4 ms·
He says "Gmail was laughable early on". I got a Gmail invitation, through an acquaintance, before it was generally available to the public. I remember how aweso
by bad_user 13y ago
He says "Gmail was laughable early on". I got a Gmail invitation, through an acquaintance, before it was generally available to the public. I remember how awesome it felt in comparison to Yahoo Mail: (1) file uploads were handled after hitting "Send", instead of disrupting the writing of your message like the other web interfaces did, (2) it came with huge online storage, (3) searching emails actually worked which in combination with the huge storage meant that I stopped deleting emails, (4) spam simply stopped hitting my Inbox (a real problem with my Yahoo Mail account, which made my Y! account unusable), (5) it was the only free email service I knew that provided POP3/SMTP access and then later I noticed (6) conversation threads.
Ever since Gmail was invitation-only, it has been awesome on multiple levels. It has its ups and downs, but if I am to think of products that have been almost perfect ever since version 1, Gmail is right up there with iPhone 1 - i.e. missing features, but so useful and refreshing.
How can you fail to mention that Internet Explorer, ever since version 6, became the main barrier for adopting web standards, as development on it simply stopped for several years, with the team being sent to work on other things, like Silverlight? How can you fail to mention Firefox for that matter? In 2006 Firefox version 2 was barely released. It then grew to over 20% of market-share, without Mozilla making aggressive deals for prebundling it. Internet Explorer isn't losing to Chrome only, it's losing to Firefox and Safari too and they ended up in this position by their own incompetence or malevolence.
There was a time when Microsoft was serving their customer's needs. They stopped doing that in 2001, after Windows XP was released.
- RyanMcGreal 13y ago> I remember how awesome it felt in comparison to Yahoo Mail The author is comparing it to Outlook and other email clients, not to the existing webmail applications when Gmail launched.
- visakanv 13y agomore anecdata: I very specifically remember thinking "wow, this kicks yahoo and hotmails' butts!" I never bothered with outlook or other non-web-based clients
- bad_user 13y agoYes, but then you're comparing apples with oranges, as Gmail wasn't initially meant to be an Exchange/Outlook replacement, being in a different league entirely and useful on its own merits. That along with Google Apps, Gmail is suddenly viewed as a replacement for Outlook/Exchange, well that's a classic innovator's dilemma.
- RyanMcGreal 13y agoThe latter half of your comment answers the objection you raise in the former half. Gmail is a classic worse-is-better disruption of an existing superior product.
- dasil003 13y agoThe OA actually seems to be claiming that it still sucks compared to Outlook. But this is similar in spirit to the endless refrain about how ill-suited the web is to application development and how far it is behind 20-year-old GUI SDKs. Meanwhile web application development continues to evolve and plow forward despite the misgivings of no small number of graybeards frantically waving their arms in protest. The bottom line is web is two steps backwards in terms of GUI, but four steps forward in terms of distribution, cross-platform, accessibility and availability. Gmail was probably the single most important bellwether of how Microsoft's lunch would eventually be eaten by cloud services.