[AccessD] Zoho Access Migration Plugin

See  
http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2007/01/10/microsoft-breaks-html-email-rendering-in-
outlook/

On 12 Aug 2009 at 16:45, jwcolby wrote:

>  > Nothing to do (I would suggest) with rendering.
> 
> ROTFL, if course it is something to do with rendering.  Your default browser renders the email when 
> it includes HTML.
> 
> John W. Colby
> www.ColbyConsulting.com
> 
> 
> Max Wanadoo wrote:
> > If they don't shown on your email, in general, it will because of an error
> > in the way the email was constructed by the sender.  Embedding graphics etc
> > is difficult (for me)
> > 
> > Nothing to do (I would suggest) with rendering.
> > 
> > Max
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
> > [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of jwcolby
> > Sent: 12 August 2009 21:01
> > To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
> > Subject: Re: [AccessD] Zoho Access Migration Plugin
> > 
> >  >> The point is, things are significantly better now with modern browsers.
> > Your development 
> > experience back then does not have to be repeated today.
> > 
> > And MY point is that "significantly better" can still be pretty screwy.
> > 
> > I use Blockbuster.  They mail me disks and I mail them back.  They email me
> > "we sent you" and "we 
> > received" kinds of emails as they ship and receive the disks.
> > 
> > Those emails were working just fine, suddenly they are rendering as the
> > "outlines" of where there 
> > should be little pictures.  BUT... NOT ALWAYS.  Some emails render
> > correctly, some don't.  It 
> > APPEARS to be something they are doing on their end, something that they
> > insert into the page to be 
> > rendered because I can go back to emails in the beginning and they ALL
> > render correctly.
> > 
> > The bigger point here is that Access "renders" fine regardless.  As does VB
> > / C# .Net.  HTML is just 
> > too "out there", and the render engines are too independently defined to be
> > 100% reliable.  So we 
> > have the question "am I going to put my business on that foundation"?  If I
> > am NOT going to try to 
> > access the database remotely over the web, if I am just doing this internal,
> > why in the world would 
> > I do that?
> > 
> > Think about this Blockbuster experience.  I am a database developer for some
> > company, and suddenly I 
> > am stopping what I am doing to try to figure out why the render engine (at
> > the far end no less) is 
> > dropping all of the pictures.  THAT IS NOT DATABASE STUFF, not application
> > stuff!!!  That is not my 
> > application, that is not what they hired me to do.  Now I understand that
> > Blockbuster has a pressing 
> > need, but the point is that if I am a developer for an INTERNAL application,
> > I would be thinking 
> > VERY carefully about this kind of experience before I recommended going to a
> > browser based application.
> > 
> > Whether you do Access or a .Net is a whole 'nother question, but to try and
> > make an application 
> > "browser based" just seems to be a non-starter UNLESS there is a pressing
> > need to do so that is not 
> > being addressed by a "Windows Native" application.  "Just because it's cool"
> > is not (IMHO) a 
> > pressing need.
> > 
> > John W. Colby
> > www.ColbyConsulting.com
> > 
> > 
> > Mark Simms wrote:
> >> Funny....
> >> I've been waiting for 6 months for Firefox to be fixed to render a web
> > page
> >> that IE6 rendered easily.
> >> Sent them 3 tech support requests. It was never fixed.
> >> It was some sort of "grid" heavily CSS-based.
> >> The website must have been getting complaints as a result of complaints
> > from
> >> Firefox users....
> >> so they changed it to show the data as PDF file links !
> >> That's great progress....and very typical of "today's" tech environment:
> >> Doing the right thing, versus DOING THINGS RIGHT.
> >>> All modern browsers pass the Acid2 test:
> >>> http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid2/
> >>>
> >>> And most make significant inroads on Acid3:
> >>> http://www.webstandards.org/action/acid3/
> >>>
> >>> The point is, things are significantly better now with modern
> >>> browsers. Your development experience back then does not have
> >>> to be repeated today.
> >> You are partially correct..it was back in the oh-so-awful days of Netscape
> > !
> >>
> >>
> -- 
> AccessD mailing list
> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com