On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:30:25 +0200, R�mi Pach [RP] wrote these
comments:
I didn't intend to joint the discussion here but this message
particularly disturbs me.
...
RP> Who uses DOS these days? Please, that's history!
There are a lot of great principles that come from the DOS days and
furthermore, we still compose plain text as we did in the DOS days. We
still use the keyboard and a blank space on the computer screen. Why
are the principles of effective text editing from the DOS days
history??? You aren't being reasonable here.
>> True, but the free caret system requires mono-spaced fonts.
RP> One more reason for the free caret to go. Ask normal e-mail users
RP> out there (i.e. not militant batters) what they would prefer and
RP> you'll see.
I fear that sort of survey because people by their very nature,
dislike change that involves relearning, even if it's change for the
better. The free caret interface was very awkward for me, when I first
met it, but I've grown to love it. If one had asked me if I wanted it
when I first met it, I would have said no.
If you sit a normal user down and go through the advantages of the
interface, then your survey results would markedly change. I'm not
saying that all will flock to the TB! editor, but many who initially
dislike the editor would begin to like it.
IOW's, TB!'s editor design offers advantages that a regular editor
doesn't offer ... and of course the converse applies. I personally
much prefer working with the advantages TB!'s editor offers in the
context of e-mail editing.
RP> First, who needs tables in an e-mail?
Are you serious? Weren't you the one who said that if *you* need to
send a table, you'd have to fire up a *separate* application, create
the table, attach it as a separate file and send it? Of course, this
exercise isn't unreasonably tedious for you. Wouldn't it be better to
simply create the table in the very e-mail document you're typing,
with the aid of smart tabbing that TB! offers (are you familiar with
smart tabbing in TB!'s editor)? :-)
The problem is that so many of us get so accustomed to doing things
ineffeciently. Unfortunately, bad philosophy of the modern age forces
us to adopt these inefficient methods. Using a proportional font to
read plain text mail is one such *modern, which must be better than
historical* philosophies. It makes using tables and accurately getting
them across to your reader very difficult using plain text. But Januk
made a strong point which is that plain text is the only format that
you're guaranteed that everyone will be able to read. Of course. if
you know what you're recipients can read then this is not an issue for
you, but it's a big issue for many and the widespread use of
proportional fonts is a frustration.
RP> Second, if you really need to create a table (once in a blue moon)
RP> you can use the spacebar.
This is very tedious.
RP> Third, you can be almost certain that a table created with TB will
RP> look awful to the recipient since 90% of all e-mail users have
RP> e-mail clients that use proportional fonts. That was my point and
RP> you have no answer to that.
Now that I see the advantage of using a fixed width font, I always use
it in the context of plain text formatting and reading, even if I am
able to use a proportional font. If others did the same, things would
be so much nicer and so standardised. What is supposed to be the main
advantage of HTML? Most can read it and it's standardised.
Unfortunately, again, these standards are being breached and browsers
render pages differently.
Using a fixed width font offers you the benefit of standardising
you're formatting, irrespective of which fixed width font you choose
to use. If you wish to standardise your formatting in this way with
other variable width font users, you'd need to use *the same* variable
width font. This is what the modern age has to offer. :-)
RP> The point is that if you turn off the auto-format feature you have
RP> to hit Alt-L all the time to reformat manually.
A drag, I agree. But I prefer doing this since I dislike using
auto-format mode.
RP> Try Eudora's editor and you'll see how well the autoformat feature
RP> is implemented. That should be a lesson for TB's programmers.
Eudora's editor is terrible. You have no control over what is
happening with your formatting. There's only soft wrapping (resulting
in virtual formatting) occurring there and not true formatting as in
TB!. It's one of those format upon sending drones. This design gets so
many users into trouble. There's *nothing* to learn there. It's one of
a few reasons, which by itself, is enough for me to say that I'd never
use Eudora.
I'm tired of seeing this exchange:
'Hey bud, you're message looks really funny here. The lines were way
too long.'
Eudora user:
'I don't know. It looks great over here. Must be a problem with your
e-mail program.'
Little does the Eudora know that the problem is at his end.
RP> The only differences I see between 1.53d and the 1.54 series are
RP> giimmicks and obscure features and shortcuts that no-one needs in
RP> real life. TB will never become a serious alternative to major
RP> e-mail clients if its developpers don't look at what people need
RP> in the *real world*, as opposed to a dedicated "fan club", which
RP> is what this mailing list sometimes appears to be. TB's editor is
RP> the only one of its kind. Can it be that TB is right and all the
RP> others wrong? Highly unlikely.
I can't really take your arguments seriously after reading this. You
really need to understand TB!'s features and appreciate why they're
there, i.e., their advantages and disadvantages, and why some features
differ from what's commonly available, before a good discussion can
occur here.
Anyway, I'm glad that TB! is different. It gives me choice. I don't
see the point of it being just like the others. I strongly feel that
this is why it has continued to survive. The developers have been
having to deal with this issue of a significant segment of their
target audience preferring features that are present in other mailers
despite their disadvantages and have been including some as an option.
I don't particularly mind their inclusion as long as I still have
access to what I consider to be the better ones.
--
.-.-.
( : ) �Allie C Martin
.-.\ ' /.-. List Moderator and fellow end user
(_.. 'Y' .._) TB! v1.54 Beta/15 & Win2K SP 2
( /|\ ) -
'-' | '-' PGPKey: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=PGPPubKey1
__
--
________________________________________________________
Archives : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ : http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com
