FM Users: Elegance-appreciators or Feature-listers

[sflorack]

Saw an interesting article in the NY Times. It suggests that technology users are either feature-listers (judge a product by one criterion: how many features it has, no matter how clunky the design) or elegance-appreciators (prefer something that does less, but does it better).

Thought it was relevant to FM with all of this new/old interface discussion going on.

Read the article here.

[David]

Originally Posted by sflorack

Saw an interesting article in the NY Times. It suggests that technology users are either feature-listers (judge a product by one criterion: how many features it has, no matter how clunky the design) or elegance-appreciators

I think that Fastmail users (who prefer the old interface) already have a package that is both elegant (in the classic sense) and feature rich. It's time tested and true.

The new interface is what I would call clunky. That is why the old school users (who appreciate old school artistry) are reluctant to lose what they now have. Elegance does not happen overnight, it takes years to build, reaches a peak, and is ultimately destroyed (IMO)

[Terry]

The new interface is what I would call clunky. That is why the old school users (who appreciate old school artistry) are reluctant to lose what they now have. Elegance does not happen overnight, it takes years to build, reaches a peak, and is ultimately destroyed (IMO)

...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................

I agree to me its a step backwards, yes for some who like search and like the yuppie things it must be better.

Sadly after 6 years I am now trialling something else but I realise it lacks F/m features but I cant get use to the new UI for me its like going from windows 98 to Vista.

I have already closed one mailbox and I'm not renewing another one which is due this next week.....sorry F/m but for now you have lost me.

Please retain your old system as I feel you will lose 30% of your paying customers.

[Merovingian]

Originally Posted by David

I think that Fastmail users (who prefer the old interface) already have a package that is both elegant (in the classic sense) and feature rich. It's time tested and true.

The new interface is what I would call clunky. That is why the old school users (who appreciate old school artistry) are reluctant to lose what they now have. Elegance does not happen overnight, it takes years to build, reaches a peak, and is ultimately destroyed (IMO)

As has been said so many times, the new interface is in beta. Maybe do not use it until the glitches and bugs have been stomped out.

I only use the new interface and love it. I don't mind the bugs.

David, you and other proponents of the "classic" interface do have a point to keeping both interfaces. I'm very ignorant when it comes to the technicalities, but I just wonder if EuMX can have three choices for customers, surely FM could have both the classic and new interfaces.

[ChinaLamb]

Originally Posted by David

I think that Fastmail users (who prefer the old interface) already have a package that is both elegant (in the classic sense) and feature rich. It's time tested and true.

The new interface is what I would call clunky. That is why the old school users (who appreciate old school artistry) are reluctant to lose what they now have. Elegance does not happen overnight, it takes years to build, reaches a peak, and is ultimately destroyed (IMO)

Elegance is in the eye of the beholder... Users who love the old interface find elegance in that, users who love the new interface find elegance in that!

Hard to judge!

[Terry]

Yes I realise its only beta BUT F/m seem very arrogant in their approach they wont show the number of e-mails in a folder, they wont do a style sheet to work in IE, they still show my login name at the top right hand corner, yes it can quite easily be taken out, they have had many complaints yet they totally ignore everyone its like this is what you are going to get take it or leave it and for them its easy add a few quick things to and it can be done quite quickly in FF.

I wish I had the technology to make my own interface but I dont and I'm limited to e-mail services who have sieve.....sigh.

[Sherry]

Originally Posted by Merovingian

I'm very ignorant when it comes to the technicalities, but I just wonder if EuMX can have three choices for customers, surely FM could have both the classic and new interfaces.

Like you I know very little of the techy stuff that goes on behind the scenes but it's my understanding that FM built their inner structure from scratch (which is why it has always been considered "fast"). I know some services offer a choice but many times I see the same choices in different email services. It's my understanding that what they use is pre-built so they just have to pull it into their systems. Also, it's maintained (fixes, patches updates etc) by the open-source communities not necessarily the email services. For FM to "maintain" two systems may be difficult to do???

Sherry

[Sherry]

Originally Posted by Terry

Yes I realise its only beta BUT F/m seem very arrogant in their approach they wont show the number of e-mails in a folder, they wont do a style sheet to work in IE, they still show my login name at the top right hand corner, yes it can quite easily be taken out, they have had many complaints yet they totally ignore everyone its like this is what you are going to get take it or leave it and for them its easy add a few quick things to and it can be done quite quickly in FF.

