End of classical interface

[chickadee]

Originally Posted by Jerry

I wonder if the FASTMAIL gurus have considered the possibility of continuing the CLASSIC interface with fewer "crossties" to its full-featured NEW interface.

They've already removed access to a few features in the CLASSIC interface (i.e. access to the Sieve Script) because it was too difficult to keep upgrading the CLASSIC when they added or tweaked features in the NEW interface. Perhaps they could keep an even more stripped down version of CLASSIC for those who like/need simple, low bandwidth, no javascript access to their mail.

Another email provider I know gives users a choice of three (commercial) interfaces: Horde v5, Horde v3, and RoundCube v1. Further, the Horde interfaces have multiple display options: Basic, Dynamic, SmartPhone/Tablet, Mobile, and NoJavaScript. It appears to me that each interface is accessing the email server via IMAP as if one were using a local computer's email client.

All the interfaces seem to operate in their own worlds; they all have access to your email folders, but there's no common Address Book or Calendar. You'll want to pick your interface before loading up those features with your data. Features that must be common amongst all interfaces, like your password, are accessed through a separate "User Control Panel."

FASTMAIL might even bring back a stripped down version of its OLD (original) HTML-only interface which used no graphics at all. Bandwidth-challenged users could use OLD or CLASSIC interfaces for their everyday email access, but if they needed one of the newer features (like updating one's Sieve Script) they would have to do it through a full-featured modern computer which could deal with Fastmail's bloated NEW interface.

Just a thought.

BritTim, you were a senior software engineer for many years, so I ask you, "How difficult would it be for FastMail to implement Jerry's suggestions?" I realize you haven't examined FastMail's code. Nevertheless, what is your best guess?

[TenFour]

BritTim, you were a senior software engineer for many years, so I ask you, "How difficult would it be for FastMail to implement Jerry's suggestions?" I realize you haven't examined FastMail's code. Nevertheless, what is your best guess?

Again, it doesn't matter "how difficult" it would be. FM has made its decision for business reasons and they have made the calculation that losing a few people is worth improving things for the many. How often have you ever seen any provider of a software service revert to an old interface in the face of criticism? I can't recall a single instance myself. Things change. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not. It is time to move on if the service no longer suits you.

[Berenburger]

Originally Posted by TenFour

Again, it doesn't matter "how difficult" it would be. FM has made its decision for business reasons and they have made the calculation that losing a few people is worth improving things for the many. How often have you ever seen any provider of a software service revert to an old interface in the face of criticism? I can't recall a single instance myself. Things change. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not. It is time to move on if the service no longer suits you.

Amén! Time to close this thread.

[chickadee]

Originally Posted by TenFour

Again, it doesn't matter "how difficult" it would be. FM has made its decision for business reasons and they have made the calculation that losing a few people is worth improving things for the many. How often have you ever seen any provider of a software service revert to an old interface in the face of criticism? I can't recall a single instance myself. Things change. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not. It is time to move on if the service no longer suits you.

TenFour, thank you for your perspicacious comment. But when did you morph into BritTim? 'Nuff said!

(I sincerely apologize for my response.)

[BritTim]

Originally Posted by chickadee

BritTim, you were a senior software engineer for many years, so I ask you, "How difficult would it be for FastMail to implement Jerry's suggestions?" I realize you haven't examined FastMail's code. Nevertheless, what is your best guess?

Briefly, to do this in a way that provided reasonable performance would be a maintenance nightmare. It would be possible to have it work like RoundCube (frontend and backend not integrated, just using a remote IMAP connection) but the performance would be lousy. Anyway, I have no doubt the code would need to be extensively modified before it would work at all. As others have opined, it is irrelevant. There is no way FastMail is going to regard it to be a viable investment.

[TenFour]

There is no way FastMail is going to regard it to be a viable investment.

I am not a software engineer, but I have worked closely with them and I know that things that look simple on the surface (in the UI) are usually not that way at all behind the scenes. In fact, I would guess that the simpler they appear often the more complex they really are! Simplicity is really, really hard. Keeping old legacy systems operating is often the bane of software engineers. I know of someone working at a major software provider who described having to build new code that didn't break other things built decades ago, and the huge hurdles that created for them. What we see on the surface is only the tip of a very, very large iceberg of software.

[Mugwhamp]

Originally Posted by TenFour

Simplicity is really, really hard.

I think this concept is under-appreciated in very many fields.

[PON]

I've been using Fastmail since early 2002. I have introduced dozens of people to it (many more than I have referral credit for, which is still substantial, though I stopped referring people a few years ago).

In the early days I could email Jeremy or Rob and get an answer to questions overnight. I never expected that nor that it was sustainable but let's talk about the other interface that matters: the customer interface. FM relies heavily on word of mouth. A LOT of goodwill can be earned by having the people running the business engage with customers (Jeff Bezos is famous for this and stories of the difference it makes are not scarce).

