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

Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 184 posts

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#141

Post by kd5bjo »

Vinnl wrote: post #138
dillondoyle wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail has smart reminders, or maybe I dont understand. I rely on gmail important filter. If I sent an email but there isn't a response back after like 4/5 days gmail puts a reminder into my important section. It's super helpful because I have a hard time remembering the smaller things.

I don't think that's what I'm looking for. I want to enter reminders that don't necessarily arise from an email. For example, if I'm asked in the morning to get some groceries, I'd set a reminder in Inbox about that that would arise at the end of my work day. Now in Gmail, as far as I'm aware, I'd have to email that reminder to myself, and then snooze that email until the end of my workday.

I've been using https://www.followupthen.com/ for this sort of thing

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#142

Post by mehrdadn »

gbear605 wrote: post #44
vbezhenar wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

3 seconds to load interface, almost instant transitions to mail and reply. Windows, Google Chrome.

15 seconds to load interface, 5 seconds to mail and reply. Mac, Google Chrome, Firefox, or Safari, 22MB/s download/upload, 2.9Ghz cpu running nothing else.

Is it the same speed in Guest Mode (no extensions)?

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#143

Post by stevewillows »

awiesenhofer wrote: post #140
GhostVII wrote: post #16

I would rather have some CSS to make the basic HTML Gmail look like the classic Gmail. Adding CSS to the new Gmail doesn't make it any faster, which is my biggest problem with it. The basic HTML version runs really fast, but it could use a bit of CSS to make it look a bit nicer and add a little more whitespace (at least on my 4k monitor it's somewhat cramped).

Reminds me of Helvetimail - I wonder if it still exists somewhere and works with basic HTML gmail? https://www.swiss-miss.com/2009/09/helvetimail-a-minimalist-... Edit: found the original CSS on archive.org: https://web.archive.org/web/20110817055720/http://www.josefr...

This is the latest copy I could find --

https://web.archive.org/web/20140521210452/http://www.josefr...

Sadly, it doesn't work. The CSS used for the simple Gmail is remarkably minimal to a fault for folks like us.

edit: here's an extremely basic Dracula theme you can use with Stylish. As a disclaimer, this is roughly ten minutes worth of work -- I don't doubt that I missed the other 80%.

https://pastebin.com/raw/srPD5E5Z and literally the invert of that https://pastebin.com/raw/enmLB3Wz

It's definitely not pretty, but with a little time it wouldn't be too difficult to spruce it up.

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#144

Post by me551ah »

pixelrevision wrote: post #46
GhostVII wrote: post #16

I would rather have some CSS to make the basic HTML Gmail look like the classic Gmail. Adding CSS to the new Gmail doesn't make it any faster, which is my biggest problem with it. The basic HTML version runs really fast, but it could use a bit of CSS to make it look a bit nicer and add a little more whitespace (at least on my 4k monitor it's somewhat cramped).

Google is becoming really frustrating. I am trying to transition off inbox because they are killing it. The performance of the new gmail is miserable though.

The new gmail is also buggy.

1. Items will randomly not open and I need to force refresh the page to open a particular email.

2. Search sometimes returns 0 results and clicking on search again seems to work.

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#145

Post by me551ah »

lucideer wrote: post #36
Arnt wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What precisely is shitty and broken about gmail's IMAP implementation? Gmail's IMAP implementation implements three RFCs I wrote; I haven't noticed anything wrong in those areas. Are my RFCs unusual or am I overlooking something?

I'm curious if you've actually used an IMAP client witha Gmail account; if so, which one(s). A sibling comment has already mentioned the folder/flags mixup issue, but while it sounds like one small feature, that one thing is so fundamentally broken that I really can't see how any user of Gmail IMAP would overlook it. I get duplicate notifications for the same mail in INBOX and [Gmail]/All Mail and actions on one copy…

I use the windows Mail application and Gmail seems to work well in that.

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#146

Post by chrismorgan »

fovc wrote: post #127
TheAceOfHearts wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this suggestion has been made a million times here by now, but you should really try a service like Fastmail! A few weeks back I began transitioning my data away from Google, and the performance and overall quality level of Fastmail really blew my mind. It's probably the best and fastest web app I've ever used.

I find FastMail painfully slow. Particularly the mobile app. Long threads with tables and images will crash the app and make Undo unusable on desktop

I work on the FastMail frontend. I’d be interested to have more details, because we pride ourselves on living up to our name (fast!), and providing a robust service. If you have something you can share which concretely performs badly or exhibits such bugs as you describe, please send a test case to support@fastmail.com, asking for the ticket to be passed to me, Chris Morgan. If it’s particular emails that you want me to be able to check, put them in a folder named “forwebmaster” (so named at present for strange historical reasons) and mention that you’ve done so, otherwise I won’t be able to see them.

Observations I can make:

• For the mobile app especially, startup can be slow, but once it’s running there should be no performance issues. The app should never crash; what you describe sounds like it could be running out of memory, which would surprise me, because FastMail’s memory usage is habitually excellent (on Firefox on desktop, I tend to find a long-running FastMail session to use about 11MB only).

