Re: "Text vs. HTML" (My final comment)
Re: "Text vs. HTML" (My final comment)
- Subject: Re: "Text vs. HTML" (My final comment)
- From: Fred Showker <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2005 08:22:05 -0400
Someone said...
> Would you prefer to read a big sheet of paper filled with
> black plain text, instead of a beautifully designed newspaper?
> I'm a graphic designer and I can tell you that using things
> like graphics, custom fonts and colors helps a lot
> in delivering a message to the audience.
Truly spoken.
However, it's the *Graphic Designer's* first and foremost
obligation to deliver a specific message to a specific audience,
unless of course the publication is a "shot-gun" message
intended for a broad audience. But wait...
Another opinion agrees:
> I'm a visual person and a busy person. If the email contains
> all that I need to see including the images without having to
> make an extra trip to the web to see the content...
> I actually despise news stories that talk about some great new
> product without actually showing the product shot.
Both posters make valid points -- 'in general' -- however the initial
intent of the question has elluded them.
It's really not about reading the 'news stories' nor is it a newspaper.
We've begun to mix in personal preferences for other forms of media
outside of the scope of the initial question.
Herein, this discussion refers to a specific communication with very
specific content directed to an audience of subscribed readers who
choose to read that communication for that specific content. Those
are the first elements the designer must analyze, and satisfy,
when selecting the vehicle and structure of information delivery.
AUGD readers are not here for leisure nor is the Bulletin
attempting to romance them or convince them of anything.
The Bulletin by its very mission and nature is charged with
delivering short 'leaders' and quick reference bursts to the
subscribers for further investigation at their discretion.
The definition of "newsletter" and "bulletin" were learned in Design 101.
Then to the matter of size...
> around 20 kB... A HTML email with 4-5 pictures...
> can be less than 100 kB in size
True. But, it's not an issue of "received" size. It's an issue
of bulk throughput. Besides, the Apple listserver, I believe, has
an imposed size ceiling on posts, which is less than 100K.
Try sending a 90K message to this list.
I administrate a number of lists and any list admin wants to
intentionally limit the size of posts because of bandwidth load.
Most of my lists are relatively small -- but the DTG newsletter to
some 70K subscribers still takes 48 hours or so to send. If
I go over about 25K in text it can take longer.
Now, consider the number of lists and the throughput of content
purveyed each day from the Apple listserver -- WOW -- millions.
Increasing ceiling beyond about 30K would have a devastating effect,
not to mention slowing response rates.
And they have the deep pockets and big guns. I don't!
Then...
> In most of the HTML emails I receive, all the pictures and
> graphics are loaded from an external server, they are NOT
> embedded in the message.
The use of external images, (sometimes only 1 x 1 pixel) are the
posts you do NOT want to load or receive. This has been one of
the most successful techniques employed by predators, spammers
and organized online crime.
They easily identify your IP address and email client when it
calls that image to load -- deliverying a real, live, IP and
email address for further spamming or stalking.
One of the scourges imposed on us by the technology industry.
Followed by another fallacy ...
> Therefore, the message body is still plain text (it contains
> HTML code, but not pictures) and it is small.
Incorrect.
The user's email client STILL has to load every single pixel of
the tagged remote image. This is further exasperated by requiring
the users system and client to make the call and then negotiate the
individual packets from the remote server BEFORE it can begin to
display the image.
Embedded images on the other hand, download and are displayed
from the local hard drive, reading bits much faster to build
and then display the image.
Links to images are still better. (IMHO)
The editor extends the courtesy... but YOU decide to look or not...
Picture:
http://images.apple.com/home/2005/images/ipodnanohand20050907.jpg
Finally, the post that satisfies... Daniel said:
> I've had much success using text emails for my newsletter...
> url which leads the viewer to the full news item story...
> As a result of this, website traffic has increased, and I
> feel that the members are better informed.
Ahhh, a thing of beauty.
A communication that actually fulfills its mission to both
the message *and* the audience. Bravo.
This... communicator (designer) obviously gets it.
...
And, alas I agree with the previous poster who indicated people
are probably getting tired of this discussion.
All the valid points have been made and I for one see a pretty
clear consensus.
As Bob Dylan once said:
"You don't need a weatherman to see which way the wind blows."
:-) Excellent discussion folks!
Fred
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Augd mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden