This is Interesting: Free Magazines for Graphics designers and webmasters
Home > Archive > Webmaster forum > August 2006 > Can you recommend good HTML e-mail editors?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Can you recommend good HTML e-mail editors?
|
|
| Charles 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| I'd like to use stationnary for my sales activities with a specific
font and a company logo in my signature when using e-mails. What e-mail
clients do you suggest? (Already tried MS Outlook 2003 and
Thunderbird).
Thanks,
| |
| Chaddy2222 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
|
Charles wrote:
> I'd like to use stationnary for my sales activities with a specific
> font and a company logo in my signature when using e-mails. What e-mail
> clients do you suggest? (Already tried MS Outlook 2003 and
> Thunderbird).
> Thanks,
Most Email clients will only except plain text. You should provide your
e-mails in plain text and just place a link to your Website at the end
of your e-mails, this also means that more people will be inclined to
actually read them.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.cjb.cc
| |
| Charles 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
|
Chaddy2222 wrote:
> Most Email clients will only except plain text.
Ok, but I still want an HTML e-mail client.
| |
| Karl Groves 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| "Chaddy2222" <spamlovermailbox-sicurity@yahoo.com.au> wrote in
news:1156345507.005704.100290@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>
> Charles wrote:
> Most Email clients will only except plain text. You should provide your
> e-mails in plain text and just place a link to your Website at the end
> of your e-mails, this also means that more people will be inclined to
> actually read them.
This is not true. In fact, most e-mail clients WILL accept HTML formatted
e-mail. The issue is that such support is not guaranteed. Also, users may
have adjusted their settings to avoid HTML formatted e-mails. This is
especially true of many corporate IT policies. Having said that, MOST
users will be able to receive HTML e-mails.
Rather than saying outright NOT to do something like this, we should
instead recommend that the OP place a link to the website (within comments
at the top) for those who can't see it. Like so:
<!--//
You're seeing this message because your e-mail software does not support
HTML e-mails or you've turned that feature off. For your convenience,
we've also placed this newsletter on our site at
http://www.example.com/foo/bar.html
//-->
--
Karl Groves
www.karlcore.com
| |
|
|
"Karl Groves" <karl@NOSPAMkarlcore.com> wrote in message
news:Xns98287544B45E2karlkarlcorecom@216.196.97.136...
>
> This is not true. In fact, most e-mail clients WILL accept HTML formatted
> e-mail. The issue is that such support is not guaranteed. Also, users may
> have adjusted their settings to avoid HTML formatted e-mails. This is
> especially true of many corporate IT policies. Having said that, MOST
> users will be able to receive HTML e-mails.
>
Can't or won't? Who cares? The effect is the same.
> Rather than saying outright NOT to do something like this, we should
> instead recommend that the OP place a link to the website (within comments
> at the top) for those who can't see it. Like so:
>
> <!--//
> You're seeing this message because your e-mail software does not support
> HTML e-mails or you've turned that feature off. For your convenience,
> we've also placed this newsletter on our site at
> http://www.example.com/foo/bar.html
> //-->
Or perhaps, just include a plaintext version in the same email as is the
generally-accepted practice. This way the uninitiated user does get put off
by the garbled mess that constitutes a HMTML email in a plaintext client.
CJM
| |
|
| Karl Groves wrote:
[html email]
> Rather than saying outright NOT to do something like this, we should
> instead recommend that the OP place a link to the website (within comments
> at the top) for those who can't see it. Like so:
>
> <!--//
> You're seeing this message because your e-mail software does not support
> HTML e-mails or you've turned that feature off. For your convenience,
> we've also placed this newsletter on our site at
> http://www.example.com/foo/bar.html
> //-->
May I please stress that the above line should be written as is, in
plain text? I'm subscribed to a newsletter that arrives once a week,
saying "if you can't read this email, please click here for the
newsletter on our site". Yup, in plain text, no url, so nothing
clickable of course. I can only get the URL by digging into the source
code of the email.
Yes, I have contacted them about it, explained how to solve it, and
they replied saying they'd take it up with their email-techies. But
no, it has not improved. Big huge well known company too.
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
| |
| Charles 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| A good HTML e-mail client will send both plain text and HTML versions
at the same time. The thing is that because the purpose is just for the
font and the logo, if the HTML version is converted my the recipient
into plain text, I just loose the logo and the font so the e-mail is
still readable. I also think most people can read HTML e-mail.
| |
| GreyWyvern 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| And lo, Els didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
> Karl Groves wrote:
>
>
> May I please stress that the above line should be written as is, in
> plain text? I'm subscribed to a newsletter that arrives once a week,
> saying "if you can't read this email, please click here for the
> newsletter on our site". Yup, in plain text, no url, so nothing
> clickable of course. I can only get the URL by digging into the source
> code of the email.
