Changes to FastMail - Page 5

M4rk4y · 12 Mar 2020, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TenFour

So, if you really don't like the new web and mobile interface can't you just use something else? There are tons of smartphone apps and many different web interfaces that could be used to view your emails.

I don't understand this remark. I log into the web UI on Firefox on my laptop. What other web interface might I choose? A different browser will presumably look much the same (a well-designed web page should be pretty browser-agnostic in look and feel, surely).

M4rk4y · 12 Mar 2020, 05:35 PM

Quote:

The trend in the 21st century is, "do more with less."

I think it's more like "do more with less of our own effort but more re-use/adaptation of what other people have already done even if it's not really fit for what we want to do with it." So it's a different kind of complexity, driven by a desire for greater standardisation, which ought to be a good thing (it's easier to do one thing really well) but somehow ends up not, as everyone ends up diverging. These things come in waves. Look at Unix. An early split into 2 rival camps and other splinter groups, then Linus' attempt to produce a single good replacement, then that has now splintered all over again.

Sorry, didn't mean to get all philosophical and somewhat off-topic.

Quote:

To me, the current FastMail service still looks far better than the nonsense I experienced elsewhere.

Couldn't agree more. Compare it with Gmail or Hotmail.

Junkle · 12 Mar 2020, 08:53 PM

Well, here's the latest ticket response:

"Thank you for your feedback. I have passed it along to the management.

Unfortunately, we cannot revert to the old font anymore. Sorry.

Is there anything else I can assist you with. "

I had to chuckle that the last sentence was ended with a period. It was intended as a question, buuut... not. As in, we don't really care about what you think... a "mock" question Freudian slip.

I reminded them again that they can revert, but that they choose not to. I congratulated them that they must be prosperous beyond their wildest dreams.

I've ruminated about it for days now, and have come to the conclusion that the financial stability of these folks must be demonstrated to be believed. "Hail Mary"-type actions often result at the end of long road of (perhaps totally behind-the-scenes) decline --- we need more users; quick, think of something, even if it means breaking something that works really well already!

Don't get me wrong, I still love fastmail, and most of what I loved about it remains. I absolutely want them to succeed but, as was commented previously, certain marches towards decline are effectively inexorable.

All that said, I credit them with highlighting how fragile I am by relying on third-party webmail. I shall do something about that.

mattc1170 · 13 Mar 2020, 02:58 AM

Add my name to the list of people really turned off by this font change. It looks terrible on my 1920x1080 monitors running Chrome on both Windows 10 and Linux. <puke emoji>

When I first signed up for FastMail many years ago I mostly just used my preferred IMAP email client to connect. But I eventually went all-in with the FastMail web client once I saw how slick it was and how quickly I could manage my email with keyboard shortcuts.

This new font is SO ugly I'm probably going to consider using an IMAP client again.

TenFour · 13 Mar 2020, 03:57 AM

General observation. A lot of the negative comments here are from new users with very low post counts. Are new people flocking here just to rag on FM?

ellentk · 13 Mar 2020, 04:46 AM

TenFour:

Are new users so blind that they will not see?

Ellen, a fairly old user

mattc1170 · 13 Mar 2020, 05:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TenFour

General observation. A lot of the negative comments here are from new users with very low post counts. Are new people flocking here just to rag on FM?

Well, yes. First time poster, some time lurker. I flocked here precisely to rag on this UI change. Things looked funny when I checked my email last night so I popped over here to see if something had changed or if I (or my browser) was going crazy. I've been an extremely happy FastMail user and occasional FastMail Twitter evangelist with no reason to post until now.

Lockwood · 13 Mar 2020, 07:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TenFour

General observation. A lot of the negative comments here are from new users with very low post counts. Are new people flocking here just to rag on FM?

Not sure posts on the forum is a reliable measure.
I'm low in posts here, but have been a rock solid fastmail user since 2006 with 5 paid accounts in use.
And I have loved how they brought the UX of the web interface up over the years so that I don't need to rely on email clients/software.
Just that this font is a substantive step back.

