The web interface has the potential to be faster than email clients, here's how: - Page 2

XB77 · 22 Nov 2003, 03:08 AM

Personally, I think that what users want and are willing to pay for would be more interesting. Thus some votes might be allocated just for signing up for various levels of service, but votes should also be purchaseable. Suppose that J&R agreed to keep accounts on how much money had been contributed (votes purchased) toward a list of accpetable programming/hardware/service enhancment projects. Then when the project's estimated cost was reached, or some other lower threshold that met their cost issues, work could commence.

Prognathous · 12 Sep 2006, 04:04 PM

I'm bumping this suggestion back up, in hope that someone from Fastmail will notice it this time.

Prog.

BritTim · 12 Sep 2006, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bitequator
That would be an interesting topic! Is that why a family member has sometimes complained about slow performance accessing FM email when he's in Southeast Asia? (He uses OE client)

FM performance in Thailand is quite acceptable: a little faster than Hotmail, comparable to Yahoo, slower than Gmail (is there anywhere FM can compete with Gmail for speed?)

In China, you should be aware that there can be special reasons for very slow performance. Some well informed people believe that all mail from overseas runs through government filters. These are sufficiently sophisticated to recognise pre-filtered email that does not ned to be filtered again. It would be interesting to check ping times for mail.messagingengine.com: if they are not totally out of whack, perhaps the problem is totally out of FM's hands.

norbs · 12 Sep 2006, 11:19 PM

Great idea! I didn't know this even existed...

I use a similar idea for email and reading news articles: opening a link to a new tab in the background for a second story whilst I am still reading the first means I don't have to wait at all for it to load, I just switch to the next tab...

I agree with DrStrabismus though, depending on useage/connection surely this could slow things down for some users.

Andy

DrStrabismus · 12 Sep 2006, 11:33 PM

I suspect this is much more difficult than it sounds, and it may not be possible to retrofit it in any sensible way. The bandwidth implications here could be substantial without a major rewrite. It may be the case that most of us with paid accounts could afford to throw away most of our bandwidth, but the economics of these accounts depends on what people do use, not what they could use.

norbs · 13 Sep 2006, 12:21 AM

To me it seems like the trick sometimes used for pre-loading full size images in gallery scripts. For the next and previous thumbs, instead of a reduced size thumbnail the full size image for the next and previous are loaded as well (they are usually displayed at a reduced size via the HTML IMG tags). it means when you hit NEXT then it already has the next image cached..

i've always found that the delay is then in waiting for this shrunken next image "thumbnail" to load. all these clever speed u[p fixes do come at a cost.

Andy

Aimlink · 13 Sep 2006, 10:12 PM

Sounds interesting.

However, what genuinely holds me up isn't that sort of thing since with good bandwidth you don't really need all that prefetched. The loading is quick enough anyway.

What really holds me up is having to work with the inability to have both message body and message list in view and being able to quickly move from one message to the other, not necessarily in the order in which they appear in the list.

Having the message list in view at all times while browsing messages provides a HUGE speed advantage that prefetching will not address.

I currently use Mulberry as my client and use the Web Interface at work since I can't use an SSL connection with my client.

If I am doing light e-mailing and don't really have to manipulate the message list by move from message to message, back and forth quite heavily, and also being very selective in what I choose to read, then the FastMail interface is pleasingly terrific with the different reply format options, identity support, text re-formatting ability while composing mail replies, and good address book support.

DrStrabismus · 14 Sep 2006, 01:58 AM

What I tend to do is open messages in tabs and leave the list open in the first tab.

sarf · 14 Sep 2006, 07:43 AM

How much time per annum would the average user or heavy user save or would the potential difference in speed be more of a sop to those of an impatient temperament than making a significant difference?

Aimlink · 14 Sep 2006, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DrStrabismus
What I tend to do is open messages in tabs and leave the list open in the first tab.

So after a while you have many tabs open or you get all tired of repeatedly closing them. I guess if I really had to put up with it, I'd do it and it's also remarkable how it becomes second nature. However, the stand alone client concept is so much better. I don't see the web interface working as well unless the basic approach is abandoned, i.e., the design that works with any browser, even Netscape v1.

MDaemon has the World Client ... nice concept. I'm hoping that one day, such designs can be implemented with the expectation that all mainstream browsers will be able to use it.

JAVA is pretty mainstream and could offer a way out here. What do you think? Even as an alternative. MDaemon offers the spiffed up World Client or the more compatible version which is less functional in terms of ease of navigation etc.

David · 14 Sep 2006, 08:41 AM

Would 'pre-fetching' be a useful tool for Fastmail to use to pre-load ad's, for their free account holders.

