Bluebottle False advertising?

[elvey]

http://mail.bluebottle.com/compare.php says FM doesn't offer secure SMTP or POP or regular SMTP or POP, but it does offer all of them. It only lists FM's free service, while listing its own free and pay services.

[Bamb0]

Either they are misinformed or are trying to keep everyone they can...

Companies often do this (Whatever they can to keep people coming to them -- At least i have noticed that alot.)

[David]

They also say that Fastmail offers no anti-phishing/spoofing protection, which is not the case.

[Chipper]

Originally Posted by elvey

http://mail.bluebottle.com/compare.php says FM doesn't offer secure SMTP or POP or regular SMTP or POP, but it does offer all of them. It only lists FM's free service, while listing its own free and pay services.

There's a difference between telling the facts and telling the truth.

[xmailer]

Originally Posted by elvey

http://mail.bluebottle.com/compare.php says FM doesn't offer secure SMTP or POP or regular SMTP or POP, but it does offer all of them. It only lists FM's free service, while listing its own free and pay services.

While, perhaps not surprisingly, they're displaying the information in such a way as to portray themselves in a favorable light, as I suspect most businesses try to do, I'm not sure this could be reasonably regarded as false advertising any more than with any other business which might only present the facts which reflect favorably on itself. To the best of my knowledge it is true (or was the last I knew) that free Bluebottle accounts have SMTP and POP access and free Fastmail.fm accounts do not.

As Chipper suggests, it may not be all the facts, but I'm not sure that there's any false statements made which might qualify as "false advertising" as such.

David's observation may be correct, though, for all I know (I no longer use either fastmail or bluebottle extensively, so I can't say I know everything about either), but perhaps this information was true at the time the chart was first put online and just hasn't been updated recently (although the information provided on this might also be true with regard to free fastmail accounts, which is all they show in the chart? I do see a copyright of 2007 at the bottom of the page, but I have no idea when any changes may have been made in the features offered with either service).

[David]

Originally Posted by xmailer

While, perhaps not surprisingly, they're displaying the information in such a way as to portray themselves in a favorable light, as I suspect most businesses try to do, I'm not sure this could be reasonably regarded as false advertising any more than with any other business which might only present the facts which reflect favorably on itself.

Would you condone their behaviour if you did not not have a Bluebottle account xmailer

[rmns2bseen]

I'm not a Bluebottle user (not really a fan of Trusted Delivery), and I'm only a sporadic FastMail user now (still have my Member account, which does a good job of attracting a lot of spam). Still, it seems the main problem with the comparison is that Bluebottle features their paid plans, while omitting those of FM. To be honest, though, if Bluebottle only included their free account on the chart, it would still outclass the FM free account -- which, in my opinion, is practically useless.

[David]

Originally Posted by rmns2bseen

I'm not a Bluebottle user (not really a fan of Trusted Delivery), and I'm only a sporadic FastMail user now (still have my Member account, which does a good job of attracting a lot of spam). Still, it seems the main problem with the comparison is that Bluebottle features their paid plans, while omitting those of FM. To be honest, though, if Bluebottle only included their free account on the chart, it would still outclass the FM free account -- which, in my opinion, is practically useless.

I would agree with what you say rmns2bseen. What I don't like though, is Bluebottle promoting themselves, by trying to show their competitors in an unfavourable light. Fastmail certainly don't do that, neither do many other email companies. They are not prepared to sink that low.

[xmailer]

Originally Posted by David

Would you condone their behaviour if you did not not have a Bluebottle account xmailer

I'm not sure I understand the point of the question. Nor am I sure how I "would feel if" circumstances were other than they are, nor am I sure how certain anyone can be how s/he would feel were any circumstances different than they are.

The fact is that I do have a bluebottle account which, as I suggested above, I don't use extensively anymore (never really did use it very much, actually), and a fastmail account, membership level, which I also make less use of than I once did, having had a so-called "full" acount for a few years before I decided to let my subscription lapse a couple years ago or so.

