I want an apology and a statement from Lars Boilesen - Page 2

communicant · 30 Oct 2012, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BritTim

Yes, this is confusing ... go to classic means go to the new interface login screen with an option set that is not "classic". You then need to click "More" under the password text box and check "Use classic interface" before entering your user and password and clicking enter.

As noted in my reply to you on another thread, for me there is no password text box or any other login fields. Where on the page do they appear?

BritTim · 30 Oct 2012, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by communicant

As noted in my reply to you on another thread, for me there is no password text box or any other login fields. Where on the page do they appear?

Sorry, I misunderstood. Which browser are you using? Any chance of posting an image of what you are seeing?

NJSS · 30 Oct 2012, 07:52 PM

Drakester

Welcome.

This:-

http://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=65451

will enable you to log in to the old UI.

It may look different, as FM have lost or deleted some of the stylesheets - but the functionality remains the same.

NJSS

hankfoner · 30 Oct 2012, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnMike

Todays' completely unannounced / unexpected upgrade which has seen the removal of FM features that have in the past made FM unique and a pleasure to work with, has wasted many hours of my time.

I find it very upsetting and insulting that having been with FM since 2005 that we the users do not even merit advanced warning of the change let alone any input to the removal of some of it's best loved features.

Stating that the system was going down for 30 minutes of maintenance simply does not cover the quantum changes in the service which we have been presented with today.

Please reply yes if you agree with me.

YES, YES, YES!

flinchlock · 30 Oct 2012, 10:57 PM

YES, YES, YES! ... since 2002.

Mike

NJSS · 30 Oct 2012, 10:57 PM

I have to say

YES

TheRincewind · 30 Oct 2012, 11:01 PM

YES (paid since 2002)

Prognathous · 30 Oct 2012, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnMike

Stating that the system was going down for 30 minutes of maintenance simply does not cover the quantum changes in the service which we have been presented with today.

This is akin to an auto mechanic telling the customer that they need to leave the car for oil and filter changing, and in practice throwing out the engine and force fitting a "brand new" engine of a moped.

Lying to customers is never a good idea.

Prog.

JohnMike · 31 Oct 2012, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sflorack

I definitely agree with you here. My comments are only to those users (such as JohnMike) who came here to the forums and know that the classic interface exists.

You'd think that FM would have at LEAST posted a link on the new interface that took you back to the classic, or provided instructions on how to do so. I agree that you shouldn't have to come here to find this out.

I may be misunderstanding the comment but I had absolutely no prior knowledge of classic anything and very rarely venture onto this or any other forum. I came to the forum because out of the blue the email client I had been using for many years has changed beyond all recognition.

I hope that that wasn't a wrong thing to do.

I can't see myself using the classic view. It isn't what we had yesterday, and I am not inclined to waste more time trying get used to a mashed up version of the old interface.

The important thing is to get the functionality that has been lost back into the new interface.

BritTim · 31 Oct 2012, 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnMike

I may be misunderstanding the comment but I had absolutely no prior knowledge of classic anything and very rarely venture onto this or any other forum. I came to the forum because out of the blue the email client I had been using for many years has changed beyond all recognition.

I hope that that wasn't a wrong thing to do.

I can't see myself using the classic view. It isn't what we had yesterday, and I am not inclined to waste more time trying get used to a mashed up version of the old interface.

The important thing is to get the functionality that has been lost back into the new interface.

Some of that lost functionality will probably never appear in the new interface. The "classic" interface is quite close to what you had yesterday. The colors, fonts, some menu structure and other aesthetics have changed a bit, but almost all the functionality is intact. There is some chance of the aesthetics of the "classic" interface getting back close to the way they were quickly. Adding 5 years of classic interface feature development into the new interface would take a long time, even if Opera decided they want to (which, with the exception of a few hot items, I predict they will not).

Tappahannock · 31 Oct 2012, 01:10 AM

Even when you log into the classic interface, you get a quasi-random mish-mash of old and new interface pages. More disturbing is the caching problem that leads to inclusion in the folder listing of emails already deleted from that folder.

This rollout is going to be studied in B-schools once the dust has settled. Whether the old customer base survives, and whether that was ever a consideration for Opera, remains to be seen.

