7 ms·

Personally I really like the new design, despite the fact I have actually implemented most of the things mentioned in the article. However, I thinks that this s

Personally I really like the new design, despite the fact I have actually implemented most of the things mentioned in the article. However, I thinks that this shows that gmail is an amazing app that it provides this level of customisation, and this doesn't include any of the stuff from the labs feature set.

sho_hn 15y ago
> I thinks that this shows that gmail is an amazing app that it provides this level of customisation That made me chuckle, using a desktop email app. Funny/curious/thought-provoking how different standards apply to web apps still.
- pbreit 15y ago
  I'm not sure I understand. Most desktop email clients have _very_ limited customizability.
  - hrktb 15y ago
    On the other hand, if you don't like one you can get any other that fits your bill.
    - Jach 15y ago
      You can do this with Gmail just fine since it supports both pop3 and imap out. But I join the chuckling at the notion that "this demonstrates gmail's flexibility". If it was really flexible and customizable, I would still have the old theme.
      - chimeracoder 15y ago
        > You can do this with Gmail just fine since it supports both pop3 and imap out. Gmail's IMAP works, though it's had a number of minor-but-irritating bugs for years (these bugs even affect the official applications too). I wish they'd fix them - I get that it's not in their interest to support nonstandard clients for which they receive no ad revenue, but that's no excuse here, because they still cause some of the same problems on the Android and Blackberry apps. This article, dated February 2008 (four years ago!) is just as relevant today as it was then. The duplication of messages with broken synchronization is what bothers me the most, as I use offlineimap to handle my mail: http://weblog.timaltman.com/archive/2008/02/24/gmails-buggy-imap-implementation http://weblog.timaltman.com/archive/2008/02/24/gmails-buggy-...
  - sho_hn 15y ago
    In my experience, they're usually far more customizable. Clients I've used include KMail on Linux, The Bat! on Windows and Mozilla's Thunderbird, all of which offer myriad options to customize the appearance and behavior of message list, message pane and folder lists, though the first two apps much more so than Thunderbird. You also get to modify things like toolbars much more freely, and OS/toolkit theming usually also beats the GMail theming system. You could argue that GMail has a higher customization potential given the fact that you can muck around with the document client-side (though Thunderbird extensions are similar, and if you really go down that road: I can also change the source code of KMail and recompile it), but we're talking in-app options here. And so I find the notion that "GMail has impressive configurability because it has the options described in the article" amusing. Somehow the world has forgotten just how sophisticated an experience a regular old desktop app running in the context of a regular old desktop environment can be. I'd also argue that regular old desktop toolkits and libraries still require a lot less investment of effort to achieve such levels of sophistication than the web development environment does at the moment. Like I said, thought-provoking.
    - cookiecaper 15y ago
      Also worth noting is that Thunderbird's layout can be thoroughly customized with a bit of JavaScript hacking via its extensions interface, just as Firefox can. While TB may not have tons of visual options by default, it can still get them via third-party extension.
      - sho_hn 15y ago
        Aye, that's what I was talking about with "Tb extensions are similar [in their capabilities] (to GreaseMonkey-style site hacks)".
        cookiecaper 15y ago
        Hmm, didn't see that part. Maybe you edited? Maybe I just skimmed it. Sorry. :)
- ditojim 15y ago
  You're missing out on a ton of great Gmail features if you are using a desktop mail client. Integrated hangout/voice /text chat, phone, conversation view, the social pane with contextual information..the list goes on.
  - nopassrecover 15y ago
    This isn't a rebuttal, but Outlook 2010 has most (if not all) of those things.
    - Karunamon 15y ago
      The only thing I'm aware of Outlook 2010 having from that list is the social networking pane.
      - nopassrecover 15y ago
        Outlook has conversation view as well, and Microsoft Lync (formerly Office Communicator) integrates the rest of the feature set (yes you're vendor-locked, but you are with GMail too). In my opinion GMail executes better on most of these features, but they're not the only ones to offer them.
        darklajid 15y ago
        Not a fan, but Lync even allows XMPP access (if so configured), so all your GTalk buddies can message you from GMail (at least that should work - didn't try).
        Karunamon 15y ago
        I wasn't aware of that.. will have to check it out! Thanks!
  - tjoff 15y ago
    Why would I want that in my mail application? Those features also only promote you to stay logged in on your gmail account at all times, and there have been numerous security issues with that approach. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would chose gmail over any native application for mail. Every time I see someone use gmail I cringe at how primitive and slow the workflow is.
vl 15y ago
It all good advise, exactly to the point what I use except for the theme - I use "Soft gray" - it's works better with preview pane lab and gets rid of the huge red button.