Whenever we send out newsletters to our list of subscribers, we always
send them in HTML format, but I take a little extra time each time to
create an equally informative text version which gets sent along as well.
Clients which cannot display HTML, or have HTML display disabled, will
display the text-only version. Clients which can display HTML display the
HTML version alone.
In either case, users of both types need have no idea the other version of
the email exists; it's all determined by their client settings. No need
for any "click here" links of any kind :) Having a second version of each
email you send out residing on your website seems absurd to me.
Grey
--
The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
pitfall corollary that nothing is ridiculous.
- http://www.greywyvern.com/orca#search - Orca Search: Full-featured
spider and site-search engine
| |
| David Cary Hart 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| On 23 Aug 2006 07:54:33 -0700, "Charles" <landemaine@XXXXXXXXXX>
opined:
> I'd like to use stationnary for my sales activities with a specific
> font and a company logo in my signature when using e-mails. What
> e-mail clients do you suggest? (Already tried MS Outlook 2003 and
> Thunderbird).
> Thanks,
>
Are you aware of the negative impact of sending HTML emails? Aside
from usually being an eyesore they unnecessarily consume cycles and
bandwidth.
--
"Black Hole": The economic effect of administering a DNSBL
Our DNSBL - Eliminate Spam at the Source: http://www.TQMcube.com
Don't Subsidize Criminals: http://boulderpledge.org
| |
|
| GreyWyvern wrote:
> Whenever we send out newsletters to our list of subscribers, we always
> send them in HTML format, but I take a little extra time each time to
> create an equally informative text version which gets sent along as well.
> Clients which cannot display HTML, or have HTML display disabled, will
> display the text-only version. Clients which can display HTML display the
> HTML version alone.
Some of my friends keep sending me HTML email (they have no idea
they're doing so), and it just translates as text in my OE, and gives
the html version as an attachment. This is not the same as what you
described, is it?
> In either case, users of both types need have no idea the other version of
> the email exists; it's all determined by their client settings. No need
> for any "click here" links of any kind :) Having a second version of each
> email you send out residing on your website seems absurd to me.
Well, not really, as this particular newsletter is a showcase of new
or temporarily low priced articles, so it has pictures and links and
price info in it. In a text only version they couldn't show the
articles, which would make the email a lot less enticing to go buy
them.
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
| |
| GreyWyvern 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| And lo, Els didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
> GreyWyvern wrote:
>
>
> Some of my friends keep sending me HTML email (they have no idea
> they're doing so), and it just translates as text in my OE, and gives
> the html version as an attachment. This is not the same as what you
> described, is it?
No, I use a modified version of PHPMailer to send our newsletters which
allows you to add separate HTML and Text-Only parts. I'm sure other
newsletter software packages allow you to do this too. Normal users
wouldn't have access to such in a regular email client.
>
> Well, not really, as this particular newsletter is a showcase of new
> or temporarily low priced articles, so it has pictures and links and
> price info in it. In a text only version they couldn't show the
> articles, which would make the email a lot less enticing to go buy
> them.
I just put URIs in the text-only version. Most clients know how to
automatically link those, even in text-only viewing. For those which
don't, users can always copy/paste.
As for pictures... well, users who use a client which does not accept HTML
mail, or who specifically set their clients to display text-only, it's a
fair bet that these people don't want to see your pictures in their inbox
anyway :)
What you're selling should already be on your website on it's own standard
page, and you should be linking to those to avoid duplicating your
efforts. That's my view, anyway!
Grey
--
The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
pitfall corollary that nothing is ridiculous.
- http://www.greywyvern.com/orca#search - Orca Search: Full-featured
spider and site-search engine
| |
| GreyWyvern 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| And lo, GreyWyvern didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
> What you're selling should already be on your website on it's own
> standard page
Don't anyone start...
Grey
| |
|
| GreyWyvern wrote:
> And lo, GreyWyvern didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
>
>
> Don't anyone start...
Believe it or not - I didn't notice until you repeated it <g>
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
| |
|
| GreyWyvern wrote:
> And lo, Els didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
>
>
> No, I use a modified version of PHPMailer to send our newsletters which
> allows you to add separate HTML and Text-Only parts. I'm sure other
> newsletter software packages allow you to do this too. Normal users
> wouldn't have access to such in a regular email client.
