Why this phobia to HTML mail?

[Larry Ebbitt]

xavier caballe wrote:

> For instance, there are some newspapers that only allow two options:
> -Go to their web page and read the content there.

That should be more than adequate for such a rag. The only newspapers 
I have any interest in offer one option: newsprint.

> Problem is that most of the people I know is happy with HTML mail. 

That's the sort of mindlessness that lead to the dominance of windos.

> I believe that, from BSW point of view --and for PMMail survival--, the fact must be: how much people will use PMMail if we decide to not support HTML
> against how much people will be interested in use PMMail if we offer a decent HTML support. And I strongly believe that not support HTML at all means
> that PMMail will be useful just for a few people --the ones on this list and a few more-- but this won't be enough people to let it survive. Just remember
> the OS/2 case.

I do remember the OS/2 case and I believe the long slide downhill began 
with the support of Win-OS2. I seriously doubt tha HTML email support will
bring many new users.  The one's that like that sort of junk will be happy
with the MS junk. It could easily cause long-time users to drop it, also.
 
> I understand that you don't like HTML mail. Ok, just ask for a switch to disable that option... and everybody will be happy. 

It takes more than a switch.  It has to possible to just not install the
code.  I don't want it wasting my disk space or my time when the program
loads.

I don't understand the
> generalized phobia that some people on this list has to this feature: 

There's a more than excellent chance that such a feature would regress the
entire
package.  Integration of the eye-candy is almost sure to make the other
features
less responsive and, thus, make the entire thing less useful

-- 
Larry Ebbitt - Linux + OS/2 - Atlanta