4 ms·

I agree. I think there is more that can be done to enhance it, and make it a more enjoyable tool. Email clients --and I am not talking about third party service

I agree. I think there is more that can be done to enhance it, and make it a more enjoyable tool. Email clients --and I am not talking about third party services a la Mailbox, who rely yet in another server-- are still very primitive.

7952 12y ago
I feel that gmail has held back development of good desktop clients (which is what we really need). My laptop has an almost empty 1TB hard drive yet I need to wait to download an image attachment every time I want to view it. Email should be built around abundant storage, not a dependency on bandwidth.
- Fastidious 12y ago
  Indeed! One think --among others-- that Gmail has done very well is search, which is expected, as Google specializes on that.
- thebokehwokeh2 12y ago
  > Email should be built around abundant storage, not a dependency on bandwidth. I'm sorry but this doesn't make sense to me. To cache all images you've ever received is sort of antithetical to the whole 'decentralized' nature of email, and the internet in a nutshell. The 'inconvenience' of having to re-download far surpasses the need to store every single trivial little thing on your mail client's cache. A few seconds is worth way more to me than taking up tens of gigs of images on my HD that I will never see again.
  - 7952 12y ago
    I disagree. A modern device is almost entirely composed of files downloaded from the internet. The binary for your web browser is just a local cache of an entity that exists in the cloud. You need a local cache because bandwidth and latency are too high to retrieve a new copy every single time you run the program unless you need an update. It seems a pity to not use storage to cache when it is available. Especially considering that to most people bandwidth is much more expensive than storage.
  - pavel_lishin 12y ago
    But your email is never decentralized. The email you've received stays on a central server, unless you delete it.
- hhsnopek 12y ago
  Why are you downloading attachments that are images? Gmail will pre-load images for you if you let it. (http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/images-now-showing.html http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/images-now-showing.htm...) Also you could open the attachment right inside Google Drive
- pjmlp 12y ago
  Quite happy with Thunderbird.
- mnkypete 12y ago
  I feel the same way. In my opionion, Outlook peaked with 2010 but they are missing new ideas. There is SO much you could do if you would think just a little bit out of the box. One could think of contextual information added to emails, like detecting invoice numbers, intellligent attachments (e.g. recognizing Dropbox links etc.) and so on. I really hope there will be some client like this in the future, if not, we'll build it :)
- jingo 12y ago
  Well, for what it's worth, I agree with you. I think this goes beyond email. Similar to the way consumer applications gratuitously became big and slow as processor speed increased and magnetic drive space increased, today we see gratuitous use of increased network bandwidth. As such if there is even a momentary problem with the remote network, then there will likely be a problem with your application. Many of today's applications have no "offline" mode. Network availability and performance is assumed. Just as back in the 90's it became assumed that the user would have a capable PC. A "slow" PC would not run the latest software. Many of the applications I write for my own use require very little computing power... I develop on a modestly powered machine and so my programs can run fast from old hardware if need be (i.e., can't afford the latest gear). My approach to "apps" is to periodically download bulk data from the network to keep the application updated, and this usually is scheduled for off-peak times when costs and congestion are lower. Fast network speeds and inexpensive local storage are much appreciated when performing these updates. Not to mention the ease of obtaining an internet globally reachable IP address through today's "cloud hosting" providers. But I will never understand today's "app" and "web API" trends. Developers of these "apps" utilize the costs of storage and bandwidth a different way. Storage is mainly remote (on someone else's machines, not yours), and hence controlled by some third party, not the user. And most of these applications I see are designed to make constant piecemeal downloads, minute by minute, hour after hour, day after day (even if the same information has been requested before) when they could just as well download all the data they will ever need once, and periodically update it during off-peak periods. As such, if the network is congested or down at runtime, the user must suffer it out. Of course, by making a call to the remote network every time the user takes some action, third parties are able to track everything a user does. That, and the whole app/api approach to development has value to some people perhaps, but surely it is not users. For example, when I watch YouTube videos, I have an application that downloads them first, storing them on RAM disk or inexpensive local media storage and then serving them over a local network. I can then play them using whatever device suits me (or store them on any other device if I wish). I never see any ads. I never use Javascript or Flash. And I never have playback issues (because among other things I have control over my local network). This approach seems like common sense but I feel like I am probably one of the only people out there who does this... and it is not difficult at all to do.
pestaa 12y ago
I gave KMail a try and so far I've been pleased. There are lots of aspects Thunderbird is ahead, though.
jtmoulia 12y ago
In what ways are the current batch of email clients primitive, and how do you think they can move forward?

