In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Charles McCathieNevile) wrote:
> I don't think anyone called the users stupid. I think the point was
> that we are catering for the ones that are, in an effort that doesn't
> really work, at the expense of those who are trying to get it right.
There's nothing stupid about return meaning give me a newline. There's
also nothing stupid about wanting a rich text editor for mail that works
with several other popular rich text mail editors, without demanding
knowledge of html. We don't want our mail users to have to understand
html in order to make basic use of rich text mail.
> We'll change it when and if our users ask for it. So far they haven't.
> Maybe they will soon. Maybe they won't.
>
> We are users, asking for it. This sounds more like the standard Microsoft
> approach to features they don't like - or is there some clear and obvious
> algorithm for determining which users need to be asking for it?
Jesus Christ give me a friggin' break. You should be able to figure it
out. How many people use NS mail? How many use AOL mail? (Maybe we
will get to replace aol mail someday, if we play our cards right.) How
many are complaining about this behavior? (Many. Lots and Lots.
Almost none.)
--
jfrancis .com -and- moose .net
@netscape @ricochet
