pgp/mime vs in-line pgp

[Per Tunedal Casual]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

At 09:56 2004-04-14, you wrote:
 >
 >On Wednesday 14 April 2004 08.32, Per Tunedal Casual wrote:
 >
 >> PGP-MIME is far better but unfortunately PGP-MIME signed mail is not
 >> transparent to non-pgp users. They will be confused by the empty mail
 >> with the two strange attachments (though readable in a texteditor).
 >> Thus I cannot use PGP-MIME widely.
 >
 >Name one mailer except MSOE which also shows this behaviour. All other
 >mailers I've come across properly implement MIME and can sensibly
 >display MIME multipart messages with an unknown subtype. I have by now
 >just given up on MSOE users: they want to live that way, so be it
 >(There are very few exceptions to this rule - job applications is one
 >example where it is vital for me that my messages are read :-/.
 >
 >The confusion for the user is exactly the same: it is a strange
 >attachment in one case, and it is '----- BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE
 >-----' at the top and a strange blurb at the bottom in the other case.
 >

NO, PGP-MIME looks really strange in Outlook Express. You'd better try it!

I cannot give up the OE-users as they are the mainpart of my customers.
Thus I have to stick to inlined pgp-signing (doesn't always verify OK) or
switch to S-MIME (rather not!).

Per Tunedal

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32) - GPGrelay v0.94

iD8DBQFAfPb+ITLMlZFNlMoRAm2vAJ0Z/Vs/6X/WMeE8xrkHPfmCHmMHUACfd7+g
4Y50jPm58r7hcOyGoThk+zU=
=nyeV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----