View Single Post
Old 10 Jan 2017, 06:50 AM   #43
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 123
Originally Posted by walesrob View Post
Are you saying the majority of FM users prefer the Classic interface? Got any inside information to back this up?
I wonder how many of this legion of users who supposedly 'prefer' the new interface have actual practical experience of using Classic.
Very few, I imagine, considering the lengths Fastmail have gone to to conceal the very existence of Classic from new users; and considering the deliberate removal of much of its functionality.
I can tell you with complete confidence that among users who are in a position to make a fair comparison, the overwhelming majority prefer Classic.
I can say this with confidence because it is not a matter of personal taste or opinion: the new interface is objectively and measurably worse than Classic.
Objectively and measurably worse in terms of accessibility, speed, stability, ergonomics and, most importantly, functionality.
The only actual improvement that users have mentioned here is that it automatically updates when new mail arrives.
Personally I've never felt the need for such a function.
In fact I would prefer not to have it, because if it fails it fails silently, whereas if a refresh fails the failure is immediately apparent.
But even if this sole improvement wasn't so problematic, it would scarecly be worth all those development hours and user pain just to implement it and save a minority of power users the minor inconvenience of having to click on 'refresh' occasionally!
Of course, the other improvement that is always being cited is that it has a 'fresh, clean look'.
I can barely believe that anyone would put this forward as an argument.
A web interface is a serious tool with a serious function, not an item of interior decor!
All talk of 'aesthetics' in this context presumably comes from people who would base their choice of a new power drill on which one they think is the prettiest colour.
Grhm is offline   Reply With Quote