyone else gets HTML, all the time. >> >> I suspect the percentage of even Gentoo mailing list users that use >> software that can't show HTML is small. I wouldn't be surprised if it >is >> single digits even. That said, Seamonkey is starting to rub me the >> wrong way. The only reason I'm still using it is because of email >since >> some websites don't load correctly anymore. Since they changed that >> reply to list to reply to sender, that has thrown me a serious curve >> ball. Before mentioning Thunderbird, it has the same default. I >found >> that out while trying to figure out Seamonkey. So, if I switch from >> Seamonkey for email, it'll be something totally new and may even have >> the same stupid "feature". >> >> Maybe one day someone can post in HTML and no one says anything. o_O > > >The only cases I see nowadays of really needing non-HTML mail is a) >this >list and b) mutt (or alike terminal MUA) for server mails which is >invariably always text-only anyway... > >People who send me mails with excessive HTML just go in my kill file on >Office 365, and it's the company spending $brazillions on that storage, >not me
I agree as well.... I can handle HTML emails and won't complain. (As long as they don't set some idiotic font or background colours) But top-posting when replying to emails makes for unnecessary difficult reading. -- Joost -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
