Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

purelymail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 316 posts

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#271

Post by [deleted] »

725686 wrote: post #270
nanis wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When signing up for a trial, the page says: > To activate a trial account, you will need a reasonably modern browser and a phone number that can receive SMS texts. It makes no mention of the use of a "hashwall" ... It gives no indication of what the user's browser is going to do ... Just a progress meter with a note saying it will take about 3 minutes. This feels fishy. Especially if a user doesn't know how to get in…

I clicked for a trial... after a while I entered my phone, received an SMS, and no indication of what to do with the code I received. No place to enter the code in the web page, nothing. Second attempt, and I got a place to put the code. Then, while I was filling up the registration data, the page refreshed and started all over. Third attempt finally worked... Not the best on-boarding experience, but hey it really is…

[deleted]

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#272

Post by baobabKoodaa »

lazyweb wrote: post #225
baobabKoodaa wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My server is quite low traffic, but it's been delivering mail reliably. How do I know? When I send mails, there's usually follow-ups. And when there's no follow-ups, you just assume your mail has been delivered? I recommend actually measuring your deliverability before making claims about it.

Well either there's a bounce, or some other indicator in the postfix logs (collected by filebeat, with alertings in kibana). If I'd still be getting blackholed with a "250 delivered" in my logs, then screw it. I would even argue people hosting their small selfmanaged mail servers helps preventing monopolization, eg. "only allow mail from google".

> Well either there's a bounce, or some other indicator in the postfix logs (collected by filebeat, with alertings in kibana).

The most common type of problem is that mail is delivered but placed into the spam folder. You will not be notified of this with a bounce or anything in your postfix logs.

> If I'd still be getting blackholed with a "250 delivered" in my logs, then screw it.

This is another type of problem I've encountered. It's rarer than the spam folder, but it happens.

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#273

Post by mv4 »

desdiv wrote: post #154
Felz wrote: post #30

Oh cool, my project is on HackerNews! I was wondering about the sudden uptick in user signups, and then I checked HN... I'm Scott, feel free to ask me anything about the service.

Hey there, cool service. I signed up immediately. >You cannot have more than $50 in credit at any time. Just curious, why a $50 limit? I'm the weird kind of guy who likes to pay years in advance. If possible, please consider raising this limit to $100 or even $200.

Risk. To the provider, prepaid fees are a liability.

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#274

Post by kureikain »

TedDoesntTalk wrote: post #257
Brian_K_White wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think all you really need is to own your domain. If you manage your domain and point your mx at google, and some ai decides your drive contents look bad or some non-official youtube app violates some api access rule and they kill your whole account, you just point your at any other service provider. That will be an annoying few days, but you don't lose anything too important. Maybe for a day or so you can't receive…

Thanks for the reply. I thought IMAP servers keep the messages on the server , not on the client. Is that incorrect?

The client has download a copy already and wont sync back what it is already download. You can look into tools like imapsync https://github.com/imapsync/imapsync to copy data from two imap account

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#275

Post by layer8 »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #204
layer8 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you send your email via a small email server (a server that sends a low volume of email), you will have constant issues getting mail delivered. That’s hyperbole. I‘ve been running my personal mail server on a VPS for the past 20 years and never had any delivery issues. It may depend on the hosting provider you use, and nowadays you probably need to have DKIM etc., but there are a lot of people running their ow…

> That’s hyperbole. I‘ve been running my personal mail server on a VPS for the past 20 years and never had any delivery issues. No email server in the world can deliver 100% (not even Gmail). Here you are claiming to have done that for 20 years straight. Well, it's not true. In fact, I'll venture as far as to guess that you've never even measured your deliverability.

I’m saying that for all practical purposes I never had an issue. That is, I don’t recollect any case where it turned out that someone didn’t get my email. That’s not to say that it didn’t ever happen in cases that went unnoticed by me, but if so it was rare enough to be a non-issue.

