----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Wilson" <mwilson(at)xionmedia.com>
To: <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2000 2:44 PM
Subject: RE: Sending mass emails in HTML format - DO NOT!


> I am kind of jumping in here late, so forgive me if I miss the point,

The point in my original post was to find out how others were handling HTML
mail and what the potential issues were.  The issues sited were:  large file
size, mail server bottlenecking, incompatibility with many user's mail
software, and complaints received by customers who don't have the patience
to wait for an HTML email to download.


> think this "HTML Mail Sucks" kind of mindset is ridiculous.

I think HTML mail usage needs to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.  In
my case, I am sending out mass email to subscribers who view email with a
variety of different software.  Therefore, the chance that I'm going to
alienate subscribers is higher, and thus I don't feel in my situation HTML
mail is the right path to take.  Does HTML suck in general?  I personally
don't care for it, and I even have a DSL connection.  I think someone who
sends an HTML email to relay a message that could have best been presented
in a text format is likely to alienate a lot of people quickly.


>We have polled
> over 30 of our sites to see what their preferences were and on
overwhelming
> 89% preferred HTML mail to regular email. Of the objections we did
receive,
> most were founded on the fact that the end user was confused as to what
HTML
> Mail even was.

89% preferred HTML mail?  Very interesting.  Do you have these statistics
posted somewhere?  That would be great if we could see them.  I wonder:   of
those 89% polled who said they liked it, how many of them were confused as
to what HTML mail was?


> I can agree that most 'Programmer' types probably hate it, but that is
> because we are generally anal about this stuff.

I think we're anal because we've had the misfortune of dealing with a mail
server crash and would like to take steps to minimize future ones if
possible.  We also receive complaints about download times, slowness, etc.
and we don't want to add more fuel to the fire by sending out large HTML
emails.


>The general public however
> is not as influenced by the things we have to deal with day-to-day. Most
> users like the "coolness" of it and could care less if it takes 2 more
> seconds to DL.

So I can throw that 8 to 10-second download rule out the door?  Cool!


>After all it isn't much different than logging onto the
> actual Site and retrieving this information via the browser.

Well, it's different in that when you send the HTML email, the customer is
being forced to download the site right then and there instead of receiving
a simple link on which they could choose to click or not.


>
> I am a member of several other Web Dev lists and it astonishes me that the
> level of interaction on those lists is so much higher than here.

Ouch.  Which Web Dev lists are those?  I'm sorry we don't live up to your
standards.  Do these web dev lists require a special sort of membership card
or secret handshake?  They're probably a little too high-class for us
lower-level cretins. :)


 >Most of the
> things that seem to be a "Big Deal" on the HWG are considered trivial on
the
> other lists and rarely mentioned. Why is that?

Maybe they're never a big deal because they are rarely mentioned?  Just a
thought.


>
> HTML Mail is the logical progression of technology in the email area,
unless
> of course we would like to stifle it and leave it as it is. I am not
saying
> it is the correct process for all things email, but it is certainly not
the
> incorrect process for all things email.

Semi-correct, then?


>It totally depends on the nature of
> you messages, audience and the worthiness of the content being formatted
in
> HTML.

Absolutely true.

Mike

• Web Designer Courses
• Off the Shelf Training Courses

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA