2 ms·

You are free to disagree of course, but it is not silly. Centralizing into a locked garden or into an established monopol-like platform has negative aspects to

by onli 12y ago

You are free to disagree of course, but it is not silly. Centralizing into a locked garden or into an established monopol-like platform has negative aspects to the field as a whole. Just look at RSS before the google reader shutdown and compare to now. Trusting the whole email-communication to one company with a direct link to the NSA can't be a good idea. To foster that development with seemingly unnecessary restricting focus onto gmail is fine to criticize. It is not like they had to choose.

ebbv 12y ago
I am against Google replacing IMAP with their own API (and yes I know they aren't removing IMAP support yet.) But as far as an individual app developer choosing only to support Gmail, or only support whatever. That's their choice. That's not supplanting an industry wide standard. The case of Mailbox is very different from say, Mozilla removing IMAP support from Thunderbird, or Apple removing IMAP support from Mail.app. Mailbox as designed from the beginning as a Gmail client. That's not a flaw in the design, it's the intended design. If you want a more general purpose mail client, make one. Don't fault other developers who weren't intending on making that in the first place.
- deong 12y ago
  It's fine to criticize others for pursuing goals you think are actively harmful. Of course, nothing makes your criticism magically "correct", and everyone is free to have different opinions, but the fact that a design was intentional doesn't make it immune from criticism.
- onli 12y ago
  > If you want a more general purpose mail client, make one. Don't fault other developers who weren't intending on making that in the first place. I can't make another mail client right now, I already have a lot of projects, and some others on my todo-list (like indeed a rss-reader). But you don't have to build something on your own to have the right to critize other things of the same kind. That is really just unnecessary rhetoric. The point of the article still stands: That the intended design is just targeting gmail is exactly the point he critizes. It is not a flaw in a design, the flaw is the design. IFF it would have worked with imap as well, but even if not, it still would be support for a too strong player (in his eyes at least). And note that it is an appel, an advice of what would be better for the internet as a whole. It is not a design critic in the sense of "there is a bug". The article is inherently ideological, and that is valid.
avz 12y ago
I agree with your main point. However, this > one company with a direct link to the NSA is a blatant misrepresentation. If mafia (or whoever) wiretapped your fibers would you be fine with people describing you as "a person with a direct link to the mafia"?
- onli 12y ago
  If the boss of a company eats lunch with the boss of the mafia, I think that would be warranted. However, I meant it more in a sense that the mails will be accessed by the NSA, be it on Googles servers, on the transport between Googles servers (they tried to fix that though, didn't they?) or before. As a link on the level of the mails.
  - avz 12y ago
    Do you have a source about the lunch? Yes, the traffic is encrypted now, see e.g. http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/20/gmail-traffic-between-google-servers-now-encrypted-to-thwart-nsa-snooping/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/20/gmail-traffic-between-googl...

by onli 12y ago

ebbv 12y ago

I am against Google replacing IMAP with their own API (and yes I know they aren't removing IMAP support yet.) But as far as an individual app developer choosing only to support Gmail, or only support whatever. That's their choice. That's not supplanting an industry wide standard. The case of Mailbox is very different from say, Mozilla removing IMAP support from Thunderbird, or Apple removing IMAP support from Mail.app. Mailbox as designed from the beginning as a Gmail client. That's not a flaw in the design, it's the intended design. If you want a more general purpose mail client, make one. Don't fault other developers who weren't intending on making that in the first place.

deong 12y ago
It's fine to criticize others for pursuing goals you think are actively harmful. Of course, nothing makes your criticism magically "correct", and everyone is free to have different opinions, but the fact that a design was intentional doesn't make it immune from criticism.
onli 12y ago
> If you want a more general purpose mail client, make one. Don't fault other developers who weren't intending on making that in the first place. I can't make another mail client right now, I already have a lot of projects, and some others on my todo-list (like indeed a rss-reader). But you don't have to build something on your own to have the right to critize other things of the same kind. That is really just unnecessary rhetoric. The point of the article still stands: That the intended design is just targeting gmail is exactly the point he critizes. It is not a flaw in a design, the flaw is the design. IFF it would have worked with imap as well, but even if not, it still would be support for a too strong player (in his eyes at least). And note that it is an appel, an advice of what would be better for the internet as a whole. It is not a design critic in the sense of "there is a bug". The article is inherently ideological, and that is valid.

avz 12y ago

I agree with your main point. However, this > one company with a direct link to the NSA is a blatant misrepresentation. If mafia (or whoever) wiretapped your fibers would you be fine with people describing you as "a person with a direct link to the mafia"?

onli 12y ago
If the boss of a company eats lunch with the boss of the mafia, I think that would be warranted. However, I meant it more in a sense that the mails will be accessed by the NSA, be it on Googles servers, on the transport between Googles servers (they tried to fix that though, didn't they?) or before. As a link on the level of the mails.
- avz 12y ago
  Do you have a source about the lunch? Yes, the traffic is encrypted now, see e.g. http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/20/gmail-traffic-between-google-servers-now-encrypted-to-thwart-nsa-snooping/ http://techcrunch.com/2014/03/20/gmail-traffic-between-googl...