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#276

Post by vzaliva »

2Gkashmiri wrote: post #79
vzaliva wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

because of spam many systems agessively block email delivery from IP addresses which do not known to belong to well established mail providers with millions of users. And it is very tedious to unblock it on case by case basis. This is the reason I've stopped running my personal mail server 10 years ago.

well there are checks to see if your ip address is blocked as spam. even then you can just ask your vps provider for giving you a fresh one.

yea, but it have to be done constantly. Somehow you never sure your messages are delivered or if people can reach you. At some point after running my onw mail infrastructure for 15 years I gave up and decided that I would like to oursource this to somebody else, a email provider who have a dedicated team of admins making sure my mail is delivered, so I do not have to worry and spend time on it myself.

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#277

Post by layer8 »

tzs wrote: post #227
layer8 wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When you send your email via a small email server (a server that sends a low volume of email), you will have constant issues getting mail delivered. That’s hyperbole. I‘ve been running my personal mail server on a VPS for the past 20 years and never had any delivery issues. It may depend on the hosting provider you use, and nowadays you probably need to have DKIM etc., but there are a lot of people running their ow…

> I‘ve been running my personal mail server on a VPS for the past 20 years and never had any delivery issues. Age may be a factor. I ran email for my domain on my own server for a long time too and generally had no delivery issues. When I got another domain a few years ago and ran it on the same server it had a lot of delivery issues.

> Age may be a factor.

Probably. Although I switched both IP and domain a couple of years ago (not at the same time) without noticeable issues.

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#278

Post by Felz »

nanis wrote: post #191
Felz wrote: post #30

Oh cool, my project is on HackerNews! I was wondering about the sudden uptick in user signups, and then I checked HN... I'm Scott, feel free to ask me anything about the service.

When signing up for a trial, the page says: > To activate a trial account, you will need a reasonably modern browser and a phone number that can receive SMS texts. It makes no mention of the use of a "hashwall" ... It gives no indication of what the user's browser is going to do ... Just a progress meter with a note saying it will take about 3 minutes. This feels fishy. Especially if a user doesn't know how to get in…

For the trial hashwall, the browser just does some heavy computations. I guess I should add a warning there, it's probably does have battery impact if you're using a phone for whatever reason.

I'll make a note on the UI elements. Honestly hadn't thought about the punycode usecase, good catch.

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#279

Post by Felz »

725686 wrote: post #270
nanis wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When signing up for a trial, the page says: > To activate a trial account, you will need a reasonably modern browser and a phone number that can receive SMS texts. It makes no mention of the use of a "hashwall" ... It gives no indication of what the user's browser is going to do ... Just a progress meter with a note saying it will take about 3 minutes. This feels fishy. Especially if a user doesn't know how to get in…

I clicked for a trial... after a while I entered my phone, received an SMS, and no indication of what to do with the code I received. No place to enter the code in the web page, nothing. Second attempt, and I got a place to put the code. Then, while I was filling up the registration data, the page refreshed and started all over. Third attempt finally worked... Not the best on-boarding experience, but hey it really is…

Hm, no idea what would've gone wrong in your case. It sounds like something kept closing the websocket used to provide page interactivity or something?

Re: Purelymail – cheap, no-nonsense email

#280

Post by Felz »

massung wrote: post #214
Felz wrote: post #30

Oh cool, my project is on HackerNews! I was wondering about the sudden uptick in user signups, and then I checked HN... I'm Scott, feel free to ask me anything about the service.

Scott, nice service! Two notes: 1. I don't know if it's the social media kiss of death at work, but I'm getting lots of SSL errors trying to load your site. It's a crap-shoot whether it works or not right now. 2. Seeing this post, I posted this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27711124 . If you don't already (did I miss it?) it might be worth tossing up a page or an item in your FAQ teaching people about how the…

> 1. I don't know if it's the social media kiss of death at work, but I'm getting lots of SSL errors trying to load your site. It's a crap-shoot whether it works or not right now.

Hard to say for sure. None of the servers really went above 15% average CPU and I don't think they maxed out net, and the health checker for HTTPS didn't have any problems. I'll doublecheck.

On the subject of migration, I'll make a note to add a FAQ for that, thanks.

Post reply on HN