[blowski]

Newsletters should include a text version as well, and you can set your client to show that instead of the HTML.

"Normal" users (i.e. the non-geeks) do seem to prefer HTML emails, and in usability studies, A/B testing, and deliverability reports, HTML emails usually outperform text.

In short, HTML emails are better for and preferred by recipients and senders in all but edge cases.

[ams6110]

I find that sadly, more and more HTML email does not include a plain text part. I realize I'm in in a small minority of people who don't use a graphical email app. But if you care about that at all (and you probably should so that you also make life easier for your visually impaired clients who use screen readers) you should include plain text. Otherwise I simply won't read the email that you spent so much time and effort painstakingly formatting.

[victorhooi]

Unfortunately, you appear to be a minority.

Look, it's all well and good to say "I'm 1337! I use Mutt, or I use Links!". But let's be honest, the majority of people are not going to use a text mode web browser or a text mode email client.

And this isn't something you're born with, like a vision impairment, so people need to make a website accessible for you. This is a personal preference.

Hence, as much as some of us neckbeards might like to go back to a works where 256 colours was the bomb =), the rest of the world has moved on.

[alextingle]

Text only e-mail is more productive for everyone, in exactly the same way that text only authoring applications are more productive. When you are writing something, fiddling around with the layout is just a distraction. Many people might prefer it, but lots of people also like to play Patience on their workstation rather that getting on with what they are supposed to be doing.