The UK Home Automation Archive

Archive Home
Group Home
Search Archive


Advanced Search

The UKHA-ARCHIVE IS CEASING OPERATIONS 31 DEC 2024


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Fwd: The Early Xmas Shoppers Promotion


  • To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
  • Subject: RE: Fwd: The Early Xmas Shoppers Promotion
  • From: Andy Laurence <andy@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2002 10:00:16 +0000 (GMT)
  • Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
  • Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx

On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Timothy Morris wrote:
> > From: Mark Hetherington
> > might even have killed all HTML email to the list (which seems more
> likely
> > than a certain HTML email advocate converting to plain text after
> > consistently changing a plain text thread to HTML). Given that this
> > addresses certain concerns of certain members, I hope that the current
>
> This slimy type of insinuation is the one thing that I really don't like
> about this list, for some reason they seem to come from linux users more
> often than not (see what it's like?)
>
> If you want to have a dig, why not come out and have a dig rather than
> try to be sly. It wasn't me that converted everything to html it was
> yahoo. Rich text still has huge advantages, and if you can't see them
> then perhaps a visit to the opticians is necessary. I remember the days
> when Wordstar 1.2 was considered to be the Nirvana of wp programs, and
> that didn't even show bold test on screen.

I'm going to say very little on this, as it'll spark a war, if I say
anymore.  I won't reply after this.  Rich text has just the advantage of
formatting.  Whilt this is good for sending colourful spams, it's of no
use on this list.  This list generates considerable bandwidth.  99% of it
is text, with just the odd post, such as the Maplin advert yesterday being
anything more.  Rich text has considerably more overhead than plain text. 
As we don't need pretty colours for the information in the text, rich text
is redundant, IMO.

If everyone was to post in plain text, we would save considerable
bandwidth, which ultimately would result in less time collecting mail. 
This wouldn't make the slightest difference to us broadband users, but
would make a difference to 56kbps users, and especially mobile users. 
Have you seen the price of GPRS, and the speed of GSM?  I recently spent
around 8 minutes just downloading headers via GSM.  There was no way I was
going to do any more than that!

I'd urge people not to respond to this, as I think we all know eachother's
views.

Andy (crawling under stone)
--
Building a wireless community network for Bristol
http://consume.andylaurence.co.uk/
4x4 in town - bog brush for your teeth
NB: Alternate E-Mail - andylaurence at yahoo dot co dot uk


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT

http://www.automatedhome.co.uk
Post message: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Subscribe:  ukha_d-subscribe@xxxxxxx
Unsubscribe:  ukha_d-unsubscribe@xxxxxxx
List owner:  ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
List of UKHA Groups here - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/UKHA_Grouplists/


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index

Comments to the Webmaster are always welcomed, please use this contact form . Note that as this site is a mailing list archive, the Webmaster has no control over the contents of the messages. Comments about message content should be directed to the relevant mailing list.