I tried going to outlook.com and it immediately kicked me out with a "cookies required" page. How is it sensible for any web site, anywhere, to make this the visitor's first impression? Even if a site does need cookies somewhere, I think it's ridiculous to design something that requires a cookie all the time.
Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
281–290 of 341 posts
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
The under 13 thing, as has been discussed before, is due to COPPA. Google doesn't offer anything like hotmail's family account (where the child's account is managed by a proven parent's account), so if they find out that you're under 13, they have to close your account and they aren't allowed to warn you that they will do so (or let you go back and change your birthdate). As for the pseudonym thing, that never occurr…
No, they don't have to close the account, they choose to, rather than deal with the law's requirements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Pr... > While children under 13 can legally give out personal information with their parents' permission, many websites altogether disallow underage children from using their services due to the amount of paperwork involved.
What distinction are you making here? They also choose to not give you infinite storage space for free and choose to not indemnify you for copyright infringement when you send ripped mp3s as attachments. Every company operating in the US has to decide if offering services to children is worth the extra regulatory oversight.
If you'd like, I can rephrase, but the meaning is the same:
Google doesn't offer anything like hotmail's family account (where the child's account is managed by a proven parent's account), so if they find out that you're under 13, they will be in violation of the law if they do not close your account, and they aren't allowed to warn you that they will do so (or let you go back and change your birthdate).
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes it would. Neither I nor anyone I know use Google because we trust or respect it, we use it because it works well.
I'll bet there are some smart, hard-working, upstanding googlers here that read that and felt a little sad.
And conversely so with Microsoft employees and similar criticisms. Nobody likes to the think they work for The Man or some kind of corporate tyrant, most truly believe they bringing value to the lives of their users as opposed to exploiting them (even incidentally).
Google is just as susceptible to trust issues as Microsoft or anyone else. Every time Google is caught violating privacy it's always an "accident", like with the wifi network data collection being done by their street view cars. If a company is constantly apologizing for "accidents" that align with their business interests I'd have a hard time trusting them, even if I continue to use them.
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, they don't have to close the account, they choose to, rather than deal with the law's requirements. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Pr... > While children under 13 can legally give out personal information with their parents' permission, many websites altogether disallow underage children from using their services due to the amount of paperwork involved.
What distinction are you making here? They also choose to not give you infinite storage space for free and choose to not indemnify you for copyright infringement when you send ripped mp3s as attachments. Every company operating in the US has to decide if offering services to children is worth the extra regulatory oversight. If you'd like, I can rephrase, but the meaning is the same: Google doesn't offer anything like…
The law provides a way to offer accounts to under-13s. They don't have to close the account, they just choose to close it instead of complying with the added burden that would be required.
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#285"Your password can't be longer than 16 characters." Well, it failed my test. Sorry. I never trust my emails to small hard to remember passwords. I rather trust them to very large easy to remember/type passwords. Like horses-functional-pickles Also their capcha, I cannot figure out it, i won't spend more than 2 minutes on capcha
Not being able to use my personal method for making unique passwords totally killed creating an account for me as well.
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#286Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck with that. SAAS means you're vulnerable to vendor change with every pageload. Though there are getting to be tools which allow you to reverse-engineer sites and design them how you want, but this is subject to a lot of churn keeping up with the SAAS vendor. Still lovin' my mutt.
On the flipside, SAAS means you can augment the interface using browser plugins (user scripts, CSS, etc)!
That's a characteristic of applications that run in a web browser and has nothing to do with SAAS architecture.
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use my old mac.com and new me.com emails and it works beautifully. The iCloud mail interface as well as everything else about the experience is just great. Very, very little spam, lightning fast, no ads, integration with my iCal and therefore easily accessed from all of my devices. Gmail is good, but I find it's overrated.
IIRC, it's not free.
It is now.
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#288Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're OK with having separate windows, you can use a different profile for each one. Chrome handles this much better than firefox. For example, I silo my facebook browsing with: chrome --app= https://facebook.com --user-data-dir=/home/jewel/.profiles/facebook The other thing I do is use a different google account for each of their services, so a policy violation in one won't shut off the service in another. For e…
Chrome handles this much better than firefox. How so? What can Chrome do that using the Firefox Profile Manager can't?
Firefox doesn't seem able to connect to a specific open profile and make a new window, if you run Firefox without --no-remote, it always opens a new window for the oldest instance, which makes keeping multiple profiles open a pain. If you close your browsing profile while your have your email profile still open, now the Firefox icon will open windows in your email profile.
If you make an icon for your various profiles that uses '--no-remote', you can only open one window with that icon. To open more you'll have to find the running instance.
I generally prefer Firefox so if I've missed something I'd love to know, but I searched high and low for a solution and in the end I gave up and swapped to Chrome. Now I have launchers for Facebook, etc. that behave exactly as you would expect. You click the Facebook icon and you get a Facebook window, running the Facebook profile.
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good luck with that. SAAS means you're vulnerable to vendor change with every pageload. Though there are getting to be tools which allow you to reverse-engineer sites and design them how you want, but this is subject to a lot of churn keeping up with the SAAS vendor. Still lovin' my mutt.
True, but it would be nice to augment Mutt with things like tags and conversations[1] without having convoluted setups involving hacks with external scripts. Another example, it would be really cool to be able to edit email as Markdown/Textile/reStructuredText and have it converted to a text+html (multipart/alternative) email, but currently there is no way to do that with Mutt without using some sort of sendmail wrap…
Not pointing this out for any reason other than it might useful for some: http://sup.rubyforge.org/
More generally, though, I last used mutt in the late 90s so I have no clue but.. it doesn't allow for a vim-style of extension by third party addons?
Re: Introducing Outlook.com - Modern Email for the Next Billion Mailboxes
#290There is currently a bug that I stumbled across that allows for spoofed emails to be sent. If you have a Live account that has an external e-mail address Microsoft allows you to login here, without any additional authentication credentials, and actually will send e-mails using the account's original address. In my case this was my Gmail address. Overall the requirement of Silverlight is a little annoying, but the sam…
You might have already verified your Gmail when you first signed up for the Microsoft account.