6 ms·
The case against gmail is very simple for me: - I need to own the domain name to make sure mail is sent to my property. - Gmail for is a paid service for cust
by pyrale 2y ago
The case against gmail is very simple for me:
- I need to own the domain name to make sure mail is sent to my property.
- Gmail for is a paid service for custome domain names.
- Why would I pay for an advertising service?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- jsnell 2y agoWhy do you think you'd be paying for an advertising service in this scenario? - Gmail doesn't show ads to Workspace users. - Your emails aren't used for ad targeting, whether it's a Workspace account or a normal Gmail one.
- pyrale 2y agoCompany promises are temporary, data is forever. And gmail is an ad service, having some paid clients doesn’t change that.
- jsnell 2y agoYour claim was that you're not going to "pay for an ad service". If you're proposing to be a paying client, that population of paid clients seems like the most relevant possible population. Yet you're dismissing it. How is a service that displays no ads and collects no data for use for ad targeting an "ad service"?
- pyrale 2y agoIs my data processed by a separate service? Are the execs at gmail-for-paid-clients different? Do I have any recourse if they decide to update some policy document like they did in the past in their other business lines? Frankly, it's just that much easier for me to feel secure when I get that service from people whose main business is email and not advertising.