EmailDiscussions.com  

Go Back   EmailDiscussions.com > Email Service Provider-specific Forums > Runbox Forum
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Stay in touch wirelessly

Runbox Forum Everything related to Runbox should go here: suggestions, comments, complaints, questions, technical issues, etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 22 Aug 2013, 11:13 PM   #1
filbert
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 81
Question Runbox webmail interface

I’ve just signed up for Runbox and I know it's been touched on in various other threads but I haven't found one specifically about the Runbox webmail interface. I know that a lot of people like it and I might be able to get used to it but so far, I can't. I'm forced to use it when I access from work as I can’t install a mail client on my laptop or even add access via Outlook. Key points I have noticed so far are:
  • Lack of comprehensive search (I gather that is on the cards)
  • No reply/reply all from the message list
  • No facility to add/remove columns from the message list
  • Too little discrimination between the various parts of the screen when reading messages – too much white space.
  • Too much wasted vertical space when writing messages (to, cc & bcc take up nearly a quarter of the screen on my laptop, there seems no way to turn off cc & bcc. I rarely use cc and almost never use bcc) – with today’s vertically challenged screens, wasting vertical space is undesirable
I might have missed some customisation options

The last two are the thngs that bug me the most - they might be cosmetic but they really irritate me.

Personally, I like Roundcube and Squirrel. I know that the folks at Runbox have put a lot of effort in developing their own interface and it suits a lot of people but I wonder why they don’t provide the others. As far as I understand, it’s not a question of extra development as they are standard packages.

It might be a small thing, but in a competitive market place, small things can win and lose customers. Is there some technical reason not to support other webmail clients?

Is this a suitable topic for discussion???
filbert is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 23 Aug 2013, 03:02 AM   #2
FredOnline
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Manchester UK
Posts: 1,931
Did you not do the free trial first?
FredOnline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Aug 2013, 03:53 AM   #3
just1acc
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 418
Probably he's on trial.

I agree, runbox interface is pretty bad looking and slow.
just1acc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Aug 2013, 04:26 AM   #4
gecko
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 99
I've been a happy Runbox user for several years now and have mixed feelings about the web interface.

On the one hand, it works, it's uncluttered, it's reliable. It does what it is made for.

On the other hand, there are some improvements that I'd welcome as well, namely configurable columns (!), allowing to set the priority of a mail, request receipt tick box, etc. I personally don't mind seeing the BC and BCC fields, but assume that making them foldable isn't a huge effort.

However, I couldn't say the the web interface feels slow. I use the RMM6 classic interface and I am more than happy with the speed.

So, in a nutshell I am a very satisfied user but can see room for some minor improvements.

[edit]
BTW, what would IMO be a huge improvement is logging not only http(s) logins but also POP and IMAP logins. And being able to disable IMAP and POP altogether via the settings page... And two factor authentication or one-time passwords (the latter could be implemented in the way FM does it).
[\edit]

BR,
gecko

Last edited by gecko : 23 Aug 2013 at 04:31 AM. Reason: adding some thoughts
gecko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Aug 2013, 05:46 AM   #5
dbowdley
Cornerstone of the Community
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 508

Representative of:
Runbox.com
filbert: I think this is a perfectly good discussion to have here, and we are quite happy to be part of that discussion if you would like that.

Speaking generally, we are aware the interface requires attention. We recently re-wrote most of the code to work on the new back-end systems. A few features were added, but on the whole not much changed that was visible.

It is worth pointing out that Runbox Mail Manager (the web interface) isn't like Roundcube or Squirrel which are essentially web-based IMAP clients; RMM is much more integrated in to the Runbox systems. Some things that may sound very simple to implement are often nowhere near as easy as it first seems. This is something that needs to change with future developments but for now we have what we have.

We are considering installing interfaces such as Roundcube, but as mentioned above, they aren't easy to integrate in to all the features that RMM gives you.

Just to pick up the point about reply/reply to all in the message list - you can reply to a message by clicking on the senders name.

