2 ms·

Looking at the mails I see from Outlook loving business people in corporations I would say it's true that people want colorful mail - not only colorful in words

Looking at the mails I see from Outlook loving business people in corporations I would say it's true that people want colorful mail - not only colorful in words, but in display. And used properly there can be a value in having more options in formatting. For my mails I try to be plain with 80 chars per line, but I've sent two HTML mails this year already, in situations where specific highlighting seemed useful.

sly010 7y ago
It is an excuse. Formatting (should) add virtually nothing. 102kb is a lot of text. There are pdf books that are smaller than that.
michaelt 7y ago
I too use colours and table from time to time in e-mails. But unless their e-mails are the length of a Shakespeare play, people aren't hitting the 102 KB limit with <b> tags. They're hitting it with <td valign=3D"top" class=3D"pre= headerContainer" style=3D"padding-top: 9px;mso-table-lspace: 0pt;mso-table-= rspace: 0pt;-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%;-webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;"><ta= ble border=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"0" width=3D"100%" class= =3D"mcnTextBlock" style=3D"min-width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;mso-ta= ble-lspace: 0pt;mso-table-rspace: 0pt;-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%;-webkit-te= xt-size-adjust: 100%;"> tags
- johannes1234321 7y ago
  Well, if I were writing by hand I certainly won't produce such a code. If I were using a visual editor where I can produce a table and drag columns and rows and make it nice (just like a non-technical user would) such code is produced quickly. Especially tables can become verbose, especially if the toolmaker wanted to support as many HTML rendering engines (in mail the variety is higher than with browsers) as possible while providing "pixel perfect" results. Of course 99% of mails doing this, do this for spamy/marketing reasons, not since it brings benefit to the content. (Which is no difference to typography and layout in web or print - brand recognition before content is common)

sly010 7y ago

It is an excuse. Formatting (should) add virtually nothing. 102kb is a lot of text. There are pdf books that are smaller than that.

michaelt 7y ago

I too use colours and table from time to time in e-mails. But unless their e-mails are the length of a Shakespeare play, people aren't hitting the 102 KB limit with <b> tags. They're hitting it with <td valign=3D"top" class=3D"pre= headerContainer" style=3D"padding-top: 9px;mso-table-lspace: 0pt;mso-table-= rspace: 0pt;-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%;-webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;"><ta= ble border=3D"0" cellpadding=3D"0" cellspacing=3D"0" width=3D"100%" class= =3D"mcnTextBlock" style=3D"min-width: 100%;border-collapse: collapse;mso-ta= ble-lspace: 0pt;mso-table-rspace: 0pt;-ms-text-size-adjust: 100%;-webkit-te= xt-size-adjust: 100%;"> tags

johannes1234321 7y ago
Well, if I were writing by hand I certainly won't produce such a code. If I were using a visual editor where I can produce a table and drag columns and rows and make it nice (just like a non-technical user would) such code is produced quickly. Especially tables can become verbose, especially if the toolmaker wanted to support as many HTML rendering engines (in mail the variety is higher than with browsers) as possible while providing "pixel perfect" results. Of course 99% of mails doing this, do this for spamy/marketing reasons, not since it brings benefit to the content. (Which is no difference to typography and layout in web or print - brand recognition before content is common)