Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

mailstudio.app

161–170 of 214 posts

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who use gmail/gsuite get html emails, the images are proxied by google. People using gmail are a huge chunk of the market.

Interesting. I've always thought that images within emails would also serve as a read receipt to the server that sent them when enabled or shown. Would this still apply? Google providing a proxy for this could totally pollute this data (which could be a good thing!).

> I've always thought that images within emails would also serve as a read receipt to the server that sent them when enabled or shown

Yes, that's exactly what happens. Proxying the image only hides the user's IP address. If the images in the email load from external resources like https://example.com/fetch-resource?id=something_unique GMail has no way of knowing if something_unique uniquely identifies a user.

This is why disabling images is helpful. Of course Gmail also lets you enable images per sender, and you may find that quite acceptable for sites you have a relationship with (e.g. a shopping site which already knows your IP address and is sending you delivery notifications).

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because if it's a one time fee, there will be no recurring income and the developer will have to stop development. Here's a crazy idea in 2020: That's totally fine. There's a point where adding more features becomes a negative ROI. That's when you know you need to move on solving a different problem . That's the alternative.

The problem in 2021 (and 2022 and 2023, etc) is that the app will break over time. OS updates will break a small piece of functionality. Critical security vulnerabilities will be discovered that need to be patched. If the developer abandons the application because it isn't earning new revenue, the application will eventually degrade over time. I don't have a good answer here, because I also don't like the SASS billin…

In my experience, Windows applications very rarely break, Mac OS apps only break with major changes, and Linux isn't worth supporting in the first place. Setting aside a little bit of money to keep the app working and patched is possible. Charging for the occasional update to make that happen is acceptable too, especially with Apple users.

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your features page says this: > Email Previews > Quickly preview your design on real devices or share it with your team by sending it as an email message. But when I read the documentation, it seems like you just assume the user has a Litmus account. Is that correct? Given your paid plans start at $19.99/mo, I think it would be wise to be upfront about the fact that you need a $99/mo Litmus account for this feature t…

Apologies for any confusion that this line might have caused. > Quickly preview your design on real devices or share it with your team by sending it as an email message. This refers to the ability to send the design you are working on as an email message. When I wrote it I didn't even consider that it might be interpreted to state that we offer device testing. We don't. You can choose to send to a real device, or Lit…

When I read "Email Designer IDE", the first question that came to mind is whether it can show me renders of my email draft in all the popular clients (various versions of Outlook, web-based platforms like GMail, etc). When I found out it doesn't do that I simply stopped reading.

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally you'd think the burden of proof would be on the side requesting considerable resources and infrastructure to send something that doesn't render properly under the most basic privacy settings and cannot be displayed text-only (like in notifications).

Normally I would agree with this sentiment, but what kind of proof are you looking for here? We're not discussing logical absolutes or claims of absolute fact! We're discussing peoples preferences - what they like and/or expect an engaging email to look like. This area is highly subjective and contextual (culture, region, age, demo, etc). Neither your nor OPs experiences invalidate each other. Both of you can be corr…

Sure if you just prefer if your emails look a certain way then there's no point in discussing proof, just do the thing you like.

However if the discussion is whether you should just send plaintext emails or use a complicated and/or expensive tool to send out fancy emails then the more time/money consuming side has more to prove.

Given that the first few replies I got were essentially "Well I assume somebody checked this", I'm not sure the assumption that fancier emails are necessarily better has been questioned enough.

I'm also reminded of several articles where online marketing itself turned out to be nowhere near as effective as people think. [1,2]

[1]: https://thecorrespondent.com/100/the-new-dot-com-bubble-is-h... [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21465873

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#167

Any HTML email that arrives to my inbox is usually marked as spam and phishing. Emails need to be clear and concise. HTML facilitates far too much hidden shit.

For security plain text is best. US Federal Government Recommendation is to disable html:

“Organizations should ensure that they have disabled HTML from being used in emails, as well as disabling links. Everything should be forced to plain text. This will reduce the likelihood of potentially dangerous scripts or links being sent in the body of the email, and also will reduce the likelihood of a user just clicking something without thinking about it. With plain text, the user would have to go through the process of either typing in the link or copying and pasting. This additional step will allow the user an extra opportunity for thought and analysis before clicking on the link.”

https://theconversation.com/the-only-safe-email-is-text-only...