It would be good if this thread could turn in to a constructive discussion about RMM because we can use the comments to make decisions about future directions for it.
dbowdley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Aug 2013, 07:54 AM   #6
gecko
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 99
Just my two pennies worth... I am not asking for another interface, but I'd think that installing roundcube, squirrel, [you name it] shouldn't be a major problem as long as it offers only email functionality. If one wants to access the file storage, the settings, etc. one would have to log into RMM, but for managing one's emails any interface should work.

Maybe that would satisfy some of the users asking for it already?

BR,
gecko
gecko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Aug 2013, 09:48 AM   #7
B4its2L8
Master of the @
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Hiding under my bed
Posts: 1,465
For my part, I’m a happy RB user, am generally pleased with the custom interface and am delighted that the RB team has gone to the effort of providing one.

But (as long as it’s okay to have this discussion, here ) off the top of my head, are a few of the things I would like to see:

1. Search box somewhere at the top of the screen after login instead of aaallllll the way at the bottom. Or maybe both places. I only use an archive folder and search it, so I'd really like not to have to scroll to the bottom to find the search box.

2. Ability to apply tags while in the message list view, including applying them to multiple messages. (I recall a RB rep. saying somewhere here that such is planned.) And maybe some eye candy: allowing colored tabs.

3. Ability to move messages not being limited to drag-and-drop. Perhaps something like FM’s double chevron (“<<”) which they have next to the folders in the classic interface.

4. Maybe way to avoid clicking twice on a message to see the original. In my case, I have resorted to having a script in Stylish (FF add-on) to increase the size of the font on the whole webmail screen, because otherwise messages are often displayed on the first screen in a very small font, requiring one to click to view the original HTML version. And, of course, there may be other reasons users would like to jump to the original HTML version right away. I imagine there could even be a setting in preferences allowing users to have messages always open in the “original HTML” format, or only from those in one's address book, etc.

5. When an address of a sender is already in the address book, remove the "add to contacts" icon by the sender;s name/address (when viewing a message), or at least change it to one that indicates "already in address book." I lose track of who's in there and who isn't and am fooled by the icon into thinking some aren't in there that already are !

6. Ability/Option to be able to move a message to Trash (without reading it first) and have it marked as 'read.'

(Note: I may have mentioned one or two of the above suggestions before in some RB thread here. I'm not trying to go over old territory but am merely putting these ideas out there now to see whether new users would agree or disagree with them. )

As a side note, mention has been made about supplementing the custom interface with another one (in case of some problem with the custom version or preference for the another one or whatever). Maybe the RB staff could at least take a poll here (or post a poll on their blog) asking which ‘back-up’ interface users would like in the event RB chooses to implement one, instead of merely picking one themselves. I would probably vote for Horde 5, OpenWebMail, or SquirrelMail (in that order). (I realize the staff may simply choose the one that's easiest to integrate with their system. Fine by me, if that's the case.)

Thanks, Runbox. Keep up the excellent work !!
B4its2L8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 Aug 2013, 09:57 AM   #8
David
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
I have only one item that I would like to see change

I use: https://rmm6.runbox.com

Let's say I go to (any) folder and open up a message; if afterward I click on my web browser 'back button' I am returned to the inbox, when I would expect to be returned to the folder that I was in before (before I opened the message) I usually use the latest (stable) version of Firefox.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 Aug 2013, 06:28 AM   #9
Geir
The "e" in e-mail
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Oslo, Norway
Posts: 2,921

Representative of:
Runbox.com
Thanks for all the comments! We very much appreciate your interest and feedback, which helps guide our development of Runbox.

Allow me to complement Dave's replies with some more details.

filbert: We have a comprehensive search function that you can activate by going to: https://rmm6.runbox.com/mail?enable_new_search=1

And as Dave mentioned, you can go directly to Reply mode by clicking a sender address in the message list. I've noted your points about message columns and vertical space on Compose -- we'll keep this in mind when we upgrade the Compose screen (currently it's table based and too rigid to allow folding of elements).

