why all my email is plain text
I have been a rather effective email user since the 80s. It's the MESSAGE that counts. The CONTENT. Not the glitz, cute fonts, colors, icons, logos, stickers, emojis or other decorations. panix is my main ISP (Internet Service Provider). I usually ssh into their NetBSD server and use the PINE email program. It's fast, responsive, and allows me to manage my email effectively. It also means that it's nearly impossible for malware, spyware, tracking cookies and other HTML atrocities to run. [admittedly, PINE has a LYNX ability to text-display HTML]. I archive emails by person or topic. Those are plain text files, so I can GREP them and easily use any editor to manipulate the content. HTML emails are usually 3x the file size of plain text. That counts against my disk quota. I don't appreciate folks filling my files with fluff. I prefer the digest so I get complete conversations albeit delayed up to a day. -- jeff jonas
I usually ssh into their NetBSD server and use the PINE email program. It's fast, responsive, and allows me to manage my email effectively. It also means that it's nearly impossible for malware, spyware, tracking cookies and other HTML atrocities to run. [admittedly, PINE has a LYNX ability to text-display HTML].
High five fellow Pine mail client user (alpine here!) I have my own server co-located at a Tier-1 internet facility. Just done it for years. Lots of friends have shell accounts on it and it usually hits 5 9's of uptime. Extra capacity if VCF needed something. I call an external program to look at HTML links that is a just a script with a pause, so I can copy and paste the URLs that wrap around the terminal window 17 times. Used to run NetBSD on it even, but once we went virtualized at the time BSD didn't behave well so moved off of it. Kind of miss it though. - Ethan
I heard that PINE is Not Elm, but I wasn't ever so sure.... -andy
On Jul 2, 2021, at 3:57 PM, Ethan O'Toole via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
I usually ssh into their NetBSD server and use the PINE email program. It's fast, responsive, and allows me to manage my email effectively. It also means that it's nearly impossible for malware, spyware, tracking cookies and other HTML atrocities to run. [admittedly, PINE has a LYNX ability to text-display HTML].
High five fellow Pine mail client user (alpine here!) I have my own server co-located at a Tier-1 internet facility. Just done it for years. Lots of friends have shell accounts on it and it usually hits 5 9's of uptime. Extra capacity if VCF needed something.
I call an external program to look at HTML links that is a just a script with a pause, so I can copy and paste the URLs that wrap around the terminal window 17 times.
Used to run NetBSD on it even, but once we went virtualized at the time BSD didn't behave well so moved off of it. Kind of miss it though.
- Ethan
On Fri, 2 Jul 2021, Ethan O'Toole via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
High five fellow Pine mail client user (alpine here!) I have my own server co-located at a Tier-1 internet facility. Just done it for years. Lots of friends have shell accounts on it and it usually hits 5 9's of uptime. Extra capacity if VCF needed something.
+1 for Alpine. I've been running my own sendmail server for going on 30 years. Mike Loewen mloewen@cpumagic.scol.pa.us Old Technology http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/
I also run a sendmail server but only for about 20 years so I guess I am newbie. I like that you can use text when you want text, html when you want html. It's the user's choice. And it's private. I also love the spam filtering. Bill On Fri, Jul 2, 2021 at 5:46 PM Mike Loewen via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
On Fri, 2 Jul 2021, Ethan O'Toole via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
High five fellow Pine mail client user (alpine here!) I have my own server co-located at a Tier-1 internet facility. Just done it for years. Lots of friends have shell accounts on it and it usually hits 5 9's of uptime. Extra capacity if VCF needed something.
+1 for Alpine. I've been running my own sendmail server for going on 30 years.
Mike Loewen mloewen@cpumagic.scol.pa.us Old Technology http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/
On 7/2/21 5:57 PM, Bill Degnan via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I also run a sendmail server but only for about 20 years so I guess I am newbie. I like that you can use text when you want text, html when you want html. It's the user's choice.
I will reserve at least most of my comment here. I guess a lot of people just don't get the ramifications; the issues have been well explained by several people here. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
-----Original Message----- From: vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic-bounces@lists.vcfed.org> On Behalf Of Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic Sent: 02 July 2021 23:29 To: vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org>; mloewen@cpumagic.scol.pa.us Cc: Dave McGuire <mcguire@neurotica.com> Subject: Re: [vcf-midatlantic] why all my email is plain text
On 7/2/21 5:57 PM, Bill Degnan via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I also run a sendmail server but only for about 20 years so I guess I am newbie. I like that you can use text when you want text, html when you want html. It's the user's choice.
I will reserve at least most of my comment here. I guess a lot of people just don't get the ramifications; the issues have been well explained by several people here.
-Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
I will just say that in some environments we may have no choice. When I worked all external e-mail servers were blocked, including any webmail servers, and the company e-mail was a web front end that did not have any option for plain text e-mail. Dave
On 7/3/21 4:14 AM, dave.g4ugm--- via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I also run a sendmail server but only for about 20 years so I guess I am newbie. I like that you can use text when you want text, html when you want html. It's the user's choice.
I will reserve at least most of my comment here. I guess a lot of people just don't get the ramifications; the issues have been well explained by several people here.
I will just say that in some environments we may have no choice. When I worked all external e-mail servers were blocked, including any webmail servers, and the company e-mail was a web front end that did not have any option for plain text e-mail.
Rushing in and using complex tools without learning anything about them first isn't exclusive to individuals, corporations do it too. And further up the chain to the vendor, there's really nothing that a corporation won't abuse (knowingly or otherwise) in order to make more money. And this STILL doesn't make it right. None of this reflects poorly on you personally, of course. No disrespect intended. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
-----Original Message----- From: vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic-bounces@lists.vcfed.org> On Behalf Of Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic Sent: 03 July 2021 15:41 To: vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> Cc: Dave McGuire <mcguire@neurotica.com> Subject: Re: [vcf-midatlantic] why all my email is plain text
On 7/3/21 4:14 AM, dave.g4ugm--- via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I also run a sendmail server but only for about 20 years so I guess I am newbie. I like that you can use text when you want text, html when you want html. It's the user's choice.
I will reserve at least most of my comment here. I guess a lot of people just don't get the ramifications; the issues have been well explained by several people here.
I will just say that in some environments we may have no choice. When I worked all external e-mail servers were blocked, including any webmail servers, and the company e-mail was a web front end that did not have any option for plain text e-mail.
Rushing in and using complex tools without learning anything about them first isn't exclusive to individuals, corporations do it too. And further up the chain to the vendor, there's really nothing that a corporation won't abuse (knowingly or otherwise) in order to make more money.
And this STILL doesn't make it right.
Dave, I am so glad I am out of this. There is such a push to "modernise" when existing methods work. We got pushed into cloud-based computing when we could deliver it cheaper on site. My manager wanted to ditch tape backups and switch to "cloud based" but could never tell me what the business benefits were or how he would fund the extra bandwidth needed. I remember years ago when I worked for Compaq they moved the employee expenses from a VT100 forms based system to a Web Forms system. The extra work must have cost them a fortune.
None of this reflects poorly on you personally, of course. No disrespect intended.
We don't always see eye to eye and life would be boring if we did, but there are some things we agree on..
-Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Another Dave, G4UGM
On 7/3/21 11:11 AM, dave.g4ugm@gmail.com wrote:
I will just say that in some environments we may have no choice. When I worked all external e-mail servers were blocked, including any webmail servers, and the company e-mail was a web front end that did not have any option for plain text e-mail.
Rushing in and using complex tools without learning anything about them first isn't exclusive to individuals, corporations do it too. And further up the chain to the vendor, there's really nothing that a corporation won't abuse (knowingly or otherwise) in order to make more money.
And this STILL doesn't make it right.
I am so glad I am out of this. There is such a push to "modernise" when existing methods work.
Yes. And more to the point, the corporations on the vendor side of the equation are doing that pushing for profit. The problem is, that's not how the Internet works. There are accepted standards (RFCs), and a standardization process, that is peer-reviewed in the engineering community and not corporation-centric. Corporations don't seem to realize that they are NOT WELCOME to try to unilaterally change the very basics of how the Internet works. Until those standards (RFCs 822, 2822, 5322 in this context) are superseded by new standards, drafted by ENGINEERS (not marketing people) and reviewed by OTHER ENGINEERS, those standards stand, and that's all there is to it. It's true that "RFC" stands for "Request For Comment", but before anyone points that out, very early on (in the 1970s) they morphed into being considered standards documents. This is distinct from things like "RS-232" (where "RS" stands for "Recommended Standard"), which is actually "RS-232C"...the standard was ratified and named "EIA-232-D", but we still call it "RS-232". (the current revision is EIA-232-F) Unlike this, the RFC world does not rename its work-in-progress standards when they are considered to be accepted by the engineering community. (I know you know this; this is for the benefit of others here) There will always be those people who just float through life ignoring the widely-accepted rules and standards that exist to keep everything working well and keep everyone happy. "Good netizens" get angry at them, or just laugh at them behind their backs, every day.
We got pushed into cloud-based computing when we could deliver it cheaper on site. My manager wanted to ditch tape backups and switch to "cloud based" but could never tell me what the business benefits were or how he would fund the extra bandwidth needed.
Yup. Moron alert. This is what happens when technical decisions are made by nontechnical people in reaction to glossy advertisements in business magazines. There used to be a website "fuckedcompany.com" that chronicled these sorts of poor decisions.