The blog and advent calendar are fine, though by and large directed at a technical audience (not the kind of people I referred to Fastmail).

I have had one specific, small, frequently repeated request that would make the new UI work for me: make it possible to sort by nickname.

It should be trivial to do. And if that's wrong, how big a customer would I have to be to get an answer on it, not necessarily personally, but if necessary in an FAQ showing "we did listen but...". Have I missed this? I don't think so.

Business decisions are acceptable.

Many businesses with technically superior products have failed or underperformed because of poor customer communications and resulting loss of goodwill.

Fastmail could be doing a better job on the customer interface.

It's a tricky business I know. Lots of companies want to email you all the time. I changed electricity provider recently and the new one is so excited (literally) to be in touch I've had to yell (metaphorically) to get off their damn mailing and survey invites list. It's a very large corporation behaving like a needy schoolgirl. My interest in having a relationship with an electricity utility is nil. I just want the greenest and cheapest power. A tool that we use very consciously (unlike electricity) for many hours a day, year and year out, is a very different matter. My communications setting for Fastmail is set to chatty. My other email provider doesn't have one and the difference with Fastmail isn't discernable.

[BritTim]

@PON : perhaps, because we have shared memories of the way FastMail was in the early days, we have similar views regarding the current situation. I, also, am rarely referring new customers to FastMail these days. This has nothing to do with current versus classic interface (although a few functions in the older interface are sometimes valuable). Overall, the product is technically better than ever. It is because FastMail rarely now listens to its base, and experience leads me to doubt FastMail's long term viability as a result.

[joe_devore]

Originally Posted by BritTim

It is because FastMail rarely now listens to its base, and experience leads me to doubt FastMail's long term viability as a result.

this worries me as well... I have put in a support ticket on this matter.. and in the end all they said is they could not promise anything...

[DumbGuy]

There have been many posts in this thread that I wanted to kudo (+1), and sometimes "-1". ....I guess that's a forum hosting related comment, but still wanted to share.

[Bamb0]

Originally Posted by TenFour

Again, it doesn't matter "how difficult" it would be. FM has made its decision for business reasons and they have made the calculation that losing a few people is worth improving things for the many. How often have you ever seen any provider of a software service revert to an old interface in the face of criticism? I can't recall a single instance myself. Things change. Sometimes for the better, sometimes not. It is time to move on if the service no longer suits you.

Well if they decided to keep the interface and tell us FREE MEMBERS that we have to start paying for our access I WOULD DO IT STRAIGHT AWAY!!!!!!!!! (For the interface as it is now -- JUST BASIC EMAIL)

Any amount of $$$$ is worth my account on thier system..... They have THE BEST out there!!!

[PON]

Originally Posted by BritTim

@PON : It is because FastMail rarely now listens to its base, and experience leads me to doubt FastMail's long term viability as a result.

This.

As we say on Twitter.

Don't know about viability. They used up one life; 8 left. Actually, I have a LOT of sympathy for the business model of an employee-owned company and would like to feel more supportive. But I'd guess most of us end up having reciprocal feelings toward companies with a take it or leave it attitude to their customers. At the other end of the spectrum from the needy schoolgirl is the one who doesn't feign acknowledging your existence.

My other mail solution works well; I have my own domain; I'm prepared (as one always should be). Having ditched Microsoft for Linux I would hate to go back to any of the feudal lords of the cloud!

[ChinaLamb]

Originally Posted by PON

Actually, I have a LOT of sympathy for the business model of an employee-owned company and would like to feel more supportive. But I'd guess most of us end up having reciprocal feelings toward companies with a take it or leave it attitude to their customers. At the other end of the spectrum from the needy schoolgirl is the one who doesn't feign acknowledging your existence.

My other mail solution works well; I have my own domain; I'm prepared (as one always should be). Having ditched Microsoft for Linux I would hate to go back to any of the feudal lords of the cloud!

Great point on supporting small business. I get the feeling some are treating Fastmail as if it were some huge heartless money sucking conglomerate. That's just not the case. If you do the math, (userbase, average cost per account, etc.) they're not getting paid that much for all they provide. In fact, I'm wondering how they keep the lights on. Truly... I don't know how they continue to do this. They are making a sacrifice for keeping our email on...

Then people wonder why they are not as active as they were in these forums.
It seems to me, the people who paid the least amount of money are putting together the greatest set of demands. You look at the content here? Good gosh. It's downright hateful at times. I would have left long ago...

Fastmail truly is a SMALL group of people trying to produce a product that can do some great things - while also paying their bills. As far as I'm concerned, they've been more than generous, much more generous than many other services offered over the years. Balancing the product, and producing something that can pay the bills is difficult.

[Bamb0]

I would love to pay them for my account... I have used 100s of megs of thier storage since I joined......

If they decided $50 a month for the interface that would be excellent!