Junkle · 13 Mar 2020, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TenFour

General observation. A lot of the negative comments here are from new users with very low post counts. Are new people flocking here just to rag on FM?

So I'm not welcome as a new user, then? I believe it's called "EmailDiscussions.com". I believe I was discussing email in the theme of the thread I found through google. Perhaps I've violated something?

Grhm · 13 Mar 2020, 09:18 AM

In the past I've been an outspoken critic of Fastmail when they have messed things up with apparently pointless changes... but I'm puzzled by this thread.
The only substantial changes I've noticed are a few minor tweaks to the layout and that they've changed the font from one inoffensive, legible, sans-serif type to a different inoffensive, legible, sans-serif type.
Unlike in previous revisions, as far as I'm aware there has been no loss of functionality at all.
I really don't understand what all the fuss is about.

Junkle · 13 Mar 2020, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grhm

I really don't understand what all the fuss is about.

The font renders very poorly on some displays. A simple solution would be to retain the option to use the old font. That was removed. It's difficult and painful to look at a poorly-rendered font for hours on end. Despite expressing this to Fastmail, they have told users who have a major issue with the rendering of this font that no changes will be forthcoming.

Grhm · 13 Mar 2020, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Junkle

The font renders very poorly on some displays.

It looks just fine on the devices I've tried it on, viz my Android phone and the PCs at my local library. What device are you using that has these problems? Please could you upload a screen-shot so we can see what you are referring to?

Junkle · 13 Mar 2020, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grhm

Please could you upload a screen-shot so we can see what you are referring to?

How do you attach a file here? I'm sorry, I can't seem to figure that out.

Grhm · 13 Mar 2020, 11:26 AM

You can't attach a file directly to a forum post here, but you can upload it elsewhere and provide a link.
Some people use third party services like 'photobucket' to do this, but it's relatively simple to do it in Fastmail itself, as follows...
• Set up a new folder in 'files',
• Upload the picture to it,
• Set up a new alias,
• Set up a web site on the domain of that alias,
• Choose the 'gallery' option,
• Point it to the new folder that has the picture in it.
• Voila!

Junkle · 13 Mar 2020, 11:45 AM

Grhm, thanks for the response. Before I do all that, maybe all I need to do is describe what's happening. On some screens that are not set up to show smoothed "anti-aliased" fonts, the aliased version of the font looks horrible; ghastly, actually. On the other hand, even on a machine where the anti-aliased font is displayed, it's still "blurry". The old font's aliased version was so well designed that it was a pleasure to look at regardless. It rendered well on the native resolutions of many common screens.

Some people, me being one, have little patience for anti-aliased fonts on low dpi screens. Such fonts look fine on mobile devices such as a Samsung S9 (my device) and are thus acceptable because the dpi of these screens is so high, and the angular resolution of our eyes is comparatively low. One can't readily "see" pixels on these screens. But when you can see individual pixels, anti-aliased fonts look like how the way home looks after two or three too many drinks. We thus "fall back" (not really a "fall back" in my opinion, but I'll call it that here) to a well-designed aliased font, and are very happy in that regime.

The old font avoided anti-aliasing and looked great at native resolutions. Why rob those for whom this works well of this option? It's just strange.

In case it's useful for anyone, see:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_rasterization

Yes, on my desktop and laptop screen, I prefer my fonts to look like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_r...ion-simple.png

This, on the other hand, is rather barf-ish to me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_r...bpixel-RGB.png

This matters particularly after hours of staring at the screen. Thanks for your interest.

