| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 21637 | 2002-06-30 09:33:00 | Notes for NEW FAQ??? Why is internet so slow? | E.ric (351) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 58599 | 2002-06-30 09:33:00 | One possible reason is HTML E-mails, Tonight I got a short "5 line" plain black text on pain while background HTML E-mail, this E-mail could of been send as plain standard E-mail and no information the sender tried to send me would of been lost, So I sent two copies to myself and used Mailwasher from www.mailwasher.net to see how big the identical files were, the plain E-mail was 1.8K while the HTML one was over double the file size at 4.4K, While one HTML E-mail might not make any difference, 1000000's might, If you use Outlook express check your Email program, go to Tools, Options..., Send (tab) and check, fix if your wasting internet space with worthless HTML E-mails, or go to Compose (tab) and add a bit of exciting color to your boring HTML E-mails. For more information see www.georgedillon.com (7 REASONS WHY HTML E-MAILS ARE EVIL.) | E.ric (351) | ||
| 58600 | 2002-06-30 09:49:00 | While the point is valid, consider the plain text one take 0.3 seconds at dial-up speeds and the html takes 0.75 seconds. Are these volumes relevant when all the 16yo kids with baseball caps on backwards are transferring files and bootlegged music on a 24/7 basis. Before you rush to print perhaps if you could find stats on how much of the traffic is e-mail and how much is data/web page access. I can only guess, but doubt html emails are a significant leech on bandwidth. Perhaps you already have this info? |
godfather (25) | ||
| 58601 | 2002-06-30 12:12:00 | HTML in email can be good *sometimes*. When colours, size, font is changed. But it is wrong to send an HTML email with no extra formatting. | -=JM=- (16) | ||
| 58602 | 2002-06-30 22:10:00 | Excuse me? > Are these volumes relevant when all the 16yo kids > with baseball caps on backwards are transferring > files and bootlegged music on a 24/7 basis. We are not all 16 Not many of us have back to front baseball caps anymore Hardly anyone leaves their downloads going 24/7, although overnight is not uncommon. > > Before you rush to print perhaps if you could find > stats on how much of the traffic is e-mail and how > much is data/web page access. I can only guess, but > doubt html emails are a significant leech on > bandwidth. Perhaps you already have this info? My 18cents worth Brendon ;/ |
nzporscheboy (603) | ||
| 58603 | 2002-06-30 22:42:00 | The HTML emails might account for some of the problem but it is not the HTML itself to blame - rather it is the volume spam email. I wouldn't want to shoot the messenger, HTML, when it is the sender I want knocked off. Today for example I had 24 emails in the webmaster account from the weekend. The spam and/or virus count? 24 out of 24. My own account had around 60 emails from the same period - with the spam rate being about 45 out of 60. By spam I don't include emails from services I've signed up to - just the crap offering me everything from an impossibly huge appendage to free cable TV, an MBA, cheap mortgage, ill-gotten gains from Nigeria and access to web sites run by girls I've never met who for some reason really want to do strange and exotic things for my pleasure. Now if we take it that of the billions(?) of emails sent out every day, perhaps 60% are unwanted spam, that is a huge and expensive wastage of bandwidth. If that spam wasn't there, it wouldn't matter that you got HTML emails. |
Biggles (121) | ||
| 1 | |||||