4 ms·

well, people could have been more willing to pay for email. Google's search engine was top notch for sure. But when we gave them the right to scan our emails we

well, people could have been more willing to pay for email. Google's search engine was top notch for sure. But when we gave them the right to scan our emails we really handed over the keys to the kingdom.

bodge5000 5y ago
I doubt willingness to pay would be a factor. To my knowledge, Gmail (or any other google services) didn't start off paid, bomb, and then they made free but paid for with privacy. I think aside from having 20/20 hindsight to avoid their services and tell others to do the same (which you cant really blame people for not having), I doubt theres much we could do. I guess theres the whole "vote with your wallet" thing, but again, I think that argument is largely made with the benefit of hindsight
- jessaustin 5y ago
  The point was that other email (even with a GUI served over the web) services were available when gmail was introduced, and you did have to pay for many of them. IIRC I was using something called "zworg". I almost regret getting a gmail invite early enough to be able to snag my first and last names with no number, since I am constantly getting all sorts of messages that include surprisingly private information about the various "Jess Austin"s around the world who are getting married, renting "flats", going on vacation, considering cosmetic surgery, etc. I don't know whether these various Ms. Austins have forgotten their email addresses, or perhaps their friends and service providers can't be bothered to use those.
iso1210 5y ago
Before gmail you either had hotmail, or you had your ISP's mail provision. Both were poor in comparison, and in different ways -- your ISP meant you were locked in to your ISP for all features, and while clients like eudora were fairly good for the time (I tended to use Pine), gmail was still superior for normal users. The move to multi-device from the late 00s onwards also changed the email landscape. It was no longer acceptable to simply download your email onto a single desktop computer via pop3 and remove from the server, you wanted access to it from everywhere on any device, your home desktop, your laptop, your work desktop, and eventually your phone, which meant storing mail on the server. Personally yes, I use DDG, OSM or apple maps, pay for an email provider hanging off my own domain which comes with a decent enough webmail client as well as imap integration for phones, but that's not normal. In the 00s I used Pine and fetchmail and squirrelmail on linux, with latex and StarOffice and Phoenix/Firebird (and konqueror at one point) rather than Microsoft and IE and hotmail and office, but that wasn't normal, and it's not really a defence against a claim of a monopoly.

bodge5000 5y ago

I doubt willingness to pay would be a factor. To my knowledge, Gmail (or any other google services) didn't start off paid, bomb, and then they made free but paid for with privacy. I think aside from having 20/20 hindsight to avoid their services and tell others to do the same (which you cant really blame people for not having), I doubt theres much we could do. I guess theres the whole "vote with your wallet" thing, but again, I think that argument is largely made with the benefit of hindsight

jessaustin 5y ago
The point was that other email (even with a GUI served over the web) services were available when gmail was introduced, and you did have to pay for many of them. IIRC I was using something called "zworg". I almost regret getting a gmail invite early enough to be able to snag my first and last names with no number, since I am constantly getting all sorts of messages that include surprisingly private information about the various "Jess Austin"s around the world who are getting married, renting "flats", going on vacation, considering cosmetic surgery, etc. I don't know whether these various Ms. Austins have forgotten their email addresses, or perhaps their friends and service providers can't be bothered to use those.

iso1210 5y ago

Before gmail you either had hotmail, or you had your ISP's mail provision. Both were poor in comparison, and in different ways -- your ISP meant you were locked in to your ISP for all features, and while clients like eudora were fairly good for the time (I tended to use Pine), gmail was still superior for normal users. The move to multi-device from the late 00s onwards also changed the email landscape. It was no longer acceptable to simply download your email onto a single desktop computer via pop3 and remove from the server, you wanted access to it from everywhere on any device, your home desktop, your laptop, your work desktop, and eventually your phone, which meant storing mail on the server. Personally yes, I use DDG, OSM or apple maps, pay for an email provider hanging off my own domain which comes with a decent enough webmail client as well as imap integration for phones, but that's not normal. In the 00s I used Pine and fetchmail and squirrelmail on linux, with latex and StarOffice and Phoenix/Firebird (and konqueror at one point) rather than Microsoft and IE and hotmail and office, but that wasn't normal, and it's not really a defence against a claim of a monopoly.