CHARLES ANGELICH wrote in a message to ROY J. TELLASON:

CA>> And ... why would having Microsoft as an ISP be a 'bad
CA>> thing'? 

RJT> Because of the way they do things -- their inclination to
RJT> "bend" standards to directions that make problems for
RJT> those who are running non-m$ operating systems, for
RJT> example. 

CA> I suppose that is true. I don't frequent M$ webpages unless
CA> it's absolutely necessary. I _have_ found many that won't allow the
CA> use of anything but IE.

Seems to me that the whole point of putting up a web page is to disseminate
some information.  If they want to be restrictive in terms of doing that, 
it's their loss.  Stupid,  really...

RJT> One that I just bumped into yesterday was emails containing only 
RJT> HTML code, for one example. Them and AOL are probably most 
RJT> responsible for that... 

CA> Most email software I have used with Windows allows use of HTML in
CA> email messages as an option that can be turned on/off. I've never
CA> used Outlook for anything and have no idea what it can or cannot
CA> do.

Neither have I.  And what I do use allows it,  and will display HTML-only
emails if I tell it that it's okay and that I trust the sender,  but
whether it _can_ or not is one thing,  whether they _should_ is another
issue.

CA> Of course if the default is ON I would guess many are unwilling to
CA> search for that option and disable it. Women seem to enjoy
CA> color, multiple size fonts, etc. and would not want plain text
CA> only. :-( 

Bad enough when they bulk a normal email up by adding an HTML portion in
addition to the text portion,  but when the leave the text portion off and
just send the HTML only,  that's a bit more aggravating.  Some of the
mailing lists won't pass that sort of thing along to me,  and one the ones
that do I just delete the damn things when they get here...

---