The Storage Announcement

[anj]

Originally posted by ewal
For people that have less ambitious needs (e.g. only one name, no filtering, no redirecting etc etc) then I'm not sure why I would want to recommend FM to them.

Many good points. Don't discount IMAP and SSL though. Both are very useful for people who travel with a laptop/PDA and also use a desktop at work/home. Once FM improves their homepage, puts out a tour and screenshots, and has a trial, many people will see how convenient this feature set is.
Of course, there are also many more who don't need that feature set and will be content with webmail or POP3. No harm in that; they have other options.

[hanihadi]

Originally posted by ewal


I'm simply not clear at all what now will attract NEW users to the power and features of Fastmail.

Previously the guest acccount (at 10mb) was a key "selling point" when most other providers only gave, typically, only 3mb.

The guest account (and the paid $15 member account), is simply no longer a "sit up and take notice" feature and I'm confused as to what it is now - particularly with the freebies available elsewhere.

However for people that have less ambitious needs (e.g. only one name, no filtering, no redirecting etc etc) then I'm not sure why I would want to recommend FM to them.

I continue to think that FM ought to offer time limited but full featured trial accounts so that such trialers can "learn" that they actually need the power of FM. The present guest account no longer offers this opportunity - IMHO.

I have to agree with ewal. Although I think fastmail is outstanding, I have had a tough time trying to convince friends that they should switch from hotmail to fastmail. In the past I would try to sell them fastmail whenever they complained about storage space. Now I try to sell it to them based on the absence of ads and pop-ups. I think offering people a trial may bring in new subscribers.

[severach]

>Don't discount IMAP and SSL though

SSL is free. Providers that don't are just showing their incompetence and unwillingness to run with software more modern than Outlook Express. Lots of places offer IMAP too so that alone doesn't say much.

Maybe I can make it all a bit less clear.

Think simple. Everyone I see uses Outlook Express for email. The web is too clumsy, special clients offer no reason for more than a few to seek them out, just Outlook Express or Outlook if at a company. I didn't choose for them, the desire for ease of use and one stop automatic email just pushes them to it. What can I recommend to people who have little interest in a web interface and only want an account for Outlook while ensuring that they can have server based email in the future when they discover they need it?

http://www.imagine-msn.com/hotmail/en-us/

With Hotmail Free, I get 2MB (250MB planned), HTTP-IMAP, address book management, (broken) anti-spam, antivirus, hard to block SMTP equivalent, no taglines.

With Fastmail Free I get 10M, IMAP, no anti-spam, no SMTP, no antivirus, taglines.

I'm only comparing with Hotmail because they are the only big name emailer that is any serious competiton to Fastmail. Gmail and Yahoo may have space but lack IMAP so are clueless webmail providers. Hotmail Free is surprisingly full featured, so much so that there is little reason to upgrade or go elsewhere. Fastmail gives me no advantages to sell. No antivirus is bad karma and bad for business. The next newsworthy email worm will bring praise to companies that block it and scorn to those that let it through. The ability to control or disable antivirus should be a pay feature. You can at least hope for some virus sound bites. For $20, Hotmail beats Google, especially when they decide to add the Googlie features that don't suck. Keep in mind that most people get lost in complexity so fancy Google features will be largely unappreciated.

I can't interest newbies in Fastmail because it lacks the things that make the press. Advanced users can't see the advantage until they use it and the price is pretty steep. Client users get nothing from the advanced Fastmail web interface and little from the back-end tools. Users wanting webmail have no money and there is nothing obvious at the start that shows Fastmail as better. I can't decide if Fastmail is everything to almost nobody, or nothing to almost everybody.

I suspect that Fastmail gets almost no "walk-in" customers. This requires a name and that they don't have. As hard as it sounds, this means that Fastmail gets new customers from a recommendation of some kind. As I found, getting to like Fastmail from a recommendation is fraught with obstacles.

All of Fastmail's advertizing claims had no positive effect in my decision to join. I was immediately turned off by the .fm domain. The only thing I knew was that .fm was anywhere but the USA, and apparently in Australia, which is the farthest possible point on the globe from me. I have files I want to send across town and they need to go around the world once. What a way to maximize unreliability. People in other countries may not want political unrest in the USA to interrupt their mail.

