I have a constant annoyance with email that I receive via subscription. The vast majority of them seem to be formatted for phones, with a narrow column of text that wastes 2/3 of the preview pane as viewed in Mail.app on my computer.
I know I can zoom the view (via multiple presses of cmd +, but not by pinching because why put a fundamental much-touted feature like that in some obscure app like Mail.app? Sorry, that’s another rant), but I haven’t found a way for the emails to appear like that by default. Zooming the view this way also increases the size of the text, which I’m happy with as my vision ain’t what it used to be.
Am I missing something? Is there an easy way to set this? I would like to hear if this crops up in other mail apps, too, but I’m very unlikely to switch.
Unfortunately, it has become customary to format HTML content of all kinds (web pages, mail, etc.) for fixed or maximum widths. For instance, note the TidBITS main page:
The theory is that people have a hard time reading very wide columns. And it is probably right, but in my opinion, that’s why windows are resizable. I prefer layouts that stretch to the full width of the window they’re displayed on. People can make the window narrower if it’s too wide. But my opinion seems to be an extreme minority these days.
I also don’t like web sites that assume you’re on a mobile device and switch layouts based on the window width.
I do a lot of web browsing using a 1080p monitor rotated into portrait mode. Even when my browser window is maximized (1080 pixels wide), some web sites switch to a mobile layout. And on my landscape-mode monitors, I rarely maximize browser windows - I normally have a window open to about 1100 pixels wide - which also causes many sites to switch to their mobile layouts.
There has to be a better way to detect a mobile browser (maybe the user-agent string?) than checking the window size. As phones and tablets get higher and higher resolution screens, it forces desktop users to get even higher resolution screens (and run browsers full-screen) in order to see the desktop layouts. Which is stark raving mad.
It’s not just web pages - some of the macOS seems to be designed for the iPhone - I’m seeing non-resizable, tiny, portrait-mode windows and dialog boxes creep into the OS, completely ignoring my big desktop monitor…
I have noticed that a lot of Windows users always have their browser window maximized, so you can probably blame The Windows Way for a lot of that bad design. It also seems to be commonplace (though diminishing) for web designers to base their layouts on the size of the screen, not the browser window, which tells me that they probably think those are roughly the same thing.
The generally accepted wisdom is that the optimal number of characters per line is somewhere between 45 and 75.
The problem with allowing line length to expand to the window size is that screens have gotten really large, and many people use close to full-screen windows, so they’d end up with ludicrously long lines. Plus, unpredictably long lines pretty much eliminate any ability to sensibly do layout, like wrapping text around an image or right-justifying an image.
Email is actually a different issue because formatting in email is really hard and often has to rely on HTML tables. Since it has to look good on a wide variety of devices (and a majority of people read email on phones now), that desire drives a lot of the design.
It’s funny that this discussion is occurring just as Apple Vision Pro is introducing an option to view a connected Mac desktop as wide as 2 27" 5K screens (part of the VisionOS 2.2 release that will also require MacOS 15.2).
I actually find the formatting attractive - as you say, there’s a limit to how much you want to stuff on a given line. I’m primarily wondering if I can max out the zoom level on this messages without having to do it manually every time I get one.
Of course those folks could learn to not do everything (especially reading!) in full screen windows. That way those of us who choose their window width with purpose wouldn’t be punished. Instead, by catering to the full screen crowd in a one-size-fits-all approach, everybody is being forced to view things in a certain pre-configured manner. Feels to me like we’re establishing the wrong incentives.
If somebody does everything full screen there’s a good chance they just don’t bother to configure, perhaps because they don’t care. OTOH if I set my browser window to a certain width, it’s a good assumption that I’ve done so because I actually care about how stuff gets formatted and displayed.
setext, or structure-enhanced text, which formed some of the basis for Markdown. As I remember, setext preferred lines in the length ranges we’re talking about, but only specified a line length of 66 characters when indenting.
It all depends on what you’re trying to achieve and for whom. Most people don’t know anything about line length and readability, so setting a good line length helps the majority at the cost of removing a little flexibility from a small minority (who still benefit from a good line length even if they would prefer something different.
Plus, as I said, pretty much any kind of layout requires some control over page width, and most publishers want to present information in particular ways.