12 Mar 2020, 08:53 PM	#63
Junkle Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2020 Posts: 29	Well, here's the latest ticket response: "Thank you for your feedback. I have passed it along to the management. Unfortunately, we cannot revert to the old font anymore. Sorry. Is there anything else I can assist you with. " I had to chuckle that the last sentence was ended with a period. It was intended as a question, buuut... not. As in, we don't really care about what you think... a "mock" question Freudian slip. I reminded them again that they can revert, but that they choose not to. I congratulated them that they must be prosperous beyond their wildest dreams. I've ruminated about it for days now, and have come to the conclusion that the financial stability of these folks must be demonstrated to be believed. "Hail Mary"-type actions often result at the end of long road of (perhaps totally behind-the-scenes) decline --- we need more users; quick, think of something, even if it means breaking something that works really well already! Don't get me wrong, I still love fastmail, and most of what I loved about it remains. I absolutely want them to succeed but, as was commented previously, certain marches towards decline are effectively inexorable. All that said, I credit them with highlighting how fragile I am by relying on third-party webmail. I shall do something about that.

13 Mar 2020, 09:18 AM	#70
Grhm Essential Contributor Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: UK Posts: 270	In the past I've been an outspoken critic of Fastmail when they have messed things up with apparently pointless changes... but I'm puzzled by this thread. The only substantial changes I've noticed are a few minor tweaks to the layout and that they've changed the font from one inoffensive, legible, sans-serif type to a different inoffensive, legible, sans-serif type. Unlike in previous revisions, as far as I'm aware there has been no loss of functionality at all. I really don't understand what all the fuss is about. Last edited by Grhm : 13 Mar 2020 at 09:21 AM. Reason: minor typo

13 Mar 2020, 02:58 AM	#64
mattc1170 Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2020 Posts: 2	Add my name to the list of people really turned off by this font change. It looks terrible on my 1920x1080 monitors running Chrome on both Windows 10 and Linux. <puke emoji> When I first signed up for FastMail many years ago I mostly just used my preferred IMAP email client to connect. But I eventually went all-in with the FastMail web client once I saw how slick it was and how quickly I could manage my email with keyboard shortcuts. This new font is SO ugly I'm probably going to consider using an IMAP client again.

13 Mar 2020, 03:57 AM	#65
TenFour Master of the @ Join Date: Feb 2017 Location: USA Posts: 1,722	General observation. A lot of the negative comments here are from new users with very low post counts. Are new people flocking here just to rag on FM?

13 Mar 2020, 04:46 AM	#66
ellentk Essential Contributor Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 249	TenFour: Are new users so blind that they will not see? Ellen, a fairly old user

13 Mar 2020, 11:26 AM	#74
Grhm Essential Contributor Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: UK Posts: 270	You can't attach a file directly to a forum post here, but you can upload it elsewhere and provide a link. Some people use third party services like 'photobucket' to do this, but it's relatively simple to do it in Fastmail itself, as follows... • Set up a new folder in 'files', • Upload the picture to it, • Set up a new alias, • Set up a web site on the domain of that alias, • Choose the 'gallery' option, • Point it to the new folder that has the picture in it. • Voila!

13 Mar 2020, 11:45 AM	#75
Junkle Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2020 Posts: 29	Grhm, thanks for the response. Before I do all that, maybe all I need to do is describe what's happening. On some screens that are not set up to show smoothed "anti-aliased" fonts, the aliased version of the font looks horrible; ghastly, actually. On the other hand, even on a machine where the anti-aliased font is displayed, it's still "blurry". The old font's aliased version was so well designed that it was a pleasure to look at regardless. It rendered well on the native resolutions of many common screens. Some people, me being one, have little patience for anti-aliased fonts on low dpi screens. Such fonts look fine on mobile devices such as a Samsung S9 (my device) and are thus acceptable because the dpi of these screens is so high, and the angular resolution of our eyes is comparatively low. One can't readily "see" pixels on these screens. But when you can see individual pixels, anti-aliased fonts look like how the way home looks after two or three too many drinks. We thus "fall back" (not really a "fall back" in my opinion, but I'll call it that here) to a well-designed aliased font, and are very happy in that regime. The old font avoided anti-aliasing and looked great at native resolutions. Why rob those for whom this works well of this option? It's just strange. In case it's useful for anyone, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_rasterization Yes, on my desktop and laptop screen, I prefer my fonts to look like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_r...ion-simple.png This, on the other hand, is rather barf-ish to me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_r...bpixel-RGB.png This matters particularly after hours of staring at the screen. Thanks for your interest.