Aimlink · 14 Sep 2006, 08:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by sarf
How much time per annum would the average user or heavy user save or would the potential difference in speed be more of a sop to those of an impatient temperament than making a significant difference?

The time can really add up. If you're accustomed to wasting time, you'll be wasting it and not even realize it. The biggest time wasters are the ones that are incremental and cumulative. Why? They are not easily detected and often the user doesn't even realize that there's a problem or that a more efficient way exists and that it's worth changing.

DrStrabismus · 15 Sep 2006, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by curtis
So after a while you have many tabs open or you get all tired of repeatedly closing them. I guess if I really had to put up with it, I'd do it

Until you realized you could just use "close other tabs".

Aimlink · 15 Sep 2006, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DrStrabismus
Until you realized you could just use "close other tabs".

Or just use something more efficient like a stand alone client.

Closing other tabs is a small consolation for a real problem with a shoe horn solution.

However, if you need to use the web interface, then clearly it outways all the drawbacks of one.

injinuity · 16 Sep 2006, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by DrStrabismus
I wouldn't want this without the option to turn it off.

It might speed things up if you are on a fast-connection, but for dial-up users it could slow things down a lot. It all depends on your pattern of use.

exactly my thoughts

J.J

22 Nov 2003, 03:08 AM	#16
XB77 Essential Contributor Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 365	Can I buy this election? Personally, I think that what users want and are willing to pay for would be more interesting. Thus some votes might be allocated just for signing up for various levels of service, but votes should also be purchaseable. Suppose that J&R agreed to keep accounts on how much money had been contributed (votes purchased) toward a list of accpetable programming/hardware/service enhancment projects. Then when the project's estimated cost was reached, or some other lower threshold that met their cost issues, work could commence.

12 Sep 2006, 04:04 PM	#17
Prognathous Master of the @ Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Israel Posts: 1,060	I'm bumping this suggestion back up, in hope that someone from Fastmail will notice it this time. Prog.

12 Sep 2006, 11:19 PM	#19
norbs Essential Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: UK Posts: 435	Great idea! I didn't know this even existed... I use a similar idea for email and reading news articles: opening a link to a new tab in the background for a second story whilst I am still reading the first means I don't have to wait at all for it to load, I just switch to the next tab... I agree with DrStrabismus though, depending on useage/connection surely this could slow things down for some users. Andy

12 Sep 2006, 11:33 PM	#20
DrStrabismus The "e" in e-mail Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,804	I suspect this is much more difficult than it sounds, and it may not be possible to retrofit it in any sensible way. The bandwidth implications here could be substantial without a major rewrite. It may be the case that most of us with paid accounts could afford to throw away most of our bandwidth, but the economics of these accounts depends on what people do use, not what they could use.

13 Sep 2006, 12:21 AM	#21
norbs Essential Contributor Join Date: May 2002 Location: UK Posts: 435	To me it seems like the trick sometimes used for pre-loading full size images in gallery scripts. For the next and previous thumbs, instead of a reduced size thumbnail the full size image for the next and previous are loaded as well (they are usually displayed at a reduced size via the HTML IMG tags). it means when you hit NEXT then it already has the next image cached.. i've always found that the delay is then in waiting for this shrunken next image "thumbnail" to load. all these clever speed u[p fixes do come at a cost. Andy

13 Sep 2006, 10:12 PM	#22
Aimlink Master of the @ Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Here and Now... Posts: 1,078	Sounds interesting. However, what genuinely holds me up isn't that sort of thing since with good bandwidth you don't really need all that prefetched. The loading is quick enough anyway. What really holds me up is having to work with the inability to have both message body and message list in view and being able to quickly move from one message to the other, not necessarily in the order in which they appear in the list. Having the message list in view at all times while browsing messages provides a HUGE speed advantage that prefetching will not address. I currently use Mulberry as my client and use the Web Interface at work since I can't use an SSL connection with my client. If I am doing light e-mailing and don't really have to manipulate the message list by move from message to message, back and forth quite heavily, and also being very selective in what I choose to read, then the FastMail interface is pleasingly terrific with the different reply format options, identity support, text re-formatting ability while composing mail replies, and good address book support.

14 Sep 2006, 01:58 AM	#23
DrStrabismus The "e" in e-mail Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 2,804	What I tend to do is open messages in tabs and leave the list open in the first tab.

14 Sep 2006, 07:43 AM	#24
sarf Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 186	How much time per annum would the average user or heavy user save or would the potential difference in speed be more of a sop to those of an impatient temperament than making a significant difference?

14 Sep 2006, 08:41 AM	#26
David Ultimate Contributor Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canada. Posts: 10,355	Would 'pre-fetching' be a useful tool for Fastmail to use to pre-load ad's, for their free account holders.