Joe Francis wrote:
>
> 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.
Of course not. So, we are agreed that the HTML-mode Message Composer
should by default open up a <pre>formatted block. Shall I file a bug?
> 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.
Mail users don't have to understand html, they just have to understand
a word processor.
>
> > 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.)
For every customer who complains, how many remain silent?
