Hi Colin. I hope you're fine.

You're never disloyal, Colin! And you know! You've helped me a lot! If you manage to find a better product or its simply fits to your needs, this makes me happy!
The central idea is to help us each other and I know frx2word was able to reach that goal (for a time, at least). But I have more reasons to be happy... With our open source, a lot of guys learn more about automation (me included, thanks John Koziol!), and maybe earn some money with this knowlegde.

Btw, frx2word 3.0 has 2 new properties called "lNetscapeCompatibility" and "lHtmlObjectsTogether"... take a look! Maybe you'll find it useful.

Fábio


>Ivan
>
>I did a lot of talking with Fabio about Frx2Word and I saw a lot of improvements over the last year. But I found myself using a versio over 6 months old because I found it was more stable then the current version. Hard to say why except thet the complaint level went down when I reintroduced the older version.
>
>At this stage I started to look at Frx2any. I use it to generate word attachments as well as html attachments (you need a separate licence key for each type of attachments). In some ways I feel disloyal because I have used Frx2word very effectively in the past but now I am increasingly using Frx2any because it is very eady to use (easier than Frx2word) and I think it is a more stable product.
>
>BTW neither product has managed to create html which can be emailed consistently well as body of text - this is my ultimate goal. I want to send personalised and snazzy body of text messages as body of text rather than as attachments because I think they are more likely to be read.
>
>For my money I would pick Frx2any.
>
>HTH
>
>Colin