Hi Terry,

I'm just going by memory now but I think, out of all the "wont's" you mentioned I only remember one that they had in the Wiki section under "FastMail won't fix". That one and the others (that they may still fix) will be easily done in "custom CSS's". FM said in the Wiki "We haven't implemented custom stylesheets just yet" but they definitely will let us have them.

Right now neither Firefox or IE can use custom stylesheets. What is being used in FF is a separate program (an ad-on) the does the job not FF itself as a browser. FM needs to do the big coding job in there to allow both FF and IE to use our stylesheets but they want to work out the bugs in there now before they introduce more bugs. (I remember when we were first allowed to use our own stylesheets (ran from our C: drives). There were lots of bugs to work out on how they worked.)

Sherry

[Terry]

Yes I'm sorry I'm impatient, for me a couple of quick f/m fixes would have done the trick, I wont go on about it anymore.

I will come back in a few weeks and have a look.

[Sherry]

Did you know they're doing "global searches" now through "All" folders on the Beta? (a much asked for but very difficult to do thing) Many bugs to work out on that but it's there.

Sherry

[David]

Originally Posted by Sherry

Like you I know very little of the techy stuff that goes on behind the scenes but it's my understanding that FM built their inner structure from scratch (which is why it has always been considered "fast"). I know some services offer a choice but many times I see the same choices in different email services. It's my understanding that what they use is pre-built so they just have to pull it into their systems.

Sherry: Although the existing interface is a 'custom interface' that has been hand coded by Fastmail (over a period of years) it is currently rock solid and as stable as it will ever be. It's as much a finished product as SquirrelMail is (in its current format) and nobody is asking that it be developed further. The fact that it's 'custom' has no bearing on if it should be allowed to stay (or if it should be booted out) when the new interface is put in place permanently.

[Sherry]

David, I have a tendency to open my big mouth when I may not know what I'm talking about but through the years I've been right enough times I continue to do it. In the following post I may be wrong but typed it up anyway. I said similar to my post in this thread but with more detail (guesses) Read down a couple of post of what "the bishop" said and my two responses where I responded that they may(?) need to continue working with the old if they keep it. (and that may be wrong also but it is a possibility???)

http://www.emaildiscussions.com/show...500#post464500

Sherry

[David]

Originally Posted by Sherry

Read down a couple of post of what "the bishop" said and my two responses where I responded that they may(?) need to continue working with the old if they keep it. (and that may be wrong also but it is a possibility???)

Sherry: I can appreciate your point and will not contest it, as I do not have enough information to do so.

But... all other companies (who support more than one interface) would experience the exact same difficulties (as what Fastmail would experience) regardless of if they support either a 'custom stable' or 'out of the box' front end. Why would it be any more difficult for Fastmail (than any other company) ? Consider that 'out of the box' front ends, are just as different from each other, as what 'custom built front ends' are...

[Sherry]

Originally Posted by David

Consider that 'out of the box' front ends, are just as different from each other, as what 'custom built front ends' are...

Each of the out of box things are self contained unlike FM codes that do everything. Isn't it the open-source guys who work on those projects that do all the fixes, updates etc then give those to the email services to feed into the UI's. I've read and also worked with beta things where parts of the program were worked on by the open-source guy('s). In some cases we would need to download the fixes to feed into the beta program we were using other times the programmers of the program would input parts or all of the fixes/updates etc and we other parts.

Anyway, if I'm wrong on any of this and the old UI wouldn't need separate support or wouldn't break from things feeding into it from work done behind the scenes of the UI then keeping the old UI would be a consideration. However most major changes in services/programs usually faze out the old over time until it's just an old memory for what would be the old timers (like me)

Sherry

[David]

Originally Posted by Sherry

Each of the out of box things are self contained unlike FM codes that do everything. Isn't it the open-source guys who work on those projects that do all the fixes, updates etc then give those to the email services to feed into the UI's.

Not exactly: the 'out of the box' front ends are usually customized by the email companies who choose to employ them. The fact that are open source allows that to happen. They are tweaked (same as custom front ends are tweaked) to meet the needs of the provider (by the provider) for their own custom use, and for the benefit of the 'end recipient'

Sherry: I am only arguing the point with you here, because I feel that Fastmail are using any excuse they can, to avoid supporting the old interface..... I am yet to be convinced, that there are insurmountable problems (to supporting two interfaces) over and above what many other companies (who support more than one interface) have successfully solved (for the benefit of their own individual companies and customers)