Tuffmail doesn't want fastmail customers - Page 2

bernfrin · 2 Sep 2006, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JasonWard
Except that Fastmail say, and I see no reason to disbeleive them, that the free accounts represent such a small percentage in usage and disk terms that they make hardly any impact on the service at all.

Jason

If that is true, and I do not beleive it, move ALL of the paying customers to reliable servers, and put the free loaders on the unreliable equipment.

JasonWard · 2 Sep 2006, 11:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bernfrin
If that is true, and I do not beleive it, move ALL of the paying customers to reliable servers, and put the free loaders on the unreliable equipment.

If its true, which I do believe, then there would no point in trying to split the customers.

However, and more pertinent is Fastmail don't deliberatly have unrelaible equipment, and if they could work out which device was to fail next I'm sure they would swap it out before it could.

Jason

rmns2bseen · 2 Sep 2006, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by digp
uh oh - what a to do?

Oww...there goes a lot of my respect for Tuffmail. It's more than a little ditzy to turn away customers or potential customers from whatever quarter.

Quote:

If you are not a Fastmail customer seeking any free port in a storm until Fastmail.fm is able to provide you with servicesagain.

Even if the concern was about some sort of overload, I would think the thing could have been handled by Tuffmail with just a wee bit more, uh, tact.

**ReuvenNY** · 3 Sep 2006, 12:35 AM

I know John Capo for some time now and am familiar with his Tuffmail operation.
The experience shows that every time Fastmail has a major fiasco like this one, people flock to Tuffmail, which is known as a reliable service. So far so good.
The experience also shows that as soon as Fastmail is back, almost ALL of those that joined, go back to Fastmail. This is not hypotheses - it's fact (Fastmail had enough breakdowns to accumulate this statistics).
At times tough decisions have to be made in order to maintain the stability and structure of the service for the existing (paying) Tuffmail customers. This is one of them: Is overwhelming the resources for a possible FEW new customers worth adversely affecting the paying, loyal business customers who must have 99.999 % reliability?

As far as John choice of words, well I would have used different words. But who are we to judge? He was not dealing with Mother Theresa, was he?

Ultimately, it all boils down to one issue: is the service reliable.
My suggestion is: if you are a Fastmail customer, unhappy with the company, wait until the service is back and you are calmer. At that point you will be able to make a less hasty decision and try Tuffmail for a possible long term business relationship.

noi · 3 Sep 2006, 12:51 AM

Well, with that kind of attitude at Tuffmail, I'm reluctant to join them, anyway. I was thinking of it but didn't join yet simply because I want to give FM a chance.

Isn't there any good, professional reliable e-mail provider out there that doesn't let childish attitude cloud their business? I would think there must be a better way to handle the situation at Tuffmail than just to tell FM exodus to **** off.

This is becoming a true nightmare

rmns2bseen · 3 Sep 2006, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ReuvenNY
But who are we to judge? He was not dealing with Mother Theresa, was he?

Ultimately, it all boils down to one issue: is the service reliable.
My suggestion is: if you are a Fastmail customer, unhappy with the company, wait until the service is back and you are calmer. At that point you will be able to make a less hasty decision and try Tuffmail for a possible long term business relationship.

Good advice, of course. The thing is, though, how many potential future Tuffmail subscribers does that sort of wording drive away for good? In my opinion, this is a rare bad move on the part of Tuffmail. If they couldn't bear the mass (even if temporary) exodus, there are other ways it could've been explained.

**ReuvenNY** · 3 Sep 2006, 12:56 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mac'd
If you state "it's fact" then where are your statistics?

Also, if the Fastmail exodus is only temporary, then why isn't John doing more to keep these users? It sounds like sour grapes to me.

John told me about this situation. I have no reason not to trust his statement.

As far as "doing more to keep" - you can bring the horse to the water, you can not make him drink. Some indeed stay but the vast majority didn't have that intention apparently - they are using Tuffmail as a temporary sanctuary.

rmns2bseen · 3 Sep 2006, 01:38 AM

I would think that most people with their own domains would merely redirect their mail elsewhere during an FM outage, anyway, rather than signing up with another host right off the bat. Also, I'd say that quite a few of Tuffmail's present (paying) users probably signed up as disgruntled FM users.

funso · 3 Sep 2006, 01:38 AM

The Tuffmail "warning off" message is pretty amazing on two counts:

1. Tuffmail do not believe they can hang onto Fastmail customers in spite of the "unreliable" service that has driven them to open trial accounts. They assume that the Fastmail customers will go back to Fastmail as soon as it comes back up.

2. Fastmail customers who reportedly rush in droves to open trial accounts with Tuffmail whenever Fastmail goes down, always seem to come back (or at least most of them).