I remember years ago when I worked for Compaq they moved the employee expenses from a VT100 forms based system to a Web Forms system. The extra work must have cost them a fortune.
Yup, for little or no tangible benefit. I bet some consulting firm made out like bandits on that.
None of this reflects poorly on you personally, of course. No disrespect intended.
We don't always see eye to eye and life would be boring if we did, but there are some things we agree on..
Yes. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Where I work we are in the process of migrating services to Azure. Our mail and internal portal have been in Office 365 for some time. It’s nice how dynamic “the cloud” can be with resources. I don’t have to worry about mailbox storage volumes, backups, legal compliance holds… they’re just a check box. If the power goes out at our office I don’t have to worry that 7,000 people can’t get to their mail. Of course some things are harder, like exporting / importing whole mailboxes. I recently wrote a script that emails people before their passwords expire. This needed 3 different modules for interacting with Azure AD and Exchange; a module which was supposed to be the updated replacement for the original MSOnline module doesn’t have all the functionality of the original. I don’t think it will be added either, it sounds like MS is going to dump the PowerShell modules all together and go to only API based calls? Fine if you’re a programmer I suppose… not if you’re a scripted. I would love… LOVE to move our primary application to Azure. We have 26 web servers that make it run today, if it could run in IIS as a service instead it would be so much easier to expand as load increases. But the software uses external modules for report generation, which IIS as a service does t support. My main gripe with “the cloud” is that it’s a bit too ADHD, in that some systems seem like “oooo shiny!”, are developed to ~80%, then the next shiny thing comes along… I have never run my own personal mail server, but I’ve done it enough professionally to know I don’t want to, either. I just want my mail “to work” and not have to fuss with it. Does that mean I’m giving all my info to “don’t be evil” Google? Yes. But everything is a trade off. I’ve got another account from mail.com that I sometimes use, but I suspect Google will be around longer. -Jason On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 11:53 AM Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
On 7/3/21 11:11 AM, dave.g4ugm@gmail.com wrote:
I will just say that in some environments we may have no choice. When I worked all external e-mail servers were blocked, including any webmail servers, and the company e-mail was a web front end that did not have any option for plain text e-mail.
Rushing in and using complex tools without learning anything about them first isn't exclusive to individuals, corporations do it too. And further up the chain to the vendor, there's really nothing that a corporation won't abuse (knowingly or otherwise) in order to make more money.
And this STILL doesn't make it right.
I am so glad I am out of this. There is such a push to "modernise" when existing methods work.
Yes. And more to the point, the corporations on the vendor side of the equation are doing that pushing for profit. The problem is, that's not how the Internet works. There are accepted standards (RFCs), and a standardization process, that is peer-reviewed in the engineering community and not corporation-centric. Corporations don't seem to realize that they are NOT WELCOME to try to unilaterally change the very basics of how the Internet works.
Until those standards (RFCs 822, 2822, 5322 in this context) are superseded by new standards, drafted by ENGINEERS (not marketing people) and reviewed by OTHER ENGINEERS, those standards stand, and that's all there is to it.
It's true that "RFC" stands for "Request For Comment", but before anyone points that out, very early on (in the 1970s) they morphed into being considered standards documents.
This is distinct from things like "RS-232" (where "RS" stands for "Recommended Standard"), which is actually "RS-232C"...the standard was ratified and named "EIA-232-D", but we still call it "RS-232". (the current revision is EIA-232-F) Unlike this, the RFC world does not rename its work-in-progress standards when they are considered to be accepted by the engineering community.
(I know you know this; this is for the benefit of others here)
There will always be those people who just float through life ignoring the widely-accepted rules and standards that exist to keep everything working well and keep everyone happy. "Good netizens" get angry at them, or just laugh at them behind their backs, every day.
We got pushed into cloud-based computing when we could deliver it cheaper on site. My manager wanted to ditch tape backups and switch to "cloud based" but could never tell me what the business benefits were or how he would fund the extra bandwidth needed.
Yup. Moron alert. This is what happens when technical decisions are made by nontechnical people in reaction to glossy advertisements in business magazines. There used to be a website "fuckedcompany.com" that chronicled these sorts of poor decisions.
I remember years ago when I worked for Compaq they moved the employee expenses from a VT100 forms based system to a Web Forms system. The extra work must have cost them a fortune.
Yup, for little or no tangible benefit. I bet some consulting firm made out like bandits on that.
None of this reflects poorly on you personally, of course. No disrespect intended.
We don't always see eye to eye and life would be boring if we did, but there are some things we agree on..
Yes.
-Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
-- Jason Perkins 313 355 0085 Sent from my iPhone
participants (8)
-
Andrew Diller -
Bill Degnan -
Dave McGuire -
dave.g4ugm＠gmail.com -
Ethan O'Toole -
Jason Perkins -
Jeffrey Jonas -
Mike Loewen