3 ms·
But none of those things are logically linked or dominant. Why can't I just have zero latency email that defaults to a prominent instant-message-like UI for all
by jessriedel 9y ago
But none of those things are logically linked or dominant. Why can't I just have zero latency email that defaults to a prominent instant-message-like UI for all emails without a subject line?
If desired, you could require approval from the recipient to reach this IM-level visibility if sent by a stranger, with unapproved messages appearing in the normal email box (sorta like FB does with non-friends). If someone is sending you too many, you can de-approve them, and you'll just respond slowly like email. The de-approved sender doesn't need to be told they have been de-approved, and the fact that we don't always reply instantly to IMs provides plausible deniability.
- lucaspiller 9y agoThis is one of the reasons why Gmail was a game changer when it launched. Most of the other services at the time offered standard inbox one-message-at-time view, where as Gmail showed them in a threaded view.
- c-smile 9y ago> If someone is sending you too many That's one of the points. I can publish my IM name but I will receive messages only from those recipients whom I will approve. Publishing email address ... well that's the main reason why we cannot live without services like GMail - to filter out spam.
- jessriedel 9y agoHuh? My original question is why we can't have the best of both worlds since their is no barrier to combining them. Merely noting that different features are available with different services does not answer this question.