Outlook 2007 Hoses HTML Email

SitePoint's current newsletter sheds some light on a move by Microsoft that will likely affect your incoming email, as soon as Outlook 2007 lands on computers around the world. It reports that Microsoft has switched the HTML rendering engine in Outlook from that used by Internet Explorer -- which in version 7 had become quite competent -- to that used by Word 2007, which, to put it in polite terms, is not fully CSS-compliant (in less polite terms, it reeks).

Here's a quick summary of the features that Outlook 2007 will no longer support, as provided by SitePoint (Microsoft's own summary is found here):

  • no support for background images (HTML or CSS)
  • no support for forms
  • no support for Flash, or other plugins
  • no support for CSS floats
  • no support for replacing bullets with images in unordered lists
  • no support for CSS positioning
  • no support for animated GIFs

What does this mean to the average email recipient? Expect to see much simpler layouts, as email developers find that their previously complex designs don't work in the new program. And since they can't target their emails based on which email program the recipients use, everyone will see the change.

Now, lest you think this is more Microsoft bashing on my part -- to be honest, I applaud this change. When it comes to my email, simpler is better, and there's nothing in the preceding list I can't live without. I try to avoid sending HTML-formatted mail, and I prefer not to receive it, when I have the choice. If someone wants me to see a web page, they need only to send me the URL and I'll visit it at my convenience; I don't want it embedded in an email. HTML-formatted mail is often ponderous and bandwidth-sucking, makes phishing easier by allowing the disguise of URLs, and increases the potential for recipients to allow the introduction of malware onto their systems. In fact, according to the SitePoint article, this change by Microsoft implies that the company isn't as comfortable with IE 7's security as it has previously asserted.

In summary, how you view this move by Microsoft will depend on the extent you favor HTML-formatted email vs. text format. There may be much wailing and gnashing of teeth in the developer community (SitePoint's own email newsletter is broken under Outlook 2007), but the average email recipient may be better off (never having to see another animated GIF in an email is a blessing from my perspective) or at least neutral (I subscribed to the text version of SitePoint's newsletter so I don't care).

Comments

Hear, hear! Ever since my first encounters with MacWrite had me producing what looked like ransom notes, I've tried to remember the blessing of simplicity. Plain text will do me fine, thanks.

And if someone invents a mouse-driven sniper rifle for those dancing silhouettes "gracing" m*rtgage ads and other useless fluff, I'll go hunting.

Posted by: Bret at January 10, 2007 09:49 AM

I agree, Eric. Simpler is better...

Posted by: Janie at January 10, 2007 09:52 AM

w00t! I'm all for simplicity.

Posted by: Stephen Shores at January 10, 2007 10:23 AM

simpler is better. which is why i use a mac in the first place.

Posted by: kyle at January 10, 2007 12:29 PM

A long running Ask ET thread that I think is topical.

Posted by: Phelps at January 10, 2007 12:32 PM

Phelps, the link you provided shows that this debate has been around almost as long as email itself. I found the discussion about fonts even more interesting than the HTML-vs-plain text dialog, but then I'm a sucker for a good font debate.

Posted by: Eric at January 10, 2007 01:02 PM

I like HTML formattable email only because I like to do things like bolding and underlining. However, as you said, I can learn to live without that stuff if it means avoiding goofy flash and gif animations. Does this mean that stationery is out? That would be awesome!

Posted by: Jim at January 10, 2007 06:03 PM

I agree completely -- OK, with one exception (see below). HTML formatting can come in handy, and I use it occasionally for its ability to display bold text (for headings) and, more importantly, for numbered or unordered lists. An actual HTML formatted list looks so much better than leading off a series of paragraphs with asterisks, and it's easier to read, as well.

underlining

Ooh, that's a big no-no! Underlining should not be used in an HTML document for anything other than for links. Don't let the Standards Police catch you.

Oops. Too late. 8)

Posted by: Eric at January 10, 2007 06:10 PM

A step in the right direction, for all the reasons you gave.

Phelps - my copy of "Beautiful Evidence" just arrived in the mail today! Tufte has a lot to say that's worth listening to.

Posted by: Brian at January 10, 2007 06:10 PM

Hey, Brian, what's the deal...you intrigue us with a book title and then don't provide an Amazon link? For shame. ;-)

The book looks interesting. The comments by the reviewers are certainly all over the board. Anytime Philip Greenspun weighs in on a book about information architecture, it's worth paying attention to.

Posted by: Eric at January 10, 2007 06:20 PM

as soon as Outlook 2007 lands on computers around the world

Does Bill Gates push a button to make that happen?

Posted by: Scott Chaffin at January 10, 2007 09:53 PM

That's as good an explanation as any as to why such an illogical thing happens.

Posted by: Eric at January 10, 2007 09:56 PM

The best way to get the books is to take the seminar. All three are included, along with a couple of lithographs and a hell of a lot of knowledge.

Posted by: Phelps at January 11, 2007 09:13 AM
Post a comment [Take your time...we're in no hurry.]









Remember personal info?