Good responsive design allows layouts to shrink gracefully to narrower screens, but going wider is tough.
The person operating the site had a long career in publishing and typography and wanted to exert control over every aspect of web presentation.
I argued that it is impossible to know what will look good on all devices (ranging from watches up to large 4K screens and printed copy) and that pages should use browser defaults unless there is a clear and present need to do otherwise, like when those defaults make it hard or impossible to read the content. And if a user doesn’t like the default fonts or colors it is trivially easy to change the browser configuration.
I was basically told “you’re not a typographer, and neither are any of the readers, so your opinion is worthless”. Which is amusing because, if I remember correctly, my opinion is actually shared by Tim Berners-Lee, and for pretty much the same reasons.
This discussion has become kind of funny since Apple used to be run (twice) by somebody, exalted by many, who wanted to exert control over every aspect of the user experience, hardware and software and visuals!
I see things like typography and layout as additional forms of creative expression in the same way that I choose the words I use for my articles. That’s why I chose the fonts and line lengths and line spacing and all that as I have for TidBITS article and email layouts.
However, I don’t mind at all if someone wants to override what I’ve done for themselves, using a tool like Safari Reader or an RSS reader or Arc Boosts. That way, I get to present TidBITS as I’d like, and those who don’t like it can pick another tool to tweak it however they want.
I wish that Apple Mail would allow me to see incoming email in plain-text format that was “between 45 and 75” characters. This is the reason I used Mailsmith for so many years.
I know I can zoom the view (via multiple presses of cmd +, but not by pinching because why put a fundamental much-touted feature like that in some obscure app like Mail.app?
I’m a big fan of System Settings / Assistive / Zoom for dealing with problems like this. Mine is set to zoom when holding the Control key and scrolling. It’s really fast both in and out and you don’t need to know the zoom commands for individual software packages.
As a long ago typesetter I fully approve of taking care in layout and design however even though modern webpage building software provides automated tools it’s just really hard to design well for the wildly different screen sizes in use today.
Thanks, I’m a huge fan, and longtime user, of the assistive zoom function (I’m using it as I compose this, actually ). I probably use it half the time in Mail when I’m not hitting cmd +. I’ve set up my computers to use option+scroll for the zoom, as it lets me perform the zoom with either hand (the ctrl key is only on the left side of the keyboard). Sadly, I need it more and more as my eyes age…
But it is an extra step - given that all these emails come in looking the same, and I do the same thing to them (cmd + until they max out in the window), it would be nice to have Mail.app do it automatically. Given that no-one in this discussion has come up with a way to do that, I will take it as a “Sorry, Charlie” and try to figure out another solution.
I’m also a proponent of good design, in fact, a bit of a religious nut about it … I’m not asking to change the appearance of these emails, just the default zoom so I can read them easily. I feel that the discussion has wandered from that basic idea - I’m not offended by the typesetting, and sizing my window smaller so that the whitespace disappears is completely missing the point.
Well, there is a way . . . . . . but it’ll drive you nuts.
You could set up a rule to filter the offending newsletters and add a step to run an Applescript that would open them in a new window and zoom the text. You might, er, find that rather irritating. (Warning: I’ve found scripting mail to be a serious hair-pulling exercise.)
As much fun as that sounds (hey, I’ve got some free time ), some days I just delete all the newsletters, and others I might want to read them, but definitely not in a separate window…
Thanks for the idea, though, I figured I might have to go the AppleScript or macro route but hadn’t thought of filtering them first, which would make any process more straightforward. Maybe I can have Keyboard Maestro detect crucial text on the screen and then zoom using the Accessibility zoom. hmmm…
). I probably use it half the time in Mail when I’m not hitting cmd +. I’ve set up my computers to use option+scroll for the zoom, as it lets me perform the zoom with either hand (the ctrl key is only on the left side of the keyboard). Sadly, I need it more and more as my eyes age…
… I’m not asking to change the appearance of these emails, just the default zoom so I can read them easily. I feel that the discussion has wandered from that basic idea - I’m not offended by the typesetting, and sizing my window smaller so that the whitespace disappears is completely missing the point.
. . . but it’ll drive you nuts.