7952 12y ago

I feel that gmail has held back development of good desktop clients (which is what we really need). My laptop has an almost empty 1TB hard drive yet I need to wait to download an image attachment every time I want to view it. Email should be built around abundant storage, not a dependency on bandwidth.

Fastidious 12y ago
Indeed! One think --among others-- that Gmail has done very well is search, which is expected, as Google specializes on that.
thebokehwokeh2 12y ago
> Email should be built around abundant storage, not a dependency on bandwidth. I'm sorry but this doesn't make sense to me. To cache all images you've ever received is sort of antithetical to the whole 'decentralized' nature of email, and the internet in a nutshell. The 'inconvenience' of having to re-download far surpasses the need to store every single trivial little thing on your mail client's cache. A few seconds is worth way more to me than taking up tens of gigs of images on my HD that I will never see again.
- 7952 12y ago
  I disagree. A modern device is almost entirely composed of files downloaded from the internet. The binary for your web browser is just a local cache of an entity that exists in the cloud. You need a local cache because bandwidth and latency are too high to retrieve a new copy every single time you run the program unless you need an update. It seems a pity to not use storage to cache when it is available. Especially considering that to most people bandwidth is much more expensive than storage.
- pavel_lishin 12y ago
  But your email is never decentralized. The email you've received stays on a central server, unless you delete it.
hhsnopek 12y ago
Why are you downloading attachments that are images? Gmail will pre-load images for you if you let it. (http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/images-now-showing.html http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/images-now-showing.htm...) Also you could open the attachment right inside Google Drive
pjmlp 12y ago
Quite happy with Thunderbird.
mnkypete 12y ago
I feel the same way. In my opionion, Outlook peaked with 2010 but they are missing new ideas. There is SO much you could do if you would think just a little bit out of the box. One could think of contextual information added to emails, like detecting invoice numbers, intellligent attachments (e.g. recognizing Dropbox links etc.) and so on. I really hope there will be some client like this in the future, if not, we'll build it :)
jingo 12y ago
Well, for what it's worth, I agree with you. I think this goes beyond email. Similar to the way consumer applications gratuitously became big and slow as processor speed increased and magnetic drive space increased, today we see gratuitous use of increased network bandwidth. As such if there is even a momentary problem with the remote network, then there will likely be a problem with your application. Many of today's applications have no "offline" mode. Network availability and performance is assumed. Just as back in the 90's it became assumed that the user would have a capable PC. A "slow" PC would not run the latest software. Many of the applications I write for my own use require very little computing power... I develop on a modestly powered machine and so my programs can run fast from old hardware if need be (i.e., can't afford the latest gear). My approach to "apps" is to periodically download bulk data from the network to keep the application updated, and this usually is scheduled for off-peak times when costs and congestion are lower. Fast network speeds and inexpensive local storage are much appreciated when performing these updates. Not to mention the ease of obtaining an internet globally reachable IP address through today's "cloud hosting" providers. But I will never understand today's "app" and "web API" trends. Developers of these "apps" utilize the costs of storage and bandwidth a different way. Storage is mainly remote (on someone else's machines, not yours), and hence controlled by some third party, not the user. And most of these applications I see are designed to make constant piecemeal downloads, minute by minute, hour after hour, day after day (even if the same information has been requested before) when they could just as well download all the data they will ever need once, and periodically update it during off-peak periods. As such, if the network is congested or down at runtime, the user must suffer it out. Of course, by making a call to the remote network every time the user takes some action, third parties are able to track everything a user does. That, and the whole app/api approach to development has value to some people perhaps, but surely it is not users. For example, when I watch YouTube videos, I have an application that downloads them first, storing them on RAM disk or inexpensive local media storage and then serving them over a local network. I can then play them using whatever device suits me (or store them on any other device if I wish). I never see any ads. I never use Javascript or Flash. And I never have playback issues (because among other things I have control over my local network). This approach seems like common sense but I feel like I am probably one of the only people out there who does this... and it is not difficult at all to do.

pestaa 12y ago

I gave KMail a try and so far I've been pleased. There are lots of aspects Thunderbird is ahead, though.

jtmoulia 12y ago

In what ways are the current batch of email clients primitive, and how do you think they can move forward?