Companies that buy other companies always make a visible statement of ownership and dominance, as predictably and inevitably as dogs marking a fire hydrant.

What wasn't so predictable or inevitable was that both design and management of the process would evidently be delegated to people who still ride skateboards to work and worship in the kult of kewl -- nor the apparent complete absence of focus-grouping with real-world users. Volunteers to evaluate a new interface are naturally those who are attracted to new interfaces. To find out what the real-world reaction is going to be requires actively going out and roping in (and paying) reluctant testers from the core user base, people who use email only to get other things done, are not novelty seekers, don't spontaneously volunteer to evaluate the bleeding edge, and don't heap praise on art for the sake of art in interface design. Opera implemented their own wet dream of form and function completely unconnected to the values, aesthetics, and needs of fastmail's core users. THAT is why this cluster fruck is going to make its way into B-school classrooms. That and the apparently unnoticed functional problems for users who try to stick to the (formerly) stable version. Those are garden-variety failures of QA.

Opera either never understood fastmail's original customer base or perhaps merely considered it irrelevant to the larger strategic plan. A 60-second perusal of fastmail's historic interfaces was all it ever took to realize the customer base didn't care about aesthetic appeal or esoteric UI elegance. It's unclear whether any effort was made to determine what the user base DID value in fastmail and what characteristics (such as stability?) we actually do care about.

But remember, in the scheme of things we geeks are a relatively small market. Sure we were always the core of fastmail's business, but it's very possible Opera just needed an existing platform to use in pursuing a new and completely different market segment, and the existing customer base was always planned to be mere collateral damage.

It was slow and painful to migrate into fastmail and it will be slow and painful to migrate away. But it led me to one key realization last night: I should never again have an important email address in a domain I don't own. If all my important emails were in my own domains, I could leave fastmail tomorrow. I could change hosts almost transparently while sticking to a stable, dependable, and transportable code base. Fastmail used to be stable and dependable and that lulled me into an illusion that transportable didn't matter. But it's difficult and probably rare for a company to regain user trust after an error of judgment and magnitude this egregious, and I imagine there will be a lot of emigration over the next 12-24 months.

Maybe I should be angrier, but mostly I feel tired recognition and resignation. I've seen this phenomenon again and again. It even happened after I sold my own IT company, which could not in the end survive the mistakes of its acquirers. Two years later the employees were being invited to more to Mumbai if they chose to keep their jobs.

Tappahannock · 31 Oct 2012, 01:17 AM

Depending on the length of non-compete that was agreed to, it would be great to see a comeback from the original developers. There'd still be the problem of migrating to a new email address but at least it was a proven team. Treat it like a project fork. Those of us who want to be forked over in new directions by Opera can stay with Opera and those of us who prefer not to get forked over go back to a team we can trust.

sflorack · 31 Oct 2012, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnMike

I may be misunderstanding the comment but I had absolutely no prior knowledge of classic anything and very rarely venture onto this or any other forum. I came to the forum because out of the blue the email client I had been using for many years has changed beyond all recognition.

No, sorry JohnMike. I did a bad job of explaining myself. Wasn't trying to suggest you had prior knowledge, and only wanted to come here to troll the threads.

BritTim said "Users who have the time and inclination to find and then browse these forums will learn that the original interface still mostly exists and can be accessed." My comment was simply to clarify my statement that "An unannounced and undocumented interface change was unwisely made, but the ability to access the old (classic) interface still exists" applied to forum users who could have seen the upteen threads where people referenced returning to the classic interface.

(BTW, this was about 100 messages ago, so I hope I clarified it enough.. Because I may need you to explain it back to me.)

sflorack · 31 Oct 2012, 01:41 AM

Also want to apologize to Tappahannock for following up his eloquent synopsis of today's events with my attempts at justifying a previous message!

tellstar · 31 Oct 2012, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tappahannock

Fastmail used to be stable and dependable and that lulled me into an illusion that transportable didn't matter. But it's difficult and probably rare for a company to regain user trust after an error of judgment and magnitude this egregious, and I imagine there will be a lot of emigration over the next 12-24 months.

