3 ms·

How will you use it in a way that benefits you? My experience has been that it makes the experience much worse since you have to search for everything to find

by eitally 16y ago

How will you use it in a way that benefits you? My experience has been that it makes the experience much worse since you have to search for everything to find related messages and you can't click-to-sort the column headers (like on a thick client).

bambax 16y ago
I use a thick client mainly; I use GMail as an archive or when I'm away; GMail downloads my mail via POP (my primary address is not GMail). So, usually, I read mail outside GMail -- but GMail does not know what mail is already read. In a big thread, it opens all "unread" emails: the tens I read already and the last one I'm interested in. This is crazy and infuriating. Also, why are most recent emails in a thread at the bottom?? (maybe it can be configured somewhere?) And finally, like most "intelligent" features, it's much too smart (or not enough): it adds new mails to old threads. Many non-techies (and some techies as well) take an old email that has the list of recipients they're looking for, to start an entirely new discussion. Aggregating those new emails to an old thread that has nothing to do whatsoever with the subject at hand is idiotic. I just want mail sorted ante-chronologically; and then I just deal with the sorting myself.
- eitally 16y ago
  I understand your POP-related complaints completely, and they're all 100% valid. For the others, though.... Most recent at the bottom: because people read from the top down, I'm sure. It only adds new mails if the heuristics are correct, those primarily being the subject, but also taking into account the recipients the timestamp, and who knows what else (they won't say). If you start a new conversation from an old thread, just change the subject... especially if it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. If the subject of two messages is different, Gmail will never group them, ever. The biggest complaint I've heard from non-techy users is that with conversations they frequently miss messages because they can't adequately gauge what is unread, especially if the volume is high enough that things move off the first page with rapidity.
  - bambax 16y ago
    > If you start a new conversation from an old thread, just change the subject... I'm not the one starting the conversation so I'm not at liberty to do anything. There is a thread. Then, days later, some member of this thread decides to start a new conversation by replying to this thread. It's the same "mailing list" but it should be a different thread. (But GMail has no way to know; this isn't a failure of GMail. The failure was, until today, to not allow to do without the threaded view). At least GMail should have had the option of breaking a thread; for each message in a thread, display a button that says "start a new thread here".
  - bambax 16y ago
    > Most recent at the bottom: because people read from the top down, I'm sure. For one, most people is not all people: why not let us set the sort order? And secondly, I too read "from the top down", but I want to start with most recent emails; and then when I have read them all (if I read them all) I'll know the whole of the conversation -- but I can stop at anytime and still have the most recent status. If you start reading the most ancient emails, then if you stop before arriving to the most recent ones (because of a distraction, a phone call, etc.) then you have an "open" conversation in your head that is waiting to be completed. That will create a memory leak ;-)

by eitally 16y ago

bambax 16y ago

I use a thick client mainly; I use GMail as an archive or when I'm away; GMail downloads my mail via POP (my primary address is not GMail). So, usually, I read mail outside GMail -- but GMail does not know what mail is already read. In a big thread, it opens all "unread" emails: the tens I read already and the last one I'm interested in. This is crazy and infuriating. Also, why are most recent emails in a thread at the bottom?? (maybe it can be configured somewhere?) And finally, like most "intelligent" features, it's much too smart (or not enough): it adds new mails to old threads. Many non-techies (and some techies as well) take an old email that has the list of recipients they're looking for, to start an entirely new discussion. Aggregating those new emails to an old thread that has nothing to do whatsoever with the subject at hand is idiotic. I just want mail sorted ante-chronologically; and then I just deal with the sorting myself.

eitally 16y ago
I understand your POP-related complaints completely, and they're all 100% valid. For the others, though.... Most recent at the bottom: because people read from the top down, I'm sure. It only adds new mails if the heuristics are correct, those primarily being the subject, but also taking into account the recipients the timestamp, and who knows what else (they won't say). If you start a new conversation from an old thread, just change the subject... especially if it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. If the subject of two messages is different, Gmail will never group them, ever. The biggest complaint I've heard from non-techy users is that with conversations they frequently miss messages because they can't adequately gauge what is unread, especially if the volume is high enough that things move off the first page with rapidity.
- bambax 16y ago
  > If you start a new conversation from an old thread, just change the subject... I'm not the one starting the conversation so I'm not at liberty to do anything. There is a thread. Then, days later, some member of this thread decides to start a new conversation by replying to this thread. It's the same "mailing list" but it should be a different thread. (But GMail has no way to know; this isn't a failure of GMail. The failure was, until today, to not allow to do without the threaded view). At least GMail should have had the option of breaking a thread; for each message in a thread, display a button that says "start a new thread here".
- bambax 16y ago
  > Most recent at the bottom: because people read from the top down, I'm sure. For one, most people is not all people: why not let us set the sort order? And secondly, I too read "from the top down", but I want to start with most recent emails; and then when I have read them all (if I read them all) I'll know the whole of the conversation -- but I can stop at anytime and still have the most recent status. If you start reading the most ancient emails, then if you stop before arriving to the most recent ones (because of a distraction, a phone call, etc.) then you have an "open" conversation in your head that is waiting to be completed. That will create a memory leak ;-)