But since I don't feel I have particularly strong feelings "pro" or "con" about either service, I tend to think my observations may be fairly objective. I mean, do most of us really expect most advertising to be "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth"? I know I don't and haven't for a long time. It's up to the potential customer to use his or her own judgement about claims made in advertising, I think, and to ask further questions and/or seek further information from other sources if they don't feel that the seller is providing enough information upon which to base a decision.

In any case, I'm not defending Bluebottle's advertising methods, just saying that that's all I see that they are and that those methods don't surprise me, but seem to me to be somewhat typical of advertising in general, which I think only the most naive might expect to be perfectly "objective." I might not be surprised if Bluebottle also doesn't mention in their chart that free fastmail accounts have IMAP while free Bluebottle accounts don't, for example -- although I can't say I made a particular note of that when looking at their chart earlier. But although I haven't specifically checked, I also tend to doubt that Fastmail (or Bluebottle) says much about their extensive down time in the relatively recent past on the main page of their site(s) either. Would this also constitute false advertising "by omission"? So, is it biased? Of course, as most advertising is. I just don't think it qualifies as "false advertising."

Of course, if I was a "rabid" fan of either service,. or had particularly strong feelings either way about either of them, then I might well feel differently about it.

[David]

Originally Posted by xmailer

But although I haven't specifically checked, I also tend to doubt that Fastmail (or Bluebottle) says much about their extensive down time in the relatively recent past on the main page of their site(s) either. Would this also constitute false advertising "by omission"?

A false claim is false advertising xmailer (if it is not the truth) Consider that Bluebottle say:

>>

The following table shows a deeper comparison between, all three Bluebottle Spam Free packages and other free email/anti-spam email providers.

>>

The truth is that all three Bluebottle account packages are not free.....

[David]

Originally Posted by xmailer

David's observation may be correct, though, for all I know (I no longer use either fastmail or bluebottle extensively, so I can't say I know everything about either)

Fastmail do provide phishing protection on the web interface and have done for more than a year (Bluebottle says they don't)

See here

[rbpickup]

Originally Posted by David

A false claim is false advertising xmailer (if it is not the truth) Consider that Bluebottle say:

>>

The following table shows a deeper comparison between, all three Bluebottle Spam Free packages and other free email/anti-spam email providers.

>>

The truth is that all three Bluebottle account packages are not free.....

David, the sentence you have highlighted refers to the three Bluebottle accounts being spam-free, not free of charge.

Robert

[rbpickup]

Originally Posted by David

Fastmail do provide phishing protection on the web interface and have done for more than a year (Bluebottle says they don't)

See here

David, you will notice that Bluebottle is referring to Trusted Delivery its anti-spoofing and anti-phishing system.

Robert

[drew]

Elvey, thanks indeed for the link.

You've forgot to mention that BB first compare with Gmail and then with hotmail and then Yahoo and at last with FastMail.

So is it really fair to say that it target FM only?

Sure I could get irritated over biased comparison too. But by including the main players they at least try to be rather relativily fair?

I don't like the "challenge" system BB use. Creates too much trouble for those writing to me. Unpolite to demand of somebody writing to me to go through such rituals as answering an email first.

(EDit after kind correction by Robert)

Bluebottle's challenge/response system is an optional (it is active by default) feature.

Robert

Yes I made use of this opt out but it do change what BB was set up to achieve. Thanks for reminding me though. Could be helpful to others who needs BB smtp feature.

[drew]

Hotmail Account Expiry (if inactive) 30 days they say.

Hasn't hotmail changed that to something more realistic recently? I'm too lazy now but that is as I remember now.

Felt sad about me lazy so I looked it up. This EMD thread says it is 120 days for hotmail now?

http://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=46482

Kaptitsky looked it up in the signup page

" Hotmail now 120 days
I looked at the signup page for Hotmail today, and it says that the account expiration for free accounts is now 120 days, or around four months. (Paid accounts don't expire until the cheque does.) And 2Gb Storage.

From 30 days to 60 days to 120 days -- big changes at Hotmail!"