Carlos,
On Sunday 07 November 2004 15:33, Carlos E. R. wrote:
The Saturday 2004-11-06 at 17:24 -0800, Randall R Schulz wrote:
Arguments about "bandwidth" are irrelevant. The Internet has vastly
much more capacity than is used, and there's miles and miles of
dark optical cable that can simply be turned on when the demand
presents itself.
Then perhaps you¡d be happy to suply me with an all optical link from
my home to the telco? I have only seen copper on my block. I have to
use a modem and a telephone, and i have to pay each single minute of
the connection, plus the full first minute in advance.
I was not referring to the last mile. To my knowledge, no consumer
optical links are commercial available, at leat not in the States. I'm
referring to over-capacity in the so-called Internet backbone.
And html, although might be nice, makes every email thrice as big.
Check this:
No offense, Carlos, but that's nonsense. If I want to italicize
something, say the word "italicize" it will add seven bytes. The same
if I want to use bold or underline.
This is 2004, and the fact that some people want to cling to antiquated
mail client software should not be a reason to hold everyone back. The
point being there's no reason for multi-part postings with a plain text
part when there's a styled part.
-rw-r--r-- 1 cer users 288 2004-11-08 00:20 p1
-rw-r--r-- 1 cer users 818 2004-11-08 00:20 p2
p1 is the text part of the OP, p2 is the html part. See the
difference?
Here are the unabridged headers from your post (the one to which I'm
replying) as they reach me:
-==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-
Return-Path:
Received: from b.mx.sonic.net (eth0.b.mx.sonic.net [209.204.159.4])
by eth0.b.lds.sonic.net (8.12.11/8.12.9) with ESMTP id
iA8Ab6Vt011056
for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 02:37:06 -0800
Received: from lists.suse.com (lists.suse.de [195.135.221.131])
by b.mx.sonic.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id iA8AaxaQ009599
for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 02:37:05 -0800
Received: (qmail 31806 invoked by alias); 8 Nov 2004 10:36:56 -0000
Mailing-List: contact suse-linux-e-help@suse.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: mailto:suse-linux-e-help@suse.com
list-unsubscribe:
mailto:suse-linux-e-unsubscribe-rschulz=sonic.net@suse.com
list-post: mailto:suse-linux-e@suse.com
X-MIME-Notice: attachments may have been removed from this message
X-Mailinglist: suse-linux-e
X-Message-Number-for-archive: 214568
Delivered-To: mailing list suse-linux-e@suse.com
Received: (qmail 31781 invoked from network); 8 Nov 2004 10:36:55 -0000
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2004 00:33:42 +0100 (CET)
From: "Carlos E. R."
X-X-Sender: cer@nimrodel.valinor
To: SLE
In-Reply-To: <200411061724.37336.rschulz@sonic.net>
Message-ID:
References: <20041107000112.30CD613924@smtp.amb.org>
<200411070118.57006.leen.meyer@home.nl>
<200411061724.37336.rschulz@sonic.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN;
charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at scanhost.suse.de
Subject: Re: [SLE] Empty Trash
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on a.spam
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_06_12,
FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0
X-Spam-Level:
Status: R
X-Status: NC
X-KMail-EncryptionState:
X-KMail-SignatureState:
X-KMail-MDN-Sent:
-==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-
That's over 2000 bytes of overhead for each message! Adding a little
styled text isn't going to make anyone go broke if they can already
afford to subscribe to SuSE-Linux-E.
And again, I'm advocating styled text only, not full-blown HTML mail,
though I find that quite useful at times, too. I'll only view such mail
from known and trusted senders, of course.
--
Cheers,
Carlos Robinson
Honestly, I don't understand all the opposition to styled text in email,
but I've made my case and will not press it further.
Randall Schulz