I was afraid of that...
>
> I just put URIs in the text-only version. Most clients know how to
> automatically link those, even in text-only viewing. For those which
> don't, users can always copy/paste.
Indeed. The problem with this company is only that the email which
should hold the url(s), only holds a 'click here' link which of course
doesn't work.
> As for pictures... well, users who use a client which does not accept HTML
> mail, or who specifically set their clients to display text-only, it's a
> fair bet that these people don't want to see your pictures in their inbox
> anyway :)
Which is the reason for the subscription to the text-only mail. If
only they could understand the problem with an html link in text-only
mail :-(
> What you're selling should already be on your website on it's own standard
> page, and you should be linking to those to avoid duplicating your
> efforts. That's my view, anyway!
Makes sense too :-)
--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| GreyWyvern wrote
> No, I use a modified version of PHPMailer to send our newsletters
> which allows you to add separate HTML and Text-Only parts.
Isn't it a chore having to write two messages every time?
I always send emails in plain text, be it automated ones from a site, or
ones I send myself. I have no need to use HTML in them.
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| GreyWyvern wrote
> And lo, GreyWyvern didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
>
>
> Don't anyone start...
:o)
Again, dear Grey, I didn't notice it until you highlighted it!
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| GreyWyvern 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| And lo, Charles Sweeney didst speak in alt.www.webmaster:
> GreyWyvern wrote
>
>
> Isn't it a chore having to write two messages every time?
Not really. Text emails, for us anyway, are really just a Ctrl+A of the
HTML email and then straightening things up a bit. For a decent sized
newsletter (2 pages printed) it takes all of ten minutes, and usually less.
> I always send emails in plain text, be it automated ones from a site, or
> ones I send myself. I have no need to use HTML in them.
Unfortunately we are in competition with dozens of other "professional"
looking firms who spend many times more than we do on marketing, so the
eye-candy facade must be upheld.
Grey
--
The technical axiom that nothing is impossible sinisterly implies the
pitfall corollary that nothing is ridiculous.
- http://www.greywyvern.com/orca#search - Orca Search: Full-featured
spider and site-search engine
| |
| William Tasso 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| Fleeing from the madness of the http://groups.google.com jungle
Charles <landemaine@XXXXXXXXXX> stumbled into news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:
> A good HTML e-mail client will send both plain text and HTML versions
> at the same time. The thing is that because the purpose is just for the
> font and the logo, if the HTML version is converted my the recipient
> into plain text, I just loose the logo and the font so the e-mail is
> still readable.
This is definately the prefered method.
> I also think most people can read HTML e-mail.
Can? most likely
will? most unlikely - once folk start to enjoy the beneits of plain text
they rarely look back. IME, MMV, etc.
--
William Tasso
http://williamtasso.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp
| |
| William Tasso 2006-08-23, 7:00 pm |
| Fleeing from the madness of the No thank you jungle
Charles Sweeney <me@charlessweeney.com> stumbled into
news:alt.www.webmaster
and said:
> GreyWyvern wrote
>
>
> Isn't it a chore having to write two messages every time?
Depends
> I always send emails in plain text, be it automated ones from a site, or
> ones I send myself. I have no need to use HTML in them.
Script could generate two (or more) output formats from the same source
data if one were so inclined.
--
William Tasso
http://williamtasso.com/words/what-is-usenet.asp
| |
|
| In <1156344873.411380.93540@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
"Charles" <landemaine@XXXXXXXXXX> mentions:
>I'd like to use stationnary for my sales activities with a specific
>font and a company logo in my signature when using e-mails. What e-mail
>clients do you suggest? (Already tried MS Outlook 2003 and
>Thunderbird).
>Thanks,
I strongly recommend against HTML email messages.
Also, I recommend against accepting them, here's why:
Joe spammer sends you an HTML email with an image like this:
<img src="http://spammers.example.com/img/foo.gif?V=120">
Now if foo.gif?V=120 is loaded, Joe Spammer knows someone actually
opened his email in an HTML aware browser. You've just given him
the green light to send more spam, he knows you're "real". (on the
plus side, some spam software can detect this and flag it)
HTML-aware email programs often have a "don't load images" feature,
and if you are stuck with an HTML-ish email program, I'd suggest turning
off images for this reason.
I consider HTML in email to actually be rather rude, I often
won't even look at it. My email program is text-based not because
I'm deprived, but because *I like it that way.* If I do look at it,
I usually use 'links' or some other text-mode browser, just to see
if it's even worth reading.
