81–90 of 147 posts
Why don't they support a mechanism which works with plain text emails? E.g. put the JSON stuff into a header field. Btw how would one suggest something like this officially? There seems to be no issue tracker or anything for gmail.
Statistically speaking, nobody sends plain text email any more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
... HTML? You're joking, right?
Not that I know of. Why? Links? Phishing would be much different if people read links instead of the label. Images? Really? Just attach them and do not add clutter to the message. Edit: did I say something wrong? Really ?
Lots of strangely negative reactions here. We ( http://inky.com ) think this is a positive development and plan to support it as well. We're happy Google has promoted open standards in doing this.
Good marketing bit there ;)
How about an "action" to let me archive/delete a message with just one click without opening it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The format may be open, the ability to use it isn't - you need to register with Google[1] or they won't display actions on your e-mail. This appears to be necessary for security reasons. Imagine if every e-mail provider did the same thing! [1] https://developers.google.com/gmail/schemas/registering-with...
And even if they implement the "open standard" in outlook, who says Google won't bait and switch (oh the irony) then, like they did with their youtube apps on windows mobile?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess that's the negativity Larry Page was talking about yesterday, sad indeed.
Yeah. There are so many positive possibilities yet a large group of people still choose to focus on the negative side. I hope this can change one day
The whole history of modern operating systems and the Web is the example of that. Think of all the amazing and useful things that could be (and have been) done had there was no Data Execution Prevention or Same-Origin Policy or any other limit introduced because of security.
I don't get it, wouldn't an html email with a form element do the same thing?
Whatever happened to the Unix philosphy? 'Write programs that do one thing and do it well'. Last thing I want in my inbox. Call me a purist but email is for emailing people.
The fact that this was posted on the Google Apps blog is telling- I imagine that Google wants to roll this out to Apps users before general Gmail users. I'm surprised by the reaction in here- yes, it's an addition to the standard e-mail system. Do we really want that system to stand absolutely still? If that's the case, why are we cheering so much web browser development? Surely a browser from 1997 should be good eno…
> I imagine that Google wants to roll this out to Apps users before general Gmail users. That'll be a first. Historically, Google has deeply neglected Apps users. My Apps account didn't get G+ until almost a year after it became generally available.
That's a funny way of looking at it. I pay Google money for my account so that I have, above all, a reliable system to use for my business.
No beta bullshit. And with Google Apps, that's what I get.
Regular users are the guinea pigs and once a feature has proven itself year(s) later, it's added to Apps. As someone who runs a business, I'm quite happy with that approach.
I get all the latest and greatest on my personal GMail account, I don't need it on my business account.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think the reactions are strange at all. Google have a bad track record in implementing things and then abandoning them for one. I want my email to be a consistent experience - not to get some different behavior if I access through a certain device. Email and its simplicity was universal - I saw the same text on my phone, tablet, laptop and desktop. Will every mail sender who makes use of this, include the JSO…
I see your point, but consistency of email display went out the window with HTML email. We (and Google, and hopefully everybody else providing mail readers) put a ton of work into sanitizing HTML before rendering it in the preview pane. This makes mail display a delicate balance between safety and preserving the sender's intent. It's already a far from trivial problem, and is one of the hundred or so non-obvious reas…