|
FastMail Forum All posts relating to FastMail.FM should go here: suggestions, comments, requests for help, complaints, technical issues etc. |
|
Thread Tools |
3 Aug 2017, 08:00 PM | #451 |
Cornerstone of the Community
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 879
|
Now that July has become August and the accounts are truly gone, I agree that there is no practical point in continuing the debate, though the poor 'dead horse' metaphor does tend to be woefully overdone.
However, even with that having been said, recent posts in this thread have moved me to raise an aspect of the controversy one more time, to make a point that (so far as I know, having followed the various iterations of threads on the forthcoming closures since their inception) has not yet been made, which is: 1) It has been maintained, repeatedly by some, that the lifetime Member accounts had always been offered as test vehicles, to give prospective customers a test-drive (so to speak) of the service, in the expectation that they would then select an annual plan. 2) That is flat-out wrong, and is contradicted by FastMail's own actions. It would make some sense, I suppose, if this claim were to be made about the Guest accounts, but in any case, why would a company offer two entirely separate versions of a 'test-drive' account, both open-ended in time, one entirely free, the other requiring a 'one-time' payment with the clear implication of 'lifetime' service? Such a course makes no business sense (or any other kind of sense). If that had been FastMail's intention, then Member accounts would never have come into existence at all, or perhaps the Guest accounts would have been offered as temporary only, set to expire after several weeks, or some similar limited time span. 3) Accordingly, it is depressing to learn that FastMail is still clinging to this shameless distortion. Why? If they came to feel that they had made a bad business decision by offering the Member accounts, and years later chose to thumb their noses at equity and honesty and simply do away with them, then why weasel about semantics, in a ridiculous attempt to twist and misrepresent the obvious? It does not speak well for FastMail as a company, or for the individuals within it who made decisions, both recent and long ago. And that, I think, will indeed be a lingering black mark for FastMail going forward, and has done the company some lasting harm. Enough said. The horse can now resume his slumbers. |
3 Aug 2017, 10:06 PM | #452 | |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: May 2003
Location: mostly in Thailand
Posts: 3,095
|
Quote:
Note that it seems in this kind of regard, Google can be trusted more then FastMail. They made their own dubious decision many years ago to offer free Google for Business accounts (as I recall, up to 30 users with your own domain). These free accounts have long ceased to be offered, but existing Google for Business accounts continue to work as they have always done. Google understands the importance of being seen as a reliable partner. |
|
4 Aug 2017, 09:28 PM | #453 | |||
Cornerstone of the Community
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 713
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
FM has seemingly missed a critical understanding of how people feel about things like this, and it goes deeper than just a little account. One hopes that they will learn. |
|||
6 Aug 2017, 02:42 AM | #454 |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 53
|
After this circus..
who would think Fastmail can be trusted? They have clearly demonstrated they look out for their own financial interest with disregard from what they promise or offer. It reminds me back in the day when your could not port your phone numbers. Once they telco's had your number, they can hang you up to dry because they knew you needed to keep it if you had it for a while and distributed it to people for contact. This is why they passed the phone number portability laws. The same thing applies to email addresses. The only customers that may feel safe (with the exception of having their rate raised) would be customers that have their own domain names.
|
6 Aug 2017, 03:56 AM | #455 |
Master of the @
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Tel-Aviv, ISRAEL
Posts: 1,666
|
|
6 Aug 2017, 07:02 AM | #456 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: May 2003
Location: mostly in Thailand
Posts: 3,095
|
|
6 Aug 2017, 07:19 AM | #457 | |
Master of the @
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
|
|
6 Aug 2017, 01:53 PM | #458 | |
Master of the @
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Tel-Aviv, ISRAEL
Posts: 1,666
|
Quote:
Theoretically you are of course right! But what TenFour said makes sense. To be on the safe side I own a domain too |
|
9 Aug 2017, 05:25 AM | #459 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 53
|
...
Quote:
. This is the problem with paid email service. |
|
9 Aug 2017, 05:49 AM | #460 | |
Master of the @
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
|
|
9 Aug 2017, 08:41 AM | #461 | |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,937
|
Quote:
This doesn't mean I don't sympathize with those who lost an account they thought was truly "lifetime". But come on.. your detracting from those folks by screaming foul when you could have easily migrated to another service (although you'd eventually be in the same boat) or purchased your own domain. (Which can be had for less than a dollar.) Based upon the initial post of this thread, you had nearly eight months to make the change and notify your "thousands of clients". |
|
10 Aug 2017, 02:15 AM | #462 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 53
|
Yes
Quote:
|
|
10 Aug 2017, 02:21 AM | #463 | |
Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 53
|
maybe
Quote:
|
|
10 Aug 2017, 05:44 AM | #464 | |
Master of the @
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 1,749
|
Quote:
|
|
10 Aug 2017, 10:44 AM | #465 |
The "e" in e-mail
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,937
|
I agree that it's an inconvenience, but your original point was that the "noose around your neck" was regarding businesses using a FM-owned domain.
|