Signatures and pictures

[Woody]

I am using Outlook 2007. I got it in my mind that it is probably best for me
to setup my Outlook Email to use plain text. I seem to remember reading an
article that said Outlook is using WORD and so because of that all HTML
capabilities are not working.

I would like to send email out with my Logo in my signature but I perceive
that if Outlook is set for Plaint text, this is not going to work.

I don't know quite how to ask the question but it goes something like this.
How should I look at the problem overall? I realize that there are anomalies
but how are most people set up. Most of the time, to most people, if I sent
an email with HTML or Rich Text formatting, are they likely to see it the way
I sent it out?

If you were me and you wanted to send your logo in your emails would you
forget the idea and just use plain text, or would you assume that most are
going to receive it as you sent it?

It appears the problem does not exist if I skirt the signatures and send an
email based on a template. That is, early testing seems to indicate that an
email sent with a template that has a picture will be recevied looking right,
even if the receiver of the email has his email set to plain text. Is this
correct?

 

[Brian Tillman [MVP - Outlook]]

I am using Outlook 2007. I got it in my mind that it is probably best for me
to setup my Outlook Email to use plain text. I seem to remember reading an
article that said Outlook is using WORD and so because of that all HTML
capabilities are not working.

As you read, Outlook 2007 uses Word for HTML and Word does not support all the
HTML that Internet Explorer and other browsers do.

I would like to send email out with my Logo in my signature but I perceive
that if Outlook is set for Plaint text, this is not going to work.

True. Plain Text BY DEFINITION allows no formatting. You cannot embed images
in a Plain Text message. This is not new. It's true for all versions of
Outlook (and any text-creation environment).

I don't know quite how to ask the question but it goes something like this.
How should I look at the problem overall? I realize that there are
anomalies
but how are most people set up. Most of the time, to most people, if I sent
an email with HTML or Rich Text formatting, are they likely to see it the
way
I sent it out?

Only other Outlook users can read Rich Text messages properly, so if you plan
to embed objects in the message, HTML is your best bet.

If you were me and you wanted to send your logo in your emails would you
forget the idea and just use plain text, or would you assume that most are
going to receive it as you sent it?

I tend to eschew formatted messages. Rarely can I not convey what I wish
using Plain Text. However, If I have to demonstrate something with, say, a
screen shot of a dialogue box, I'll use HTML.

It appears the problem does not exist if I skirt the signatures and send an
email based on a template. That is, early testing seems to indicate that an
email sent with a template that has a picture will be recevied looking
right,
even if the receiver of the email has his email set to plain text. Is this
correct?

If the receiver's mail client is set to receive everything as Plain Text,
nothing you can do will allow him to see embedded objects or the formatting
you've designed. He'll probably see your logo as an attachment and all other
formatting will be lost.