That said theres another post on the front page about an Apple mail zero click exploit involving attachments so even plain text can’t dodge everything.

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#169
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like anything, this is a matter of perspective. The right team would find value in it. I used to manage a marketing team at a large e-commerce company and we spent tens of thousands a month in email design fees. We rotated through a group of freelancers to design emails. Even an email that was simply following one of our "tried-and-true" templates still would cost us $400 - $500 or so for a single email. That is just…

$500 to update the content of an email is downright robbery. Unless it's not actually "updating content" but is changing what side the images are on, tweaks layouts, adding a graph that wasn't there before, etc.

$500 would include a few images or something. But it definitely wasn't a crazy amount of work. Swapping out text and messaging probably came in closer to the $300 mark. We mostly were paying for expertise of email developers that we trusted.

We rotated through a team of freelancers that specialize in email development. All the freelancers we worked with did email development full-time. They didn't make websites, they didn't do SEO, they just knew email inside and out. They specialize in email, and we paid a premium to them for that expertise. This is important because you want the emails to work on all platforms. So while it might seem easy to just swap out text, it can sometimes cause layout issues (email is very finicky) and we didn't want any of those glitches negatively effecting the brand. The emails generated tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of dollars of revenue per email on average. So no one batted an eye at $500 to make the email. You are paying for the right person to do the job, not micro-analyzing their hours.

We made a lot more money from those emails than the freelancers made by making the emails. So you also want to make them happy, because good email developers are a dying breed. They are hard to find.

I should say that part of process was testing the emails. We ran email device and litmus tests for every email that had to be done as part of the development process. So when I got the finished email from the freelancer, they always submitted a link to a full litmus test result page which showed the email presented in about 30 different device, resolution, and email client combinations. That's what was required for me to approve the email and for the freelancer to get paid.

So the freelancer wasn't just swapping text, but testing the email for us and making any fixes so it worked consistently. They would also add variables for things like %%firstname%% or whatever. We would also run "conditional emails" several times a month that were customized to a customer's location (for example New York customers got a different email than California customers) or some other segment. But conditional emails were more advanced and would run closer to the $2,000 mark. Again, conditional emails out-performed blast emails (uncustomized), so they would consistently bring in 6-figure revenues on those days from the email, so no one thought twice about the $2,000 bill from the email developer.

Re: Show HN: Mail Studio – IDE for designing responsive emails

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally I would agree with this sentiment, but what kind of proof are you looking for here? We're not discussing logical absolutes or claims of absolute fact! We're discussing peoples preferences - what they like and/or expect an engaging email to look like. This area is highly subjective and contextual (culture, region, age, demo, etc). Neither your nor OPs experiences invalidate each other. Both of you can be corr…

Sure if you just prefer if your emails look a certain way then there's no point in discussing proof, just do the thing you like. However if the discussion is whether you should just send plaintext emails or use a complicated and/or expensive tool to send out fancy emails then the more time/money consuming side has more to prove. Given that the first few replies I got were essentially "Well I assume somebody checked t…

>However if the discussion is whether you should just send plaintext emails or use a complicated and/or expensive tool to send out fancy emails then the more time/money consuming side has more to prove.

I am curious, how many plaintext emails do you receive as a percentage? I don't receive any so maybe my opinion is colored by that fact.

>Given that the first few replies I got were essentially "Well I assume somebody checked this", I'm not sure the assumption that fancier emails are necessarily better has been questioned enough.

I'm 100% with you that conventional wisdom should attract scrutiny from time to time, and I don't mean to discourage that. My only point was that there is nothing to "prove" here. Marketing styles/trends/methods are not linked so neatly and linearly that we can test individual elements by scientific method. There are far too many variables. I think it is natural that each company wants to be able to choose the font, add graphics to make the email attractive, add tracking pixels to measure performance, etc. Its sort of become the default. So maybe the question really is what do you stand to gain by removing all that?

>I'm also reminded of several articles where online marketing itself turned out to be nowhere near as effective as people think. [1,2]

Heh, maybe marketing was never as effective as people claimed, its that now we have the tools & metrics to detect just how bad it is. :)

Post reply on HN