fastmail's big mistake - Page 2

randombox · 27 Jan 2005, 07:32 AM

I have no problems or issues with FastMail.fm GUI.
With the exception of a few nits:
1. I think that the columns' arrangement takes some getting used to >> "SUBJECT" field/column should be before the "FROM" field/column.
2. Columns should be adjustable to a certain degree >> The "DATE" field/column is unnecessarily too wide with too many useless white spaces at the end!

But I be not complaining!

**Shelded** · 27 Jan 2005, 03:11 PM

You're not complaining but I would be if you got your wishes since I like the order and the dates are a bit too short since they omit the year already

snsh · 27 Jan 2005, 09:57 PM

Quote:

The "DATE" field/column is unnecessarily too wide with too many useless white spaces at the end!

The width of DATE column is hardcoded in the HTML, for example 14% for XGA screensize. Would it work better to remove that 14% and let the browser set the width? Then the width of the DATE column will always be the width of the widest date in your inbox, plus some padding. Or would that not work right.

David · 27 Jan 2005, 10:35 PM

Would the Fastmail website still work with Lynx if they make these changes? Lynx does not even support Javascript. Fastmail works with any web browser (currently) hopefully this is not about to change.

Prognathous · 27 Jan 2005, 11:20 PM

Another vote to keep the support for text browsers. I occasionally use Links.

Prog.

kander · 27 Jan 2005, 11:31 PM

I don't see why switching to an XHTML+CSS compatible layout would break anything for text-based rendering. As long as the document is well-formed, and tabulated data is tabulated, it should all work ok.

The problem lies more with old browsers that have poorly implementated support for the standards (ie 4/5, NS 4, anyone?)

--K

Ilja · 27 Jan 2005, 11:45 PM

I don't see the point in supporting older browsers like NS4-dinosaurs. If you support them forever, people will use them forever. Why not just let them show a sign that they should upgrade their browser, which is better for them anyway. Would FM really lose customers because of that?

kander · 27 Jan 2005, 11:51 PM

From a designer's perspective, I'm all with you Ilja. Old browsers are a scourge to the Web that should be eliminated as soon as possible.

However, the user in me who is stuck in school libraries where these exact same dinosaurs are being used (ie5, (not 5.5) unpatched and everythign), would have to disagree. One of the things I like about Fastmail is that it just works, wherever I go.

I could live with 'it works, but looks a lot less pretty then on a modern browser', but if showstoppers would occur when using an old browser, I'd be strongly disappointed.

Ilja · 28 Jan 2005, 01:24 AM

Good point, but quite frustrating to be hindered in using new technologies because of this issues

Regarding design overhaul: I suggested this a couple of times before, but here goes again:

why not use an xml/xslt approach? xslt gives you lots more flexibility while still being able to make use of css, allthough the learning steep might be a littlebit higher, but it's not that hard. You can easily apply some browser-detection to apply different xslt-stylesheets depending on the browser

nickos3k · 28 Jan 2005, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by snsh
stylesheets could evolve into much more than color/font/wallpaper tweaks if FM's server generated tidy HTML without hardcoded formatting (font sizes, widths, cellspacings, etc) and with all screen elements (command buttons, table columns, navigation links) individually ID'd. the interface could become much more compact with fewer pixels wasted. the beauty of it is that stylesheet authors would do most of the hard work, and users would have less to gripe about since they can tweak more themselves.

Spot on snsh, I guess many people are ignorant of how much you can do with style sheets. It would probably also reduce the size of the HTML...

randombox · 28 Jan 2005, 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shelded
You're not complaining but I would be if you got your wishes since I like the order and the dates are a bit too short since they omit the year already

How stupid of me! I apologize!
I now realize the reason for the width of the "DATE..." field: It is due to the fact that previous years' emails' dates' [eeek.gif] also contain the year (e.g. 2004). Since this field (by default) also contains the time; forcing the date field to be much wider. For example "19 Dec 2004 10:32" forces the column to expand inordinately.
Again, this is a small nit but an older email (which requires the 4-digit year) does not really need the (5 character) time field!
Over the years, I have turned on many people to FastMail.fm treasure and I am not the only one that had to get acclimated to the fact that (intuitively) we all seem to want to click on the left-most field when we want to read an email. Doing so, only results in the launching "Reply ..." rather than "Read ..." function. argh.gif

Yet, if a 'cosmetic surgery' to the FastMail GUI will be forthcoming in the near future, you may wish to consider the following:
*Allow users to rearrange (add/remove) available fields/columns.
*Allow users to customize the width of the fields/columns ... especially, the "ATT...", the "F...", the "DATE..." and the "FROM..." fields.

But in the mean time, I can live with all of these peculiarities of FastMail and will continue being a billboard for FastMail!

