3 ms·
The complaint is that they're extending the email standard by sending single-URL bodies instead of the messages inline. I can see the point, but sending URLs i
by lallysingh 9y ago
The complaint is that they're extending the email standard by sending single-URL bodies instead of the messages inline. I can see the point, but sending URLs is still fine in my book, and this is a useful feature that's trying to get parity with Outlook.
- pjmlp 9y agoIncluding not being able to read them when using a 3rd party client?
- SquareWheel 9y agoIf it's just a URL, why wouldn't that work in other email clients? (Though personally I'm not a fan of the idea itself)
- pjmlp 9y agoOutlook has a way to send such messages that you only see a Webmail.dat attachment when using other clients, hence why I was jokingly asking if that was also part of achieving parity.
- SquareWheel 9y agoAh, missed that sorry. Thankfully haven't received such a file yet.
- Lionsion 9y ago> The complaint is that they're extending the email standard by sending single-URL bodies instead of the messages inline. Someone needs to write a client to recognize the gmail, single-URL, bodies and archive the content with the messages.