New G-mail Interface

Donald Trump

verycool wrote: »

Use Thunderbird!

Thunderbird me arse*


w3m is where it's at baby. Use that and the html version of gmail.











*coincidentally that's what your sister asked me to do to her last night

Donald Trump

bluewolf wrote: »

i don't like it
too much whitespace
change it back

Once you go black, something something


apparently

Donald Trump

Anyway, if yiz want to know about emails, ask Hillary.

She's the expert on emails

mikhail

Bradlin wrote: »

Does anyone else think the new G-mail interface looks like a rubbish bin in a skip on a landfill in Athlone?

I don't like it very much, but that Athlone comment is harsh.

AllForIt

dotsman wrote: »

Do people still use the web interface for email? I thought those days died out with the millennium :eek:

You've got it the wrong way round. The web interface is the advancement. Using a email client is what is old. No one needs their emails downloaded to their PC anymore with constant online speedy access.

OldMrBrennan83

dotsman wrote: »

So doesn't it make sense to use a proper email client to type your emails rather than a web interface?

Nope. You're cutting out faff by using it directly. Less links in the chain.
I'd even rather use the outlook365 webpage for my work email than the actual Outlook program itself.

dotsman

AllForIt wrote: »

You've got it the wrong way round. The web interface is the advancement. Using a email client is what is old. No one needs their emails downloaded to their PC anymore with constant online speedy access.

Patww79 wrote: »

Nope. You're cutting out faff by using it directly. Less links in the chain.
I'd even rather use the outlook365 webpage for my work email than the actual Outlook program itself.

Not sure where to begin, but off the top of my head...

• Firstly, not everyone has constant speedy access. I, and quite a few people, will use their laptop in taxi's, on trains & planes. So having my entire email and calendar history available is essential.
• Web interfaces are far slower than client for navigation. This cannot be overstated. Seriously, try using a proper client and you will never go back to web interface.
• Client layout can be customised for better reading/navigation
• Desktop client is a separate application to your browser. Rather than having your email hidden in a tab (when you may have 20+ tabs open), you have a dedicated application and notification process - you can simply have outlook running in the background while you work/play
• You don't need to constantly re-sign in to a desktop application - there is no such concept as a connection timeout. Your email client starts up on on log in to windows and stays open until you log off.
• Web interface tends to be far clunkier and dumbed down (depending on the interface you are referring to - outlook 365 as example). Client is clean and clear and contains a lot more info.
• With a client, you have the exact same and consistent experience regardless of email provider.
• Client provides far better dictionary/grammar correction.
• You lose a lot of essential real estate in a browser with the tabs, navigation bar, bookmark bar etc.
• Web interfaces are always trying to catch up with clients. Clients are the one that are always ahead in terms of design and functionality.

xi5yvm0owc1s2b

AllForIt wrote: »

No one needs their emails downloaded to their PC anymore with constant online speedy access.

Personally, I'd rather have my data on my computer than on Google's computers. So I always download my email.

Mint Sauce

Looks the exact same for me as it has always done. But if there was an option to go back to the classic/orriginal mode I would use it, if I thought it was that bad. The same as I use Boards Lecacy Mode, instead of that horrid Responsive Mode.

Wanderer78

Aubree Scruffy Vinyl wrote:

Personally, I'd rather have my data on my computer than on Google's computers. So I always download my email.

Probably saved on multiple servers anyway

OldMrBrennan83

dotsman wrote: »

Not sure where to begin, but off the top of my head...

• Firstly, not everyone has constant speedy access. I, and quite a few people, will use their laptop in taxi's, on trains & planes. So having my entire email and calendar history available is essential.
• Web interfaces are far slower than client for navigation. This cannot be overstated. Seriously, try using a proper client and you will never go back to web interface.
• Client layout can be customised for better reading/navigation
• Desktop client is a separate application to your browser. Rather than having your email hidden in a tab (when you may have 20+ tabs open), you have a dedicated application and notification process - you can simply have outlook running in the background while you work/play
• You don't need to constantly re-sign in to a desktop application - there is no such concept as a connection timeout. Your email client starts up on on log in to windows and stays open until you log off.
• Web interface tends to be far clunkier and dumbed down (depending on the interface you are referring to - outlook 365 as example). Client is clean and clear and contains a lot more info.
• With a client, you have the exact same and consistent experience regardless of email provider.
• Client provides far better dictionary/grammar correction.
• You lose a lot of essential real estate in a browser with the tabs, navigation bar, bookmark bar etc.
• Web interfaces are always trying to catch up with clients. Clients are the one that are always ahead in terms of design and functionality.

None of those really matter.

dotsman

Patww79 wrote: »

None of those really matter.

To you maybe. They are, after all, subjective. But there's no denying that an email client offers "more" to a user than a web interface. If a user doesn't want/need any of those additional features, then fine, they can stick with the Web, but most people would benefit from at least some of the additional/superior features of a desktop client.

Bradlin

mikhail wrote: »

I don't like it very much, but that Athlone comment is harsh.

Apologies, I didn't mean Athlone. Bloody predictive text - I hate it.

I meant to say Mullingar.