Advantages of Runbox over Fastmail?

CyberSaint · 9 Jun 2010, 04:09 AM

What are the advantages you Runbox users may see over Fastmail? I don't want to get into FM bashing, I'd just like to hear why you prefer Runbox over FM. I'm a FM user, and am looking for a change.

Thanks,
CS

che · 11 Jun 2010, 08:24 PM

I don't see any!

In my opionion FM is far superior ... unfortunately. Runbox: no sieve, no webdav, no ldap, is their new imap server after several years still beta? What do you miss? What are you looking for?

Anyway, why don't you sign-up for a 30day free trial . :-)

CyberSaint · 11 Jun 2010, 08:48 PM

I did signup for a free trial a few days ago

tomhab · 11 Jun 2010, 10:58 PM

Not really an advantage but a differentiation would be Runbox's hosting thrown in to make a relatively cheap package.

Also, depends on who's looking but mini-sub account is very cheap and feature complete.

And IMAP was promoted from beta around a year or two ago....

Geir · 16 Jun 2010, 09:48 AM

It depends what you're looking for, but one way to compare the two would be in terms of simplicity and breadth: While Fastmail may offer more advanced email functionality, Runbox is simpler and sleeker, more user-friendly, and includes a wider set of services including full-featured web hosting with the cPanel control panel.

Beside the service itself, you might be interested in learning that Runbox is a small, independent company operating in Norway under very strict privacy regulations and consumer rights, which we have taken great care to express in our Terms of Service.

For more about our services, please see Runbox Feature Overview and Runbox Web Hosting.

- Geir

digp · 25 Jun 2010, 04:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geir

...Beside the service itself...
- Geir

The service which often breaks down?

RunboxCustomer · 25 Jun 2010, 06:35 AM

I switched to .Rrunbox because it costs me approximately 1/2 of what Fastmail charges and I get a lot more storage space.

liteswap · 14 Aug 2010, 12:21 AM

I switched from Runbox to FM because it worked. Runbox's IMAP seems still to be broken: my partner stayed with Runbox and she's struggling with it as I speak, waiting for minutes for emails to download.

I waited loyally for two years for Runbox to fix this before switching two years ago. I find it incomprehensible that it's still broken.

I also think the Runbox web interface is looking tired by comparison....

bipbop · 15 Aug 2010, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by liteswap

I switched from Runbox to FM because it worked. Runbox's IMAP seems still to be broken: my partner stayed with Runbox and she's struggling with it as I speak, waiting for minutes for emails to download.

I waited loyally for two years for Runbox to fix this before switching two years ago. I find it incomprehensible that it's still broken.

I also think the Runbox web interface is looking tired by comparison....

Just signed up with FM to have a look. The interface design looks not that much different from Runbox's. Interestingly, one can load external style sheets. But it doesn't seem like there's an easy way to load a new. By easy I mean easier than copy into editor, save file, then import into FM. The two first actions shouldn't be necessary, IMO.

https://www.fastmail.fm/help/quick_t...tylesheet.html

Not too impressed with that.

Both FM and Runbox could take a hint from Apple:
http://basshead.files.wordpress.com/...ileme-mail.jpg

A simple, clean, yet stylish interface.

Geir · 19 Aug 2010, 12:11 AM

liteswap: We'd appreciate more details regarding the IMAP problems you've been experiencing. We also have some updates in the pipeline that should improve overall IMAP performance.

- Geir

Geir · 19 Aug 2010, 12:14 AM

bipbop: Thanks for the suggestion -- Apple's MobileMe interface is simple and sleek, but not exactly exciting (to the extent that's what one is looking for in an email service

).

It's not been that long since we upgraded our Webmail interface but we're always looking for suggestions to make it better, and we will continue working to gradually improve it.

- Geir

liteswap · 19 Aug 2010, 12:16 AM

bipbop: I guess for me one of the most important things is how well an email IMAP server interfaces with my email clients. And with FM, it's very good. With RB it really wasn't, sad to say. And now I see the same experience I had being repeated with my partner. Sad really. The prettiness of the web interface is a low priority for me, frankly.

Geir: sorry - I quit RB a while back, after two years of hearing talk of updates in the pipeline that would speed up IMAP and waiting for the reality to arrive. My partner is seeing slow updates, lots of emails that appear blank, and general lack of responsiveness. This criticism does not extend to tech support, which has been outstanding, I'm happy to say.

Geir · 25 Aug 2010, 04:04 AM

liteswap: We would really like to know more about the problems your partner is experiencing, if they are still ongoing. The IMAP issues you're describing are not typical for Runbox and I'm sure we would be able to resolve them.