Some anti-spam tools might actually give an HTML message a higher
spam score. I'm awful tempted to adjust mine to do that, almost
all HTML email I get is spam.
As more people get phished, scammed and spammed, they will likely agree
with my sentiment. Though I've never been phished.. and there are many
other, better ways to detect it, simply removing HTML support from email
is an excellent way for those who don't wish to learn about URL's to
avoid being snagged.
Jamie
--
http://www.geniegate.com Custom web programming
guhzo_42@lnubb.pbz (rot13) User Management Solutions
| |
| PDannyD 2006-08-23, 10:34 pm |
| On Wednesday 23 August 2006 15:54, Charles [landemaine@XXXXXXXXXX] wrote in
message <1156344873.411380.93540@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
> I'd like to use stationnary for my sales activities with a specific
> font and a company logo in my signature when using e-mails.
Hmmm, bad idea.
I recently had a forwarded email from a friend (he accepts HTML emails and,
yes, he does get viruses) about an SD memory card offer which I was
certainly interested in but by the time it had come to me it was stripped
of all but the text of the message which was a bit scrambled.
I got him to send it again to my Hotmail account and had to enable the
content to see anything other than grey squares and scattered text.
The original message looked like a web page with images and hyperlinks from
those images and fancy fonts, etc. Nowhere was there any information about
who they were, what their site address was and the text was so badly
formatted (I assume it was a tables-for-layout page) that I couldn't be
sure what offer related to which product.
Personally I'd send only brief plain-text emails with a simple link to a
more flamboyant web page.
eg: taking the memory card email as an example
2GB SD memory card - £17.99 each
See the full range at http://www.mymemory.co.uk
That's the gist of the email in two lines, possibly a third line for a
catchy phrase. No logo, no font, no formatting, no problem. Heck! The first
line could even be the subject line of the email.
I don't care what MyMemory's logo looks like. I don't care what font their
designer wants me to use. I want to know what's for sale, how much, where
to buy and how to order.
| |
| PDannyD 2006-08-24, 3:40 am |
| On Thursday 24 August 2006 00:34, PDannyD
[dan1970@scenicplace.freeserve.co.uk] wrote in message <44ece95c.0@entanet>
> On Wednesday 23 August 2006 15:54, Charles [landemaine@XXXXXXXXXX] wrote in
> message <1156344873.411380.93540@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>
>
>
> Hmmm, bad idea.
>
> I recently had a forwarded email...<snip>
Well, that wasn't wuite what I meantto write. Nearly but not quite. One
shouldn't try to post messages after sampling a particularly fine single
malt. :-)
Hic.
| |
| Andy Mabbett 2006-08-24, 3:40 am |
| In message <44ecee2f.0@entanet>, PDannyD
<dan1970@scenicplace.freeserve.co.uk> writes
>that wasn't wuite what I meantto write
Uh huh...
--
Andy Mabbett
Say "NO!" to compulsory ID Cards: <http://www.no2id.net/>
Free Our Data: <http://www.freeourdata.org.uk>
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-26, 6:31 am |
| GreyWyvern wrote
> Unfortunately we are in competition with dozens of other
> "professional" looking firms who spend many times more than we do on
> marketing, so the eye-candy facade must be upheld.
Unfortunate indeed!
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-26, 6:31 am |
| William Tasso wrote
> Fleeing from the madness of the No thank you jungle
> Charles Sweeney <me@charlessweeney.com> stumbled into
> news:alt.www.webmaster
> and said:
>
> Script could generate two (or more) output formats from the same source
> data if one were so inclined.
Good point.
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-26, 6:31 am |
| PDannyD wrote
> Personally I'd send only brief plain-text emails with a simple link to
> a more flamboyant web page.
>
> eg: taking the memory card email as an example
> 2GB SD memory card - £17.99 each
> See the full range at http://www.mymemory.co.uk
>
> That's the gist of the email in two lines, possibly a third line for a
> catchy phrase. No logo, no font, no formatting, no problem. Heck! The
> first line could even be the subject line of the email.
Ssssshhhh!! Don't give away the secret!
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
| |
| Charles Sweeney 2006-08-26, 6:31 am |
| PDannyD wrote
> sampling a particularly fine
> single malt. :-)
mmmmmmm!
--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com
|
|
|
| | Copyright 2003 - 2008 forum4designers.com Software forum Computer Hardware reviews |
|