Hotmail was my first introduction to server based email where email clients at multiple locations and webmail all have equal access. People are awed when I install their garbage Hotmail account into Outlook and they discover how much handier it is than any of their other mail. For the first time travelling clients discover they don't need to lug the laptop ball-n-chain to have fully functional mail while away. After breaking away from Eudora in which the IMAP support is so bad it's unusable, I discovered that IMAP in a good client provides the same functionality as Hotmail-HTTP so Hotmail+Outlook wasn't the only game in town. While reading about IMAP, I stumbled on alises for spam avoidance and this soon lead me where all IMAP roads lead to, Infinite Ink. Two days of reading Infinite Ink and Fastmail seemed to have more than an accidental interest in cutting edge email technology. Fastmail consistently came out with the best features at the lowest price is what pushed me to discover their USA presence and try it out. As a die hard client user, I'm looking for something that solves my problem. My problem is spam, not that my webmail interface is too slow or not full featured. The only thing that FM advertizing did was to show me that it was going to take $40 to get started. My joy was short lived as I discovered that clients don't support alises nor does it matter because Fastmail doesn't provide enough to use. Only after being pushed into the web interface to get minimal alias support did I discover that the web interface is so good that it's worth paying $40/yr for web based email and even now that I have a fully functional OE, I usually use the web interface. All the other clients are so much farther away from optimal than OE that I don't even bother with them. A product needs to be 90% there before I have any confidence that features I need will be implemented in a timely fashion.

I went through the maze only to pay more than average for webmail. I look like a fruitcake to an untrained observer because webmail providers are dime-a-dozen. Why would anyone pay for it? So I passed the test and send in my money. What's my reward? I get the little Club Fastmail badge at a big price, but since my spam problem isn't solved because I don't have enough of the aliases I came for, I must keep looking. Sure FM won top honors at Infinite Ink, not because they do everything right, but because they do everything less wrong than the rest. Grading Fastmail on a curve, they get top marks. Grading on an absolute scale to what's needed, fail.

http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools?tool=3

Hotmail lacks aliases. Yahoo lacks IMAP. Both have own-domain though a bit skimpy because they are providing separate accounts, not alias space. Yahoo has a disposable email alias system that meets my minimum requirements but fails on virus handling. Fastmail's main advantage is that they have all the needed features in one place, but too few aliases keeps my eyes roving, and I notice that the big boys are only a few features away from winning me and everyone for primary email. The worst part for Fastmail is that all the critical features are in at least one of the big services and if each were to grab the missing features from the others, Fastmail's less important advantages would not make them attractive enough to join or stay. Depending on the incompetence of the big boys is skating on thin ice. One is bound to get the right feature set if only by accident. What a cruel world for Fastmail to help push IMAP into mainstream only to have someone else steal the thunder.

Gmail, no IMAP = joke. What ever do we need with another cheesy web only email provider of which we have thousands that only serve to irritate people into Outlook Express?

Since I expect server based email to grow ever more popular, I can only recommend Hotmail at this time without any downside. It's quite good at the free level and $20 probably buys way more than you need. Yahoo and Gmail need to bite the IMAP bullet before they can be taken seriously.

[juppa2]

Originally posted by severach
With Hotmail Free, I get 2MB (250MB planned), HTTP-IMAP, address book management, (broken) anti-spam, antivirus, hard to block SMTP equivalent, no taglines.

What is the difference between HTTP-IMAP and IMAP?

Where can get info on Hotmail HTTP-IMAP?

Thanks for any info.

[severach]

I run them together as HTTP-IMAP to show that Hotmail HTTP is a feature of equivalent quality as Fastmail-IMAP as long as you are using Outlook. If you are using a client other than Outlook, Hotmail only offers the inferior POP access after you pay $20/yr until Hotmail supports the real IMAP or HTTP is added to the clients, which doesn't seem so hard considering so many webmail pop-links have done it and the standard is pretty well set in stone. Due to some extra features in HTTP, there is good reason for clients (and services) to support it. Due to the way it is set up in Outlook, it is very Very VERY clear that Microsoft didn't intend for Hotmail to be the only HTTP provider. (hint hint)

There are a few differences I do know.

* IMAP headers only folders display a date. HTTP headers only folders show only subject lines.

* HTTP can sync the OE address book which means that HTTP has an address book syncing standard.

* HTTP contains both receive and send protocols. IMAP only receives and requires SMTP to send. This may mean that HTTP uses binary to send attachments while SMTP certainly doesn't. Getting users away from SMTP would generally be a Good Thing (tm).

* IMAP transports on port 143/993 and SMTP sends on port 25. HTTP does everything on port 80. This is great for psycho firewall admins that block everything but port 80 and makes HTTP much easier to set up and troubleshoot.

If you are already using Outlook, fire up a Hotmail account and program it in to see how it works.

http://jhttpmail.sourceforge.net/httpmail.html

[bitequator]

^ You might also want to search the forum for previous mentions of "HTTPMail" -- which is based on WebDAV and is used by a few other providers too (IIRC Lycos, etc). What I'm not sure about is if HTTPMail is now a fully open standard (as in sponsored by W3, IETF, or somebody) -- which I believe WebDAV is currently yes?

I agree as an open standard HTTPMail has benefits going for it to attract wider adoption (in part due to the inherent advantages of WebDAV itself). But IMAP has its own (less aparent) advantages IMHO...


P.S. (OT) Being in the USA I must admit I too was concerned about connectivity/routing issues with an international server presence, when dealing with the likes of Runbox -- but I can also see the point previously raised by others about Runbox enjoying Norway's tougher privacy laws...

