Outlook: Possible to change default reply to HTML?

Unfortunately, I don't think so, that appears to be the way it's set up. New messages will be in HTML if you set it that way, but for replies, it replies as it rec'd. Which is good, usually.

If someone is sending you text messages, there may be a reason. I personally don't like it when people send me HTML messages. Replying gets messed up, they use disastrous fonts, et cetera.

I have two sets of signatures, one in text only, one in html. For the signatures that need it, that is (most don't). What do you need to have that can't be in plain text just as effectively?

Thank you for your response, Suzanne.

Plain text is old fashioned and doesn't look as attractive as HTML. It is 20th century. We are now living in the 21st century.

Even spammers now use HTML.

Hi Nadeem,

Have you looked thru all the options carefully? I use Eudora, and buried in the options [not where you'd first look!] is:

When the body of a message has no styles, but the signature does have styles
... and below it a tick-box which says
Send the signature with styles

Yep, spent an hour checking through the options.

The guys on the Outlook newsgroup told me that it's not possible to change the default reply to HTML - and it wasn't recommended to use HTML anyway.

I find it sad that there's all these people on the net who have nothing else to do but preach about how using HTML emails is on a par with Satanism. If I want to use HTML and not be stuck in the ice-age, it's my choice.

I use enormous banners (80 - 100k) to advertise my Web site and get enormous click-thru rates (6%). That goes against the wisdom of the so-called experts. The gurus, who go on and on and on about using text-only emails and banners which load quickly etc., don't know what they are talking about. These same people who are responsible for many a dot com business going bust.

Quote: Originally posted by 1lit.com
I find it sad that there's all these people on the net who have nothing else to do but preach about how using HTML emails is on a par with Satanism. If I want to use HTML and not be stuck in the ice-age, it's my choice.

I use enormous banners (80 - 100k) to advertise my Web site and get enormous click-thru rates (6%). That goes against the wisdom of the so-called experts. The gurus, who go on and on and on about using text-only emails and banners which load quickly etc., don't know what they are talking about. These same people who are responsible for many a dot com business going bust.

Erm well actually Suzanne was expressing an opinion and one that I happen to agree with!

I get a lot (and I mean alot) of crap in my mail on a daily basis and to be perfectly honest its gets harder to sort the rubbish from the good when its in HTML format!

Life is nots so bad now I have cable but when I was on a dialup (like 85% ish of interent users) I found the modem dialing up when I was reading my mail bloody annoying! Especially when it was some flah git showing off his latest banner at the top of his pointless message.

As for your banners, I'm really pleased that your clickthrus are so high. I find it somewhat surprising bu then I would be one of the 94% who would give up on you without clicking... Ever thought about reducing the file size and maybe increasing that 6%?

And finally I don't think any one or group of people can be thought of making the dot com boom going bust. It went bust simply down to idiots in the city jumping on the .com bandwagon, making a fast buck and then nicking off when the going got tough.... I hardly think the self styled "Gurus" had anything to do with it!

Just my £2.43

***Rant Off***

Quote: Originally posted by 1lit.com
Thank you for your response, Suzanne.

Plain text is old fashioned and doesn't look as attractive as HTML. It is 20th century. We are now living in the 21st century.

Even spammers now use HTML.

Sweetie, that spammers use HTML is hardly a boon. By using HTML, they can send viruses, malicious code, et cetera through the mail.

Regardless, it's quite likely that you use email differently than I do. Between receiving and sending, I deal with over 150 pieces of valid non-spam email a day. I don't have time to futz with settings. When people send me HTML email, it's harder to get the information I need out of it (frequently content for websites) in a usable form. Unless for a specific reason (edits to content where colours help identify the areas), I convert it to text to reply.

99% of my valid email is text only.

As flipper mentioned, it's just my opinion. I work in the field, I rely on email to do my job. Using text email makes my job easier.

Quote: Originally posted by 1lit.com
I use enormous banners (80 - 100k) to advertise my Web site and get enormous click-thru rates (6%).

Wow, that really amazes me - outstanding results, must be 10 times the average.

Mind if I ask if those click-thrus convert into sales [or whatever action you want] at an expected rate also? Just wondering if it's the novelty of your ad, or the value of your offer

Sorry, I wasn't referring to Suzanne's comments. She was helpful. I didn't mean to criticise her, so I'm sorry if that's the way it came across.

I just became irate at the people on the newsgroup, who instead of trying to assist me, just layed into me for using HTML as though it was some major sin.

Was scouring through my Bible last night, but couldn't see any commandment prohibiting the use of HTML emails.

Mike, the banners are a novelty, I accept and that's why the high click-thru rates. I think people are sick of those boring error-style 468x60s. The conversion rates are not that high: if they was a 6% conversion ratio I'd be rich. But no matter what, the banners do better than standard ones which are only 6 or 10k.

Some people want to see impressive stuff on the net. Yes, most people use standard dial-up connection, but I believe they don't mind waiting an extra second to see an awesome graphic. I didn't used to mind when I first got on the net.

You must realise that most people don't spend 12 hours of the net like us guys. I don't think I'm impressed by anything any more and, like the rest of the people on the forum, just want to get my job done. But many people who are only on the net once in a while are amazed by something outlandish and it captures their attention. Which results in them bookmarking the site and possibly returning to it later. Which *may* result in more sales.

...and at least I know my Web sites are future-proof and prepared for broadband. I won't have to totally revamp them in a couple of years time.

A tip from me is that if you are creating banners for your own site, create them slightly bigger than 468 by 60 pixels. Many people use ad-blocking software which automatically gets rid of standard-size banners, so using non-standard ads will ensure they are not filtered out.