• If you have very large emails, the current interface renders them completely, which can be slow; in our upcoming JMAP-based interface, which we’ll be transitioning everyone over to in the near future, we truncate at 100KB by default, which I’ve definitely observed having a positive effect on performance on certain types of inordinately large (like 6MB cron job logs) or unreasonably-written emails (HTML for email is awful; if anyone ever asks you to craft an HTML email, run away).

• I know of no bugs in undo handling. If you know otherwise, please advise so that we can investigate and fix it.

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#147

Post by chrismorgan »

socratesque wrote: post #117
mistermann wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gmail search often doesn't even work for me anymore, I simply can't understand how decisions are made at this company. Is there a way to migrate all your email and maintain your Gmail address indefinitely?

If I remember correctly (maybe four years ago) I just downloaded all my email over IMAP using some desktop client then re-uploaded onto Fastmail. It's a one time hassle but definitely worth it, especially if I had known what I had to do yesterday. I sifted through 10 years worth of email looking for train and plane tickets and hotel bookings etc because I needed to know exactly which dates I crossed which borders ..…

Our migration tools have at times been fragile (I myself tried and failed to migrate from Gmail about a year before I ended up working at FastMail—something about a Gmail security change that broke it), but I believe that they’re all working properly at present. We have a guide for migrating from Gmail in our documentation: https://www.fastmail.com/help/account/gmailimport.html. We’re planning improvements to the procedures, too, to make it easy to use rather than merely possible!

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#148

Post by Arnt »

lucideer wrote: post #36
Arnt wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What precisely is shitty and broken about gmail's IMAP implementation? Gmail's IMAP implementation implements three RFCs I wrote; I haven't noticed anything wrong in those areas. Are my RFCs unusual or am I overlooking something?

I'm curious if you've actually used an IMAP client witha Gmail account; if so, which one(s). A sibling comment has already mentioned the folder/flags mixup issue, but while it sounds like one small feature, that one thing is so fundamentally broken that I really can't see how any user of Gmail IMAP would overlook it. I get duplicate notifications for the same mail in INBOX and [Gmail]/All Mail and actions on one copy…

I intended to ask about actual IMAP bugs. Things that go against the RFCs.

Showing the gmail labels as flags would be legal by the protocol (and have some disadvantages), showing them as mailboxes also legal (and have some other disadvantages), so I don't count that as a bug, it's merely a situation where one has to choose disadvantages.

The duplicate notifications are different; the way IMAP is designed the server cannot know which TCP connections originate from the same client. It can guess based on IP address and some other things, and it can know something based on RFC 2971, but 2971 also says explicitly that the server shouldn't do anyhting differently based on that. Which has been discussed in one of the IETF WGs, and the consensus was that the server isn't permitted to suppress probably superfluous notifications. If a client opens two connections, getting rid of duplicate notifications is the client's job.

www.rfc-editor.org/search/rfc_search_detail.php?author=gulbrandsen are my RFCs; I actually wrote most of those and gmail implements four of the IMAP-related ones I've written.

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#149

Post by chrismorgan »

realusername wrote: post #124
schrodinger wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How's the search and spam filtering?

Spam filtering is alright (at least for me it's similar to Gmail), search has issues if you don't put the exact term I found, I don't like it that much. Fortunately, you can search with a lot of criteria and usually I find what I want.

For clarity: search does stemming (so “work” will find “works” and “working” as well), but it doesn’t try to match synonyms or related words (so “laptop” won’t find “notebook”).

Re: Show HN: Gmail Classic – CSS for Reverting Gmail's New Look

#150

Post by lucideer »

Arnt wrote: post #148
lucideer wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious if you've actually used an IMAP client witha Gmail account; if so, which one(s). A sibling comment has already mentioned the folder/flags mixup issue, but while it sounds like one small feature, that one thing is so fundamentally broken that I really can't see how any user of Gmail IMAP would overlook it. I get duplicate notifications for the same mail in INBOX and [Gmail]/All Mail and actions on one copy…

I intended to ask about actual IMAP bugs. Things that go against the RFCs. Showing the gmail labels as flags would be legal by the protocol (and have some disadvantages), showing them as mailboxes also legal (and have some other disadvantages), so I don't count that as a bug, it's merely a situation where one has to choose disadvantages. The duplicate notifications are different; the way IMAP is designed the server c…

> I don't count that as a bug, it's merely a situation where one has to choose disadvantages.

There's no line in the IMAP spec. that very explicitly states "each mail MUST exist in exactly one folder", so you can certainly argue that Gmail technically follows the spec. but the only reason that line doesn't exist is because doing otherwise is so non-sensical as to not have been considered as a possibility. It does for example contain the following line, which Gmail does not follow: "permits manipulation of mailboxes (remote message folders) in a way that is functionally equivalent to local folders", but the fact that line is simply in the abstract and contains no MUST means one can argue it's not prescriptive.

There may be disadvantages to using flags instead of mailboxes, but equating their disadvantages is reverse hyperbole. If there was any equivalence, you wouldn't have every major client containing a rake of Gmail-specific code to work around the issue.

Post reply on HN