On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Feli Wilcke <feli...@gmx.net> wrote: > As for the comparison between HTMLrendering in outlook and TB: I have > one account running in both MUA and cannot see there any major > difference. For me, TB's HTML rendering is sufficient.
I have no idea what is MUA (make-up artist?), but "sufficient" is a relative term. What is sufficient for you may be very insufficient for others. Someone also suggested that HTML is not email and that we should just open a message in Firefox if we want to see the HTML. Perhaps that is "sufficient" for him/her. But, once again, it might also be very insufficient for someone else. Personally, I rarely use HTML; but when I do need it, then TB is a relatively poor tool for both creating and viewing messages... in my opinion. -- jaywalker Windows XP Pro SP3 The Bat! Pro 4.2.36.4 OTFE ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 4.2.33.9 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