This is well said. Because of that illusion I have no back-up plan in place and this may lead to a false sense at Fastmail that users are simply learning to love this mess. It will take me a while to develop something I can permanently count on, and then I won't be held hostage to this sort of malfeasance again.

31 Oct 2012, 01:10 AM	#26
Tappahannock Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 21	Even when you log into the classic interface, you get a quasi-random mish-mash of old and new interface pages. More disturbing is the caching problem that leads to inclusion in the folder listing of emails already deleted from that folder. This rollout is going to be studied in B-schools once the dust has settled. Whether the old customer base survives, and whether that was ever a consideration for Opera, remains to be seen. Companies that buy other companies always make a visible statement of ownership and dominance, as predictably and inevitably as dogs marking a fire hydrant. What wasn't so predictable or inevitable was that both design and management of the process would evidently be delegated to people who still ride skateboards to work and worship in the kult of kewl -- nor the apparent complete absence of focus-grouping with real-world users. Volunteers to evaluate a new interface are naturally those who are attracted to new interfaces. To find out what the real-world reaction is going to be requires actively going out and roping in (and paying) reluctant testers from the core user base, people who use email only to get other things done, are not novelty seekers, don't spontaneously volunteer to evaluate the bleeding edge, and don't heap praise on art for the sake of art in interface design. Opera implemented their own wet dream of form and function completely unconnected to the values, aesthetics, and needs of fastmail's core users. THAT is why this cluster fruck is going to make its way into B-school classrooms. That and the apparently unnoticed functional problems for users who try to stick to the (formerly) stable version. Those are garden-variety failures of QA. Opera either never understood fastmail's original customer base or perhaps merely considered it irrelevant to the larger strategic plan. A 60-second perusal of fastmail's historic interfaces was all it ever took to realize the customer base didn't care about aesthetic appeal or esoteric UI elegance. It's unclear whether any effort was made to determine what the user base DID value in fastmail and what characteristics (such as stability?) we actually do care about. But remember, in the scheme of things we geeks are a relatively small market. Sure we were always the core of fastmail's business, but it's very possible Opera just needed an existing platform to use in pursuing a new and completely different market segment, and the existing customer base was always planned to be mere collateral damage. It was slow and painful to migrate into fastmail and it will be slow and painful to migrate away. But it led me to one key realization last night: I should never again have an important email address in a domain I don't own. If all my important emails were in my own domains, I could leave fastmail tomorrow. I could change hosts almost transparently while sticking to a stable, dependable, and transportable code base. Fastmail used to be stable and dependable and that lulled me into an illusion that transportable didn't matter. But it's difficult and probably rare for a company to regain user trust after an error of judgment and magnitude this egregious, and I imagine there will be a lot of emigration over the next 12-24 months. Maybe I should be angrier, but mostly I feel tired recognition and resignation. I've seen this phenomenon again and again. It even happened after I sold my own IT company, which could not in the end survive the mistakes of its acquirers. Two years later the employees were being invited to more to Mumbai if they chose to keep their jobs. Last edited by Tappahannock : 31 Oct 2012 at 01:21 AM.

30 Oct 2012, 07:52 PM	#18
NJSS Master of the @ Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,238	Drakester Welcome. This:- http://www.emaildiscussions.com/showthread.php?t=65451 will enable you to log in to the old UI. It may look different, as FM have lost or deleted some of the stylesheets - but the functionality remains the same. NJSS

30 Oct 2012, 10:57 PM	#20
flinchlock Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Augusta, MI Posts: 156	YES, YES, YES! ... since 2002. Mike

30 Oct 2012, 11:01 PM	#22
TheRincewind Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: England Posts: 27	YES (paid since 2002)

31 Oct 2012, 01:17 AM	#27
Tappahannock Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 21	Depending on the length of non-compete that was agreed to, it would be great to see a comeback from the original developers. There'd still be the problem of migrating to a new email address but at least it was a proven team. Treat it like a project fork. Those of us who want to be forked over in new directions by Opera can stay with Opera and those of us who prefer not to get forked over go back to a team we can trust.

31 Oct 2012, 01:41 AM	#29
sflorack The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 2,937	Also want to apologize to Tappahannock for following up his eloquent synopsis of today's events with my attempts at justifying a previous message!