On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, Justin Krejci wrote: > I also don't see what is so bad about HTML mail in principal. I like the principal, but the practice has sometimes been terrible. It could be a simple way of marking up text, but in the hands of Microsoft, a small simple message with no markup (like this one) can be expanded into something hundreds of lines long. I'm not kidding. I'm not sure why they do it. A guy just sent me something the other day that was 3 KB as plain text but the HTML attachment -- merely repeating exactly the same information -- was literally more than 1,000 lines long. My theory is that Microsoft wants to create messages that don't look right in non-Microsoft MUAs. They try to complicate their HTML to achieve this goal, thereby making absurdly large messages. If successful, people will think "my email only looks right if I read it in a Microsoft email client," so they'll use one and they will send the ugly messages that no one can read without Microsoftware. Microsoft will get a stranglehold on the market. People don't know how to tell what program was used to send them an ugly message, they just know that it doesn't look right. Mike