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

Goodbye Gmail

dangoldin.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 105 posts

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#71

Post by sliverstorm »

chavesn wrote: post #60

This article is misleading on several accounts (as others of its type often are). - Yes, initial payload size matters. But where's the true comparison about what each app is loading? How are the features and the UX? Would a power user be satisfied with Fastmail (e.g. search, filters, etc.)? (It looks nice, but none of this was discussed at all). - The disparate email count comparison is excused way too quickly. Have…

As a power user, I like my shell access to my mail machine. Procmail, shell scripts, perl...

Oh, and GMail has definitely grown a lot more heavyweight. I've had to switch to the classic HTML interface to get anything done in GMail on my 3 watt 1GHz laptop. Turning off chat helped, but not nearly enough.

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#72

Post by sliverstorm »

r0s wrote: post #41

Spam filtering in Gmail is a killer feature, now as much as when it first appeared. These rants always skip that detail, the primary reason I stick with gmail.

You can always forward your mail through GMail. Publicly, your address is r0s@gmail.com, but that account forwards to another address. Boom, spam filtering. You can even give out your "private" address to trusted parties, and skip the middleman.

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#73

Post by sliverstorm »

motyar wrote: post #16

Not yet ready for a switch? There is still a simple, clean, basic Gmail https://mail.google.com/mail/h/ For more light weighted https://mail.google.com/mail/x/

Yup, I literally have to use /h/. Standard has become so slow I can count the seconds between the end of page loading and the begin of responsiveness (like how Windows used to boot to the desktop, but be unresponsive for another 30 seconds)

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#74

Post by sliverstorm »

ams6110 wrote: post #18
shaunol wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sitting here thinking the same thing .. Can't say I've ever had performance issues or even a moments downtime whilst using gmail since it was launched. Is a paid vs. free solution even comparable? It's also a bit weird to compare the requests made on initial load considering these web pages are arguably meant to be kept open- but regardless, shouldn't the browser be caching these? I think a more fair & thorough compa…

I have accounts on both gmail and fastmail, for different purposes. Gmail has become bloated enough that it's really only usable on modern hardware. I have an older laptop I use when I travel (don't really care too much if it gets stolen, damaged, etc.) and gmail is painfully sluggish on it while Fastmail is still quite usable. Fastmail has also, however, become more bloated than it used to be. I preferred their UI f…

I've mostly jumped off the webmail bandwagon altogether. They are all headed that direction (except squirrelmail) so I stick with IMAP access. Outlook 2010 is currently idling on my laptop at an astonishing 36.6MB.

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#75

Post by sliverstorm »

computerjunkie wrote: post #36

This article may be a little biased but as a user of Gmail and Outlook I can agree that Gmail is sluggish to a certain extent. Outlook's interface made managing my email much simpler and straight to the point. I have not come across issues about Microsoft's server not playing nice with email clients. Yes Outlook may not have as many features as compared to Gmail but it does what it says on the tin, and does it well i…

What do you mean, Outlook has less features than GMail? Sure doesn't seem that way to me.

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#77

Post by yen223 »

hueving wrote: post #66
MBlume wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"It seems kind of ironic that a company whose motto is “Don’t Be Evil” has a flagship product that believes virtually every demographic group should be murdered en masse. I don’t know if this is a weird quirk of the search algorithm or if pretty much everyone who makes should-statements on the Internet is recommending genocide." http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/04/lies-damned-lies-and-fa...

>or if pretty much everyone who makes should-statements on the Internet is recommending genocide No, you are seeing a reflection of what other people are searching too. It's a mirror into peoples private naughty thoughts. Stuff they wouldn't say themselves, yet they search for to see if there are arguments supporting the thought.

I've always wondered - are Google's autocomplete choices based on what people are searching for, or are they based on frequently-found phrases in website content?

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#78

Post by yen223 »

sliverstorm wrote: post #72
r0s wrote: post #41

Spam filtering in Gmail is a killer feature, now as much as when it first appeared. These rants always skip that detail, the primary reason I stick with gmail.

You can always forward your mail through GMail. Publicly, your address is r0s@gmail.com, but that account forwards to another address. Boom, spam filtering. You can even give out your "private" address to trusted parties, and skip the middleman.

This negates the privacy benefits of not using gmail, no?

Re: Goodbye Gmail

#80

Post by doff »

justinzollars wrote: post #4

I've noticed maps is considerably slower and less responsive. Google has become corporatized so I'm keeping my expectations in check.

I've noticed this with maps as well. I don't know what that has to do with corporatization, but I do know slow, hiccupy, and failed to load when I see it.
Post reply on HN