And speaking of antivirus good, no AV bad (), I wish FM would reconsider doing dual (or even triple) antiviruses...

[gdg]

^FM has servers in the U.S.

[bitequator]

^ Yeah I was just commenting on severach's generalized comment about issues with non-domestic servers, and I used Runbox as the example.

Anyways I think severach himself already knows that FM now uses all USA servers* since he mentioned it towards the end in his post?

* (since smtp.eu has moved to TX awhile back)

[Shazzer]

Originally posted by Jeremy Howard
We've decided to increase Full file storage by 50%, to 30MB!

Well, that makes me and my Full subscription feel *slightly* less like the "ugly step-child" in the Fastmail Family. Now if only you guys would let me have a couple more personalities (which I'm willing to pay for ala carte) I'd be in e-mail nirvana!

[pingme97]

Originally posted by Shazzer
Well, that makes me and my Full subscription feel *slightly* less like the "ugly step-child" in the Fastmail Family. Now if only you guys would let me have a couple more personalities (which I'm willing to pay for ala carte) I'd be in e-mail nirvana!

With few less feature and better stability I find Runbox as better Value for Money than FM

PS: I am full member of FM as well as Runbox. After using both the services for a while, I have come to this conclusion

[gdg]

Originally posted by Shazzer
Well, that makes me and my Full subscription feel *slightly* less like the "ugly step-child" in the Fastmail Family. Now if only you guys would let me have a couple more personalities (which I'm willing to pay for ala carte) I'd be in e-mail nirvana!

One thing going for FM - you can have almost unlimited personalities with FM at any level with the ability to change the from line on the fly - I know - doesn't solve all issues, but it is helpful.

[gdg]

Originally posted by pingme97
With few less feature and better stability I find Runbox as better Value for Money than FM

PS: I am full member of FM as well as Runbox. After using both the services for a while, I have come to this conclusion

Runbox has many issues, and apparently very slow ability to address them, but they still remain a temptation for me, also.

[Shazzer]

Originally posted by gdgrph
One thing going for FM - you can have almost unlimited personalities with FM at any level with the ability to change the from line on the fly - I know - doesn't solve all issues, but it is helpful.

I agree it's a great feature for those who only need to change the From line once in awhile...but it's a major pain in the @ss if you have to do it on a regular basis. Not only do you have to *remember* to change it before you send the message, but there's also the increased chance of making a typo while manually inserting the From address.

As a Full account holder I have 8 Personalities at my disposal...but half of them have to be designated for my *real* FM address and aliases if I am to have full functionality of those addresses. This means that in reality, I only have 4 other Personalities to use for any other addresses I may wish to funnel into my FM account...and that's two short of what I need. This is especially maddening when you consider that Enhanced account holders get 500.

Come September my mail storage is going to get a really healthy bump, and I'm grateful for that (even though I've already purchased extra storage for my Full account). With that kind of space I could, in theory, have virtually ALL of my e-mail from my various accounts directed to FM and never have to log in anywhere else ever again. But without the necessary number of Personalities making it possible for me to "send" from those accounts as well, there's no point in forwarding them to FM...which means I'll probably never use anything even close to the new storage capacity.

Sorry to sound like sour grapes on this...I'm actually a pretty happy long-time customer who renewed for another two-years this past Spring. But it's hard to get excited about the expanded storage limit when I don't have the one feature I need to actually make use of it. (And please don't advise me to upgrade to Enhanced...I don't think anyone here believes that spending an additional $20 per year for two more Personalities is a good value for money.)

[mlevin]

Originally posted by Shazzer
As a Full account holder I have 8 Personalities at my disposal...but half of them have to be designated for my *real* FM address and aliases if I am to have full functionality of those addresses. This means that in reality, I only have 4 other Personalities to use for any other addresses I may wish to funnel into my FM account...and that's two short of what I need. This is especially maddening when you consider that Enhanced account holders get 500.

Yeah, that's a pretty big disparity (8 vs. 500) for something that costs FM very little (if anything) to provide. Is the only reason for that to entice people to upgrade?

Maybe FM should move to a completely a la carte system? Instead of packaging features, let people pay for the ones they want. They're trying to do that with the cable TV industry here (I have no interest in some gardening channel, but I have to get it if I want the history channel?).

[Shazzer]

Originally posted by mlevin
Yeah, that's a pretty big disparity (8 vs. 500) for something that costs FM very little (if anything) to provide. Is the only reason for that to entice people to upgrade?

Maybe FM should move to a completely a la carte system? Instead of packaging features, let people pay for the ones they want. They're trying to do that with the cable TV industry here (I have no interest in some gardening channel, but I have to get it if I want the history channel?).

I've never understood why Personalities are not included in the present ala carte system. You can buy more storage, additional bandwidth, extra aliases and personal domains, but not Personalities. I personally can't see the value of having more aliases or personal domains *without* the ability to set up Personalities to use with them...but obviously it does work for some people.