David · 28 Jan 2005, 04:46 AM

Many people who use Lynx and/or Links are locked into using these browsers; they are connecting to the web via Freenet's and shell accounts. I often log into my local freenet and telnet over to my shell account and then connect to Fastmail.

snsh · 28 Jan 2005, 06:14 AM

a compact text-only webmail would be nice to have for telnet/mobile use

Prognathous · 28 Jan 2005, 06:57 PM

Slightly off topic, yet still related to this thread: Man Reportedly Jailed for Using Lynx

Prog.

LazyGun · 3 Feb 2005, 07:36 AM

I can remember maybe three times since I joined Fastmail where I've found it down.
I *have* seen reports of more, but it's only affected me 3 times.

I have to say, I really like the interface myself, but for those who don't isn't it customisable with CSS? I know that's beyond a lot of peoples abilities including my own, but isn't it an option?

I remember a few years ago Fastmail's big promo was, no images, no ads, no animation, speed and usability. That's why I joined and it's still there. Or not as the case may be.

LONG LIVE FASTMAIL!

27 Jan 2005, 07:32 AM	#16
randombox Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 65	I have no problems or issues with FastMail.fm GUI. With the exception of a few nits: 1. I think that the columns' arrangement takes some getting used to >> "SUBJECT" field/column should be before the "FROM" field/column. 2. Columns should be adjustable to a certain degree >> The "DATE" field/column is unnecessarily too wide with too many useless white spaces at the end! But I be not complaining!

27 Jan 2005, 03:11 PM	#17
Shelded Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USA Northwest Posts: 3,849	You're not complaining but I would be if you got your wishes since I like the order and the dates are a bit too short since they omit the year already

27 Jan 2005, 10:35 PM	#19
David Ultimate Contributor Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canada. Posts: 10,355	Would the Fastmail website still work with Lynx if they make these changes? Lynx does not even support Javascript. Fastmail works with any web browser (currently) hopefully this is not about to change.

27 Jan 2005, 11:20 PM	#20
Prognathous Master of the @ Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Israel Posts: 1,060	Another vote to keep the support for text browsers. I occasionally use Links. Prog.

27 Jan 2005, 11:31 PM	#21
kander The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,112	I don't see why switching to an XHTML+CSS compatible layout would break anything for text-based rendering. As long as the document is well-formed, and tabulated data is tabulated, it should all work ok. The problem lies more with old browsers that have poorly implementated support for the standards (ie 4/5, NS 4, anyone?) --K

27 Jan 2005, 11:45 PM	#22
Ilja Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands Posts: 173	I don't see the point in supporting older browsers like NS4-dinosaurs. If you support them forever, people will use them forever. Why not just let them show a sign that they should upgrade their browser, which is better for them anyway. Would FM really lose customers because of that?

27 Jan 2005, 11:51 PM	#23
kander The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 4,112	From a designer's perspective, I'm all with you Ilja. Old browsers are a scourge to the Web that should be eliminated as soon as possible. However, the user in me who is stuck in school libraries where these exact same dinosaurs are being used (ie5, (not 5.5) unpatched and everythign), would have to disagree. One of the things I like about Fastmail is that it just works, wherever I go. I could live with 'it works, but looks a lot less pretty then on a modern browser', but if showstoppers would occur when using an old browser, I'd be strongly disappointed.

28 Jan 2005, 01:24 AM	#24
Ilja Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Amsterdam, Netherlands Posts: 173	Good point, but quite frustrating to be hindered in using new technologies because of this issues Regarding design overhaul: I suggested this a couple of times before, but here goes again: why not use an xml/xslt approach? xslt gives you lots more flexibility while still being able to make use of css, allthough the learning steep might be a littlebit higher, but it's not that hard. You can easily apply some browser-detection to apply different xslt-stylesheets depending on the browser

28 Jan 2005, 04:46 AM	#27
David Ultimate Contributor Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canada. Posts: 10,355	Many people who use Lynx and/or Links are locked into using these browsers; they are connecting to the web via Freenet's and shell accounts. I often log into my local freenet and telnet over to my shell account and then connect to Fastmail.

28 Jan 2005, 06:14 AM	#28
snsh Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Boston Posts: 611	a compact text-only webmail would be nice to have for telnet/mobile use

28 Jan 2005, 06:57 PM	#29
Prognathous Master of the @ Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Israel Posts: 1,060	Slightly off topic, yet still related to this thread: Man Reportedly Jailed for Using Lynx Prog.

3 Feb 2005, 07:36 AM	#30
LazyGun Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Dublin, Ireland Posts: 128	I can remember maybe three times since I joined Fastmail where I've found it down. I have seen reports of more, but it's only affected me 3 times. I have to say, I really like the interface myself, but for those who don't isn't it customisable with CSS? I know that's beyond a lot of peoples abilities including my own, but isn't it an option? I remember a few years ago Fastmail's big promo was, no images, no ads, no animation, speed and usability. That's why I joined and it's still there. Or not as the case may be. LONG LIVE FASTMAIL!