<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 4/23/2010 6:10 PM, Dan Mosedale wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4BD21ACC.1@mozillamessaging.com" type="cite"> As
we're nearing the end of the Thunderbird 3.1 cycle, the usual
questions about what's next have started popping up. With help
from drivers, I've put together a wiki page that describes, in
general, what we expect things to look like going forward at <br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Thunderbird_Post_3.1_Plan"><https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird:Thunderbird_Post_3.1_Plan></a>
<br>
<br>
Folks who wish to discuss this in more detail are encouraged to
join <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/tb-planning"><https://wiki.mozilla.org/Thunderbird/tb-planning></a>
<br>
<br>
and post there. <br>
<br>
Dan <br>
<br>
_______________________________________________ <br>
tb-planning mailing list <br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<font face="Arial">Post TB3.1 planning..Thoughts<br>
I won't belabor the point, but just the fact that there was a
TB3.1 with the emphasis there proves that Mozilla messaging is in
fact listening.<br>
I think it also shows that assume really can make an ass out of
you and me..(Bad News Bears)<br>
<br>
Assumptions worth thinking about in future releases:<br>
</font><br>
<div align="center">
<blockquote>
<div align="left"><big>1. </big>Prospective new TB users are
non-technical types who simply want to exchange simple text
messages<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<div align="left"><small>Plaintext vs. html is a dead issue. Let
it go and give folks an easy way to compose stylish messages.<br>
<br>
</small><br>
<blockquote><small><big><b>2</b>. MS Outlook,Windows Live Mail
users are not likely to migrate to TB<br>
<br>
</big></small></blockquote>
<small>Probably not , if we don't offer an easy migration
path.And offer equivalent functionality.<br>
<br>
</small>
<blockquote><small><big><b>3</b>. Interoperability with other
mail clients is a minimal edge case<br>
<br>
</big></small></blockquote>
<small>While I would like to see all email interaction TB to TB
that is certainly not the case.<br>
An example of this is that we fairly recently defaulted all
inline images to content-disposition attachment, which lost
all inline images to Gmail recipients.<br>
So TB just doesn't work in that scenario.<br>
<br>
<big>Bottom line here is a lot of folks are disenchanted with
Outlook, and the MS decision to use the word html editor in
html composition.<br>
Word produces some very ugly html, but we make it extremely
difficult to use the existing tools (html editor) to do much
better.<br>
<br>
I could cite bugs here, but I think that would do little to
advance my position.<br>
<br>
Oh, on the interoperability issue (Point 3) 99 out of 100
corporate mails received here are from MS based
clients.(composed in html)<br>
Replying to them "in kind" is sometimes a challenge for me.
(And I have been using TB since the very early days 0.5)<br>
<br>
-- <br>
JoeS<br>
<br>
</big></small>
<blockquote>
<div align="left"><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>