Hello Leif, On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 18:05:26 -0700 GMT(2/26/2005, 7:05 PM -0600 GMT), per mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Leif Gregory wrote:
> Nope. I still don't want HTML support either, I'm just tired of always > arguing about it. This thread is really about opinions. Everyone has one. :-) ...<snip> > Now, TB is a for profit application. This is a very important point which should not be lost in the debate about opinions. > XHTML, WCAG, CSS, Section 508 are moving targets. Isn't most of the software / IT market a moving target? :-) > I want e-mail not a webpage. Don't you really want your email client to be just text based? What about the users who want HTML in their email? Why do I ask these questions? Well to be honest I am trying to make people think, and it really comes down to my opinion. I want TB to implement HTML email provided it is an option with the default off. I don't want to get into the various ways of implementing the option. Just so people have a choice which continues to support the security characteristic of TB. So people can jump all over me, and I could care less. Personally I read only text based email at home for 2 reasons. First, I would rather read text email, and second for security reasons. I understand your position to use a browser for HTML email when using TB. It is a good position. :-) I use TB for my personal email client. I don't plan on changing unless I have a pressing need to use IMAP, and TB has NOT cleaned up the significant issues. So why am I for increased HTML capabilities in TB? Without knowing the market statistics / trends on email clients AND the current profitability of RIT, I am on record of my opinion for selfish reasons. I want TB to continue to be a viable product. My thinking is that by incorporating better HTML capabilities that RIT would be able to expand their market share. The relevant question here is what would RIT's margins be? IOW would RIT's increased revenue pay back the investment into the increased HTML capabilities. Don't read more into my words than what is in text. Business starts with revenue. If you don't have revenue, the expenses are academic and soon non-existent. For all I know Stefan and Max have I nice nest egg stashed away for all of the work. ...<snip> I use to use Virtual Access (OLR) which was a very good text based email client. I could use it to do email, newsgroups, and CIS. Everything all in one without having to add additional software / plugins. If development would not have ceased I would still be using VA today. Because of the VA situation I moved on to TB for email, and use Agent for newsgroups. I am no longer a member of CIS, and believe the older technology is no longer provided. Funny thing is Agent is still trying to implement features in version 2 promised years ago. I have yet to upgrade. IMHO VA died because the owners did not MARKET their product appropriately. IIRC they provided it free with bannerware. The user could purchase the license and remove the advertising for a relatively small price. In my opinion this approach to the market created an image of lesser quality. Now without having access to the books my guess is VA had revenue problems which could not sustain the development costs. Being a user of technology both professionally and personally for many years the ONLY one sure guarantee in the technology market is CHANGE. Businesses in this market need to CHANGE with the market. -- Best Regards, Greg Strong Using The Bat! v3.0.2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 2 ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.0.9.1 Deep Alpha | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