Thanks again,

- Geir

brong · 27 Aug 2010, 01:19 PM

FastMail's IMAP server is very good - we're running a pre-release copy of Cyrus IMAP that will become Cyrus 2.4 pretty soon. That said, there's nothing stopping Runbox using the same system, it's all open source!

kservik · 27 Aug 2010, 09:18 PM

Our IMAP service is not in any way in Beta. We might add a Beta, but we havent had one for a very long time.

Kim

9 Jun 2010, 04:09 AM	#1
CyberSaint Essential Contributor Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Hurricane, WV Posts: 206	Advantages of Runbox over Fastmail? What are the advantages you Runbox users may see over Fastmail? I don't want to get into FM bashing, I'd just like to hear why you prefer Runbox over FM. I'm a FM user, and am looking for a change. Thanks, CS

11 Jun 2010, 08:24 PM	#2
che Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 58	I don't see any! In my opionion FM is far superior ... unfortunately. Runbox: no sieve, no webdav, no ldap, is their new imap server after several years still beta? What do you miss? What are you looking for? Anyway, why don't you sign-up for a 30day free trial . :-)

11 Jun 2010, 08:48 PM	#3
CyberSaint Essential Contributor Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Hurricane, WV Posts: 206	I did signup for a free trial a few days ago

11 Jun 2010, 10:58 PM	#4
tomhab Essential Contributor Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 236	Not really an advantage but a differentiation would be Runbox's hosting thrown in to make a relatively cheap package. Also, depends on who's looking but mini-sub account is very cheap and feature complete. And IMAP was promoted from beta around a year or two ago....

16 Jun 2010, 09:48 AM	#5
Geir The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 2,938 Representative of: Runbox.com	It depends what you're looking for, but one way to compare the two would be in terms of simplicity and breadth: While Fastmail may offer more advanced email functionality, Runbox is simpler and sleeker, more user-friendly, and includes a wider set of services including full-featured web hosting with the cPanel control panel. Beside the service itself, you might be interested in learning that Runbox is a small, independent company operating in Norway under very strict privacy regulations and consumer rights, which we have taken great care to express in our Terms of Service. For more about our services, please see Runbox Feature Overview and Runbox Web Hosting. - Geir

25 Jun 2010, 06:35 AM	#7
RunboxCustomer Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 29	I switched to .Rrunbox because it costs me approximately 1/2 of what Fastmail charges and I get a lot more storage space.

14 Aug 2010, 12:21 AM	#8
liteswap Junior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Lewes, UK Posts: 20	I switched from Runbox to FM because it worked. Runbox's IMAP seems still to be broken: my partner stayed with Runbox and she's struggling with it as I speak, waiting for minutes for emails to download. I waited loyally for two years for Runbox to fix this before switching two years ago. I find it incomprehensible that it's still broken. I also think the Runbox web interface is looking tired by comparison....

19 Aug 2010, 12:11 AM	#10
Geir The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 2,938 Representative of: Runbox.com	liteswap: We'd appreciate more details regarding the IMAP problems you've been experiencing. We also have some updates in the pipeline that should improve overall IMAP performance. - Geir

19 Aug 2010, 12:14 AM	#11
Geir The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 2,938 Representative of: Runbox.com	bipbop: Thanks for the suggestion -- Apple's MobileMe interface is simple and sleek, but not exactly exciting (to the extent that's what one is looking for in an email service ). It's not been that long since we upgraded our Webmail interface but we're always looking for suggestions to make it better, and we will continue working to gradually improve it. - Geir

19 Aug 2010, 12:16 AM	#12
liteswap Junior Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Lewes, UK Posts: 20	bipbop: I guess for me one of the most important things is how well an email IMAP server interfaces with my email clients. And with FM, it's very good. With RB it really wasn't, sad to say. And now I see the same experience I had being repeated with my partner. Sad really. The prettiness of the web interface is a low priority for me, frankly. Geir: sorry - I quit RB a while back, after two years of hearing talk of updates in the pipeline that would speed up IMAP and waiting for the reality to arrive. My partner is seeing slow updates, lots of emails that appear blank, and general lack of responsiveness. This criticism does not extend to tech support, which has been outstanding, I'm happy to say.

25 Aug 2010, 04:04 AM	#13
Geir The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 2,938 Representative of: Runbox.com	liteswap: We would really like to know more about the problems your partner is experiencing, if they are still ongoing. The IMAP issues you're describing are not typical for Runbox and I'm sure we would be able to resolve them. Thanks again, - Geir

27 Aug 2010, 01:19 PM	#14
brong The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 2,696 Representative of: Fastmail.fm	FastMail's IMAP server is very good - we're running a pre-release copy of Cyrus IMAP that will become Cyrus 2.4 pretty soon. That said, there's nothing stopping Runbox using the same system, it's all open source!

27 Aug 2010, 09:18 PM	#15
kservik Cornerstone of the Community Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Oslo, Norway Posts: 555 Representative of: Runbox.com	Our IMAP service is not in any way in Beta. We might add a Beta, but we havent had one for a very long time. Kim