The following conclusions can be drawn from the above:

1. Fastmail is so much better than Tuffmail (apart from reliability issues) that its customers will always remain loyal despite the frequent downtime.

2. Fastmail customers have all been mass-hypnotised and can't help coming back each time.

I suspect the first conclusion is closer to the truth.

XB77 · 3 Sep 2006, 01:46 AM

I looked at the Tuffmail website and couldn't figure out what my e-mail address options would be over there--what domain names, if any, besides Name@TuffMail.com do they offer?

Chipper · 3 Sep 2006, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by funso
The Tuffmail "warning off" message is pretty amazing on two counts:

1. Tuffmail do not believe they can hang onto Fastmail customers in spite of the "unreliable" service that has driven them to open trial accounts. They assume that the Fastmail customers will go back to Fastmail as soon as it comes back up.

2. Fastmail customers who reportedly rush in droves to open trial accounts with Tuffmail whenever Fastmail goes down, always seem to come back (or at least most of them).

The following conclusions can be drawn from the above:

1. Fastmail is so much better than Tuffmail (apart from reliability issues) that its customers will always remain loyal despite the frequent downtime.

2. Fastmail customers have all been mass-hypnotised and can't help coming back each time.

I suspect the first conclusion is closer to the truth.

Just to dovetail on what you said, Reuven mentioned your first two points in this post.

To quote part of Reuven's post:
My suggestion is: if you are a Fastmail customer, unhappy with the company, wait until the service is back and you are calmer. At that point you will be able to make a less hasty decision and try Tuffmail for a possible long term business relationship.

memac · 3 Sep 2006, 02:31 AM

Having used both, I definitely prefer Tuffmail. It's not as "pretty" as Fastmail, but I'm not looking for prettiness. I'm looking for powerful and reliable email, which is why I switched to Tuffmail. I am fortunate I made the switch yesterday (please don't close my Tuffmail account

) and will definitely be staying there even if my FM data isn't lost. Tuffmail seems to be too good a service to give up. Why anyone would want to drop it is unamiginable to me, unless they are looking for prettiness.

I also can't blame Mr. Capo for blocking new registrations. From what I gather, and I could be wrong, each account is manually approved. Doing that by hand for hundreds of temporarily disgruntled FM users wouldn't be something I'd want to do either. And he apparently doesn't need disgruntled FM users to be able to stay in business, which is a good sign for those of us who were able to become customers. It indicates, to me anyway, that he's not desperate for money.

By the way, regarding the billing... you'll see an invoice before your trial is up. I too looked for a way to pay but then read in the help info at the site that I can pay after I get the invoice.

**Shelded** · 3 Sep 2006, 03:08 AM

Each time there has been a major development that Fastmail could take advantage of, Jeremy has made sure to gobble up the new customers. The biggest was when Yahoo stopped allowing POP for free, and Fastmail welcomed them. The impact on the
EMD forum was huge, too. I also am seriously questioning the tone of the JCapo post as indicative of future support interactions. Maybe JCapo should hire Liz (Runbox) part time, I have only seen her get unglued once in the face of all insults

memac · 3 Sep 2006, 03:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shelded
Each time there has been a major development that Fastmail could take advantage of, Jeremy has made sure to gobble up the new customers. The biggest was when Yahoo stopped allowing POP for free, and Fastmail welcomed them.

And I am now wondering if that was a good move on Fastmail's part. Did they gain members too fast to keep up with the growing member base? Did their catering to new members, trying to give them what they wanted when they wanted it, make them not pay enough attention to the reliability factor? I used to think it was great that they were often adding new features but now I have to wonder if their time could have been better spent implementing redundancy. If they hadn't focused on trying to gobble up new members would we be in the situation we're in today?

Just wondering.

**Shelded** · 3 Sep 2006, 03:28 AM

Fastmail performed erratically like this when small. I don't see this as a "volume" impact. Even now the group affected is a small portion of the customer base. I thnk accepting custmers has been good. Others suggest the free accounts cost FM and should be stopped but Jeremy always says that he's happy with the pricing schedule and we don't need to worry about it. You may note that some tweaks have been made over time, such as Guests now have ads, and the Full & Enhanced accounts features changed recently. FM is able to control this OK to their benefit.

3 Sep 2006, 01:46 AM	#25
XB77 Essential Contributor Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 365	Tuffmail address domain name options? I looked at the Tuffmail website and couldn't figure out what my e-mail address options would be over there--what domain names, if any, besides Name@TuffMail.com do they offer?

