3 ms·
HTML vs plaintext The plaintext email only nature resonated with me for long time but many email and chat services have gone rich text and it's great. Why I sa
by vanous 9y ago
HTML vs plaintext
The plaintext email only nature resonated with me for long time but many email and chat services have gone rich text and it's great. Why I say that...I used to use claws mail for many years for business email but being able to at least make text bold or add an inline image is valuable. For personal email mutt is great for me and Gmail too nowadays but for business to business, HTML is required.
It took me a while to get Thunderbird to mimick Claws. Thunderbird is much slower and crashing randomly frequently but is the best from the crowd.
Does Claws Mail allow me to write HTML styled messages?
No. A discussion has gone around over this topic, and the outcome was that HTML mail is not wanted. If you really need to send HTML, you can of course attach a webpage to an e-mail.
http://www.claws-mail.org/faq/index.php/General_Information#Does_Claws_Mail_allow_me_to_write_HTML_styled_messages.3F http://www.claws-mail.org/faq/index.php/General_Information#...
- zerocrates 9y agoThunderbird's slowness and other quirks got me to switch from it to the Windows mail app when I'm on Windows... suffice to say I don't recommend it. It looks nice and all, but isn't necessarily all that much faster, doesn't always render HTML email all that well, and has pieces of basic functionality mysteriously missing (i.e., to this day it doesn't understand what the Reply-To header is for). Chalk it up as another in a long line of Thunderbird alternatives that just don't measure up. I'd love to have something else I like (especially now in the twilight of XUL) but it's just a tough space.