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

Google Inbox

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 472 posts

Re: Google Inbox

#301

Post by dmourati »

GuiA wrote: post #19

Congrats to Google on shipping! Side question: am I the only person fully satisfied by my email workflow? I practice inbox 0- if an email is in my inbox, it means something needs to be done about it (whether it's replying, filing a bug report, writing a patch, etc). Once it's done, it gets archived. I star the stuff that I'll need to refer to later, like tickets for a flight or concert. I then have a few server side…

Same.

I had an inbox zero policy before that was a thing. It's the only sane way to deal with email.

Count today: ~100 work emails. Most take less than a second of time. Some, require <1 minute to reply. The outliers are the ones that require me to do actual work beyond email but those are luckily usually communicated otherwise.

Re: Google Inbox

#302

Post by prawn »

DINKDINK wrote: post #125
matkam wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too practice "inbox 0," and making sure I am very diligent about unsubscribing from mailing lists and creating the occasional filter. I am completely content with email, and I feel like this is more for people who never hit the "archive" button. This is why I use stock gmail over Dropbox's Mailbox. And I am afraid that if I start using Google's Inbox, my inbox will just get cluttered and I won't be able to go back.

can you explain to me the advantage of archiving a message over just letting it rest in a read state in your inbox? I've never been able to see an added value to it.

Same goes for "starring for to-do" vs "unread as to-do". The latter does mix in requires-action with yet-to-read, but maybe a lot of us class a yet-to-read email as requiring an action anyway?

Re: Google Inbox

#303

Post by fabrice_d »

cromwellian wrote: post #282
pcwalton wrote: post #261

Chrome only, it seems. Disappointing. https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/524987137892954112

It doesn't use any Chrome specific features and it will work on FF, but it needs to be optimized to get buttery smooth 60fps animations. As you know, the logic for when the various browsers do layout, create layers, upload them to the GPU, etc is different, and that causes divergence rendering performance. It was hard enough to do this on Chrome, it just takes time. We also ran into a recent difference in the way spa…

Still, people wanting to use it will likely switch to chrome. That's a tactic google already used for hangouts - only to end up with a very unconvincing "oops, that was a mistake" answer (see https://twitter.com/johnath/status/486575645338918912).

Instead, you could just notify the user that performance may not be as good on other browsers for now.

Re: Google Inbox

#305

Post by fabrice_d »

cromwellian wrote: post #282
pcwalton wrote: post #261

Chrome only, it seems. Disappointing. https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/524987137892954112

It doesn't use any Chrome specific features and it will work on FF, but it needs to be optimized to get buttery smooth 60fps animations. As you know, the logic for when the various browsers do layout, create layers, upload them to the GPU, etc is different, and that causes divergence rendering performance. It was hard enough to do this on Chrome, it just takes time. We also ran into a recent difference in the way spa…

Still, people wanting to use it will likely switch to chrome. That's a tactic google already used for hangouts - only to end up with a very unconvincing "oops, that was a mistake" answer (see https://twitter.com/johnath/status/486575645338918912).

Instead, you could just notify the user that performance may not be as good on other browsers for now.

Re: Google Inbox

#306

Post by smussmann »

MCRed wrote: post #268

New Rule: I'm officially done with artificially segregating people into "cool people" who have an invite and the rest of us who have to get in line. Simple was the worst offender-- I should have known with the multi-year wait, to be capped off by bigoted comments from a cofounder to me on twitter (about an unrelated matter. But hey, your CxO makes a bigoted comment- I'm no longer your customer!) But it's not just Sim…

I expect the reason Google is doing this is to be able to control the rate at which they allow people onto the infrastructure behind the new service. Going from internal testing to everyone on the Web using a service can be pretty rough.

[Disclosure: I work for Google, but not on anything related to Inbox or Gmail]

Re: Google Inbox

#307

Post by n72 »

Sounds to me very much like the Active Inbox plugin, which I've been using for a couple of years and proselytize mercilessly. It's based on the GTD way of doing things.

Re: Google Inbox

#308

Post by taeric »

sytelus wrote: post #300
GuiA wrote: post #19

Congrats to Google on shipping! Side question: am I the only person fully satisfied by my email workflow? I practice inbox 0- if an email is in my inbox, it means something needs to be done about it (whether it's replying, filing a bug report, writing a patch, etc). Once it's done, it gets archived. I star the stuff that I'll need to refer to later, like tickets for a flight or concert. I then have a few server side…

Emails have several issues: Large % of emails are newsletters, notifications, offers and promotions. This is not spam (I think we have got that under control). These are the things you intentionally subscribed to and "nice to know" but not important or urgent. Email clients are utterly oblivious to identifieng and ranking them (Gmail's Priority Inbox is rather dumb baby steps). Replying to threads and quoting previou…

This doesn't really make it not spam. After a while, I do have to wonder why quite a few of my emails aren't just items in an RSS feed.

Re: Google Inbox

#309

Post by [deleted] »

DINKDINK wrote: post #125
matkam wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too practice "inbox 0," and making sure I am very diligent about unsubscribing from mailing lists and creating the occasional filter. I am completely content with email, and I feel like this is more for people who never hit the "archive" button. This is why I use stock gmail over Dropbox's Mailbox. And I am afraid that if I start using Google's Inbox, my inbox will just get cluttered and I won't be able to go back.

can you explain to me the advantage of archiving a message over just letting it rest in a read state in your inbox? I've never been able to see an added value to it.

[deleted]

Re: Google Inbox

#310

Post by jgon »

cromwellian wrote: post #282
pcwalton wrote: post #261

Chrome only, it seems. Disappointing. https://twitter.com/brianleroux/status/524987137892954112

It doesn't use any Chrome specific features and it will work on FF, but it needs to be optimized to get buttery smooth 60fps animations. As you know, the logic for when the various browsers do layout, create layers, upload them to the GPU, etc is different, and that causes divergence rendering performance. It was hard enough to do this on Chrome, it just takes time. We also ran into a recent difference in the way spa…

What an incredibly disingenuous reply. Chrome is truly this decade's IE, and watching Google try to play this kind of crap off would be disappointing if it wasn't so insulting.

"There's no intent to exclude Firefox", it just turns out you've done that for like 2 major product releases in a row along with a giant flashing button suggesting that the user downloads Chrome. I'm not stupid, you don't have to lie to my face.

Post reply on HN