While it would be complicated to *replace* RMM with e.g. RoundCube, we are currently looking into setting it up as an alternative Webmail interface. Because Runbox is a database accelerated system (message metadata is kept in a database and message contents as files) an alternative Webmail interface would have to be installed as an IMAP client, which might be less efficient than RMM because it can access the database directly. We are however planning to replace our IMAP server with a more efficient one too so it might turn out to be a good combination.

Our goal is if course to provide one fully integrated and modern interface since RMM provides so many features besides the Webmail, and we're working on this slowly but steadily.

gecko: Thank you for the kind words -- we are planning to implement improved logging and authentication features as you suggest.

B4its2L8: Thanks for all the suggestions -- we'll keep them in mind as we continue improving the interface. You shouldn't need to click twice to view a message in a legible font size though -- RMM should remember your font size setting in between sessions, and the "Show HTML version" in Preferences should cause the HTML message to be shown with its original font size.

David: If you're using the Enhanced version of Runbox 6, the browser buttons won't work as expected because part of the application is now running locally in your browser as Javascript. This is a common issue with web services utilizing Javascript for a faster and smoother experience. You can switch to the Basic version to avoid this, but then some functions such as drag-and-drop of messages won't work and you will need to use the regular Move buttons instead.

- Geir
Geir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 Aug 2013, 08:31 AM   #10
David
Ultimate Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Canada.
Posts: 10,355
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geir View Post
David: If you're using the Enhanced version of Runbox 6, the browser buttons won't work as expected because part of the application is now running locally in your browser as Javascript. This is a common issue with web services utilizing Javascript for a faster and smoother experience. You can switch to the Basic version to avoid this, but then some functions such as drag-and-drop of messages won't work and you will need to use the regular Move buttons instead.

- Geir
Thank you Geir. Your reply is much appreciated.
David is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 Aug 2013, 10:10 AM   #11
emebrs
Essential Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by gecko View Post
being able to disable IMAP and POP altogether via the settings page
I like this idea.
emebrs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 Aug 2013, 12:27 PM   #12
sheprd
The "e" in e-mail
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: VA, USA
Posts: 2,474
I would like very much for Squirrel mail to be added as an option
sheprd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Aug 2013, 12:17 AM   #13
filbert
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbowdley View Post
It would be good if this thread could turn in to a constructive discussion about RMM because we can use the comments to make decisions about future directions for it.
Ceratinly my intention was that my comments would be constructive - it's encouraging to get a receptive response from Runbox folk to suggestions.
filbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Aug 2013, 12:33 AM   #14
filbert
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geir View Post
Thanks for all the comments! We very much appreciate your interest and feedback, which helps guide our development of Runbox.
...
- Geir
Thanks for the response Geir - I certainly didn't intend to suggest that RMM would be replaced, just that other options could be provided. I expect that I would use one (eg Roundcube or Horde) for every day use and drop into RMM for specific tasks that a simpler webmail client can't do.

As for the reply form and the CC/BCC etc. Making three lines available for each is overkill . Especially as they seem to expand vertically, if needed anyway. Can they be trimmed back to one line each, even if they can't be folded??

I did have a quick look at the advanced search but I couldn't immediately understand what it was doing. It didn't seem to allow me to search in the subject and body across all folders. I need to go back ad look at it when I have a bit more time to be clear whether it can do what I am looking for.

Thanks for listening

Rgdrs

F
filbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 Aug 2013, 10:10 PM   #15
filbert
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 81
More items for the wishlist:

Ability to collapse and expand intermediate levels of folders. Mine are nested two or three deep and expand all/collapse all is too crude.

Folder list and message pane to scroll separately so that I can see messages at the top of the list in a folder which is near the bottom of the folder list without having to scroll back up the screen

Preview pane - has this been mentioned?? I can't see one and it's normally a standard feature of a webmail system, have I missed something?

The option to run a filter on messages already received (and in a selected folder) (like you can do in Outlook).

Rgrds F

Last edited by filbert : 28 Aug 2013 at 10:18 PM. Reason: Added feature
filbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +9. The time now is 05:59 AM.

 

Copyright EmailDiscussions.com 1998-2013. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy