|
FastMail Forum All posts relating to FastMail.FM should go here: suggestions, comments, requests for help, complaints, technical issues etc. |
|
Thread Tools |
10 Jan 2017, 06:55 AM | #46 |
Ultimate Contributor
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
|
There has been a perception (for a long, long time) that the classic interface would one day go away, And that even if it did not, it would no longer be fully supported, is the reason that many have already left the classic interface, methinks. Also, a few knowledgeable (influential) EMD users here have continually reminded us of that, and have touted the new interface as God's gift to all wo/mankind
|
10 Jan 2017, 07:04 AM | #47 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: May 2003
Location: mostly in Thailand
Posts: 3,095
|
All my customers have now moved from Classic to the current interface. This is partly based on my advice because I expected the Classic interface to be disappearing. We still sometimes switch back to Classic to accomplish tasks that are difficult to achieve in the current interface. Overall, everyone has adapted to the current interface within a few days without too much trouble.
I still believe the older interface works better for a certain category of power users. However, the current interface mostly works better for those trying to get routine work done. Both classic and the current interface are fast, but (for routine work) the current interface has these advantages:
|
10 Jan 2017, 07:06 AM | #48 |
Essential Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 270
|
(1) Accessibility
The new interface works on fewer browsers than the Classic interface. Do you dispute this? (2) Speed In addition to the obstacles to workflow introduced in the interest of a 'clean look' [see (4), below], whenever I use the new interface I seem to spend most of my time looking at an animated graphic and waiting for things to happen. This doesn't happen nearly so much with Classic. [And it never used to happen at all with the original 'Old' interface, back in the days when Fastmail lived up to its name.] I haven't quantified this slowing-up on lower-spec computers, but if you doubt my word, I will do... just as soon as I find time to get onto the public computers in the library. [I am unable to do this at home owing to point (1), above] (3) Stability The new interface crashes more often than Classic. Do you dispute this? (4) Ergonomics Many controls that are in constant view and therefore instantly available on Classic are hidden away in the new interface behind menus and links. This means much more mouse navigation and clicking is entailed in the new interface than when doing the same things on Classic. Do you dispute this? (5) Functionality Not counting the functions that formerly worked in Classic but have been deliberately removed, the number of functions that are available in Classic but not in the new interface is significantly larger than the number of functions that are available in the new interface but not in Classic. Do you dispute this? Last edited by Grhm : 10 Jan 2017 at 07:11 AM. Reason: Minor typos |
10 Jan 2017, 07:19 AM | #49 | |||||
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,696
Representative of:
Fastmail.fm |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
10 Jan 2017, 07:57 AM | #50 | |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,696
Representative of:
Fastmail.fm |
Quote:
I would estimate that the overhead in terms of code complexity to keep classic running is at about 20% of all new development, but worse, it holds us back from making other technical moves like changing out Apache mod_perl (which is very unmaintained these days) for a newer, more efficient and debuggable web server engine. It's very hard to quantify the cost of those technical roadblocks. |
|
10 Jan 2017, 08:58 AM | #51 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: VK4
Posts: 3,029
|
Edit..........
Last edited by Terry : 10 Jan 2017 at 05:28 PM. |
10 Jan 2017, 09:43 AM | #52 |
Essential Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 270
|
Hi, Bron.
Thank you for your reply. You've provided some detail, and you've explained the reasons why you think things must be so, but it seems to me that you basically agree with me that the accessibility, speed, stability and ergonomics of the new interface are inferior to Classic. The only thing you dispute (and vehemently so!) is that the new interface has less functionality than Classic. This surprises me because I had expected it to be the other way round. The fact that there is a net loss of functionality I thought was uncontroversial. This thread, and a number of threads linked from it, are full of users lamenting the loss of functions that were important to them in Classic but that don't exist in the new interface. Are you really saying that those users are all mistaken? Last edited by Grhm : 10 Jan 2017 at 11:00 AM. |
10 Jan 2017, 11:09 AM | #53 |
Ultimate Contributor
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
|
Perhaps you could list these out Grhm. I doubt that Bron has enough time to spare to do that.
|
10 Jan 2017, 11:33 AM | #54 |
Essential Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 270
|
If I find time I may do that, yes.
|
10 Jan 2017, 12:35 PM | #55 | ||
Master of the @
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 1,876
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
10 Jan 2017, 02:15 PM | #56 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: May 2003
Location: mostly in Thailand
Posts: 3,095
|
Unless you have the browser source code, a lot of time, and the skills to apply security updates, this is simply false. (I am not even assuming here that you want to selectively enable JavaScript.) Actually, you will often also need the source of the operating system to patch security holes there that cause the browser to be insecure.
|
10 Jan 2017, 02:26 PM | #57 | |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: May 2003
Location: mostly in Thailand
Posts: 3,095
|
Quote:
As Bron said, enable and learn the keyboard shortcuts in the current interface, and it becomes more efficient than Classic for routine operations. The fact that it is less efficient than Classic for less frequently used functions when using the mouse becomes irrelevant. There are a few features that I consider important in Classic that do not exist in the current interface. To say Classic overall is better is mistaken IMHO, for most categories of users. |
|
10 Jan 2017, 04:05 PM | #58 | |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: May 2003
Location: mostly in Thailand
Posts: 3,095
|
Quote:
Poll Mail is obsolete when new messages show up immediately instead of at each poll interval. Download zip is still available for specific folders. I agree with you that loss of download zip for selected messages from a search is an occasional problem. There are pluses and minuses when comparing the Classic and current compose screens. I have had several customers concerned about the non visibility of the address book, but they seemed to adapt pretty quickly once using the current interface routinely. To log out (once you have enabled keyboard shortcuts which any power user should) get into the habit of logging out using Shitf-G followed by (lowercase) L. It is quicker even than a single movement of the mouse and mouse click. The @ feature has been present in the current interface for some time. You just need the appropriate identity defined to enable it. |
|
10 Jan 2017, 05:03 PM | #59 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: VK4
Posts: 3,029
|
Edit........
Last edited by Terry : 10 Jan 2017 at 05:29 PM. |
10 Jan 2017, 05:23 PM | #60 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 2,908
|
|