sho_hn 15y ago

> I thinks that this shows that gmail is an amazing app that it provides this level of customisation That made me chuckle, using a desktop email app. Funny/curious/thought-provoking how different standards apply to web apps still.

pbreit 15y ago
I'm not sure I understand. Most desktop email clients have _very_ limited customizability.
- hrktb 15y ago
  On the other hand, if you don't like one you can get any other that fits your bill.
  - Jach 15y ago
    You can do this with Gmail just fine since it supports both pop3 and imap out. But I join the chuckling at the notion that "this demonstrates gmail's flexibility". If it was really flexible and customizable, I would still have the old theme.
    - chimeracoder 15y ago
      > You can do this with Gmail just fine since it supports both pop3 and imap out. Gmail's IMAP works, though it's had a number of minor-but-irritating bugs for years (these bugs even affect the official applications too). I wish they'd fix them - I get that it's not in their interest to support nonstandard clients for which they receive no ad revenue, but that's no excuse here, because they still cause some of the same problems on the Android and Blackberry apps. This article, dated February 2008 (four years ago!) is just as relevant today as it was then. The duplication of messages with broken synchronization is what bothers me the most, as I use offlineimap to handle my mail: http://weblog.timaltman.com/archive/2008/02/24/gmails-buggy-imap-implementation http://weblog.timaltman.com/archive/2008/02/24/gmails-buggy-...
- sho_hn 15y ago
  In my experience, they're usually far more customizable. Clients I've used include KMail on Linux, The Bat! on Windows and Mozilla's Thunderbird, all of which offer myriad options to customize the appearance and behavior of message list, message pane and folder lists, though the first two apps much more so than Thunderbird. You also get to modify things like toolbars much more freely, and OS/toolkit theming usually also beats the GMail theming system. You could argue that GMail has a higher customization potential given the fact that you can muck around with the document client-side (though Thunderbird extensions are similar, and if you really go down that road: I can also change the source code of KMail and recompile it), but we're talking in-app options here. And so I find the notion that "GMail has impressive configurability because it has the options described in the article" amusing. Somehow the world has forgotten just how sophisticated an experience a regular old desktop app running in the context of a regular old desktop environment can be. I'd also argue that regular old desktop toolkits and libraries still require a lot less investment of effort to achieve such levels of sophistication than the web development environment does at the moment. Like I said, thought-provoking.
  - cookiecaper 15y ago
    Also worth noting is that Thunderbird's layout can be thoroughly customized with a bit of JavaScript hacking via its extensions interface, just as Firefox can. While TB may not have tons of visual options by default, it can still get them via third-party extension.
    - sho_hn 15y ago
      Aye, that's what I was talking about with "Tb extensions are similar [in their capabilities] (to GreaseMonkey-style site hacks)".
      - cookiecaper 15y ago
        Hmm, didn't see that part. Maybe you edited? Maybe I just skimmed it. Sorry. :)
ditojim 15y ago
You're missing out on a ton of great Gmail features if you are using a desktop mail client. Integrated hangout/voice /text chat, phone, conversation view, the social pane with contextual information..the list goes on.
- nopassrecover 15y ago
  This isn't a rebuttal, but Outlook 2010 has most (if not all) of those things.
  - Karunamon 15y ago
    The only thing I'm aware of Outlook 2010 having from that list is the social networking pane.
    - nopassrecover 15y ago
      Outlook has conversation view as well, and Microsoft Lync (formerly Office Communicator) integrates the rest of the feature set (yes you're vendor-locked, but you are with GMail too). In my opinion GMail executes better on most of these features, but they're not the only ones to offer them.
      - darklajid 15y ago
        Not a fan, but Lync even allows XMPP access (if so configured), so all your GTalk buddies can message you from GMail (at least that should work - didn't try).
        Karunamon 15y ago
        I wasn't aware of that.. will have to check it out! Thanks!
- tjoff 15y ago
  Why would I want that in my mail application? Those features also only promote you to stay logged in on your gmail account at all times, and there have been numerous security issues with that approach. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would chose gmail over any native application for mail. Every time I see someone use gmail I cringe at how primitive and slow the workflow is.

vl 15y ago

It all good advise, exactly to the point what I use except for the theme - I use "Soft gray" - it's works better with preview pane lab and gets rid of the huge red button.