3 Sep 2006, 12:35 AM	#19
ReuvenNY Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: New York Posts: 4,259	I know John Capo for some time now and am familiar with his Tuffmail operation. The experience shows that every time Fastmail has a major fiasco like this one, people flock to Tuffmail, which is known as a reliable service. So far so good. The experience also shows that as soon as Fastmail is back, almost ALL of those that joined, go back to Fastmail. This is not hypotheses - it's fact (Fastmail had enough breakdowns to accumulate this statistics). At times tough decisions have to be made in order to maintain the stability and structure of the service for the existing (paying) Tuffmail customers. This is one of them: Is overwhelming the resources for a possible FEW new customers worth adversely affecting the paying, loyal business customers who must have 99.999 % reliability? As far as John choice of words, well I would have used different words. But who are we to judge? He was not dealing with Mother Theresa, was he? Ultimately, it all boils down to one issue: is the service reliable. My suggestion is: if you are a Fastmail customer, unhappy with the company, wait until the service is back and you are calmer. At that point you will be able to make a less hasty decision and try Tuffmail for a possible long term business relationship.

3 Sep 2006, 12:51 AM	#20
noi Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 13	Well, with that kind of attitude at Tuffmail, I'm reluctant to join them, anyway. I was thinking of it but didn't join yet simply because I want to give FM a chance. Isn't there any good, professional reliable e-mail provider out there that doesn't let childish attitude cloud their business? I would think there must be a better way to handle the situation at Tuffmail than just to tell FM exodus to **** off. This is becoming a true nightmare

3 Sep 2006, 01:38 AM	#23
rmns2bseen Master of the @ Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,426	I would think that most people with their own domains would merely redirect their mail elsewhere during an FM outage, anyway, rather than signing up with another host right off the bat. Also, I'd say that quite a few of Tuffmail's present (paying) users probably signed up as disgruntled FM users.

3 Sep 2006, 01:38 AM	#24
funso Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 97	The Tuffmail "warning off" message is pretty amazing on two counts: 1. Tuffmail do not believe they can hang onto Fastmail customers in spite of the "unreliable" service that has driven them to open trial accounts. They assume that the Fastmail customers will go back to Fastmail as soon as it comes back up. 2. Fastmail customers who reportedly rush in droves to open trial accounts with Tuffmail whenever Fastmail goes down, always seem to come back (or at least most of them). The following conclusions can be drawn from the above: 1. Fastmail is so much better than Tuffmail (apart from reliability issues) that its customers will always remain loyal despite the frequent downtime. 2. Fastmail customers have all been mass-hypnotised and can't help coming back each time. I suspect the first conclusion is closer to the truth.

3 Sep 2006, 02:31 AM	#27
memac Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 196	Having used both, I definitely prefer Tuffmail. It's not as "pretty" as Fastmail, but I'm not looking for prettiness. I'm looking for powerful and reliable email, which is why I switched to Tuffmail. I am fortunate I made the switch yesterday (please don't close my Tuffmail account ) and will definitely be staying there even if my FM data isn't lost. Tuffmail seems to be too good a service to give up. Why anyone would want to drop it is unamiginable to me, unless they are looking for prettiness. I also can't blame Mr. Capo for blocking new registrations. From what I gather, and I could be wrong, each account is manually approved. Doing that by hand for hundreds of temporarily disgruntled FM users wouldn't be something I'd want to do either. And he apparently doesn't need disgruntled FM users to be able to stay in business, which is a good sign for those of us who were able to become customers. It indicates, to me anyway, that he's not desperate for money. By the way, regarding the billing... you'll see an invoice before your trial is up. I too looked for a way to pay but then read in the help info at the site that I can pay after I get the invoice.

3 Sep 2006, 03:08 AM	#28
Shelded Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USA Northwest Posts: 3,849	Each time there has been a major development that Fastmail could take advantage of, Jeremy has made sure to gobble up the new customers. The biggest was when Yahoo stopped allowing POP for free, and Fastmail welcomed them. The impact on the EMD forum was huge, too. I also am seriously questioning the tone of the JCapo post as indicative of future support interactions. Maybe JCapo should hire Liz (Runbox) part time, I have only seen her get unglued once in the face of all insults

3 Sep 2006, 03:28 AM	#30
Shelded Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: USA Northwest Posts: 3,849	Fastmail performed erratically like this when small. I don't see this as a "volume" impact. Even now the group affected is a small portion of the customer base. I thnk accepting custmers has been good. Others suggest the free accounts cost FM and should be stopped but Jeremy always says that he's happy with the pricing schedule and we don't need to worry about it. You may note that some tweaks have been made over time, such as Guests now have ads, and the Full & Enhanced accounts features changed recently. FM is able to control this OK to their benefit.