Re: No interest was Re: KMail - Replying in HTML

Am Mittwoch, 11. August 2010 schrieb John Murphy:

> And many thanks to Pablo, Richard and others for looking
> for solutions to making KMail (and by extension KDE) more appealing to a
> wider community.

Yes, many thanks for the effort also from me.

> Unfortunately it seems - good product, wrong mindset -
> not an unusual combination.

Really, I am not able to understand comments such as Pastor JW‘s at all. 

Suppose there is an excellent html support in kmail, if users don’t press the 
“write in html” option button, their ”job concept”, their work flow, really 
nothing would change. 

The only thing what really changes, is losing the feeling of using an 
”elitist” software. So, is it really the case, that some people because of 
some non-technical, non-work-flow-oriented, non-limiting, even non-visual 
changes that make them feel losing their elitist feelings, oppose against 
necessary features that other people need, and by this, restricting them 
technically, restricting their work flow, arguing for limiting their use of a 
tool?

I really wonder, where is the advantage of a kmail without full html support, 
the advantage of not implementing it? And, I wonder even more, how a kmail 
with proper html support could not be the “right tool for the job concept of a 
craftsman that one appreciates“, as this craftsman can use kmail in exactly 
the same way as without html support?

Johannes
_______________________________________________
KDE PIM users mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kdepim-users