New : Inbox by Gmail - Page 2

kaptitsky · 30 Oct 2014, 12:25 PM

I read the three dot button as Options on Android and so when I see the screen shot, I know that the lower button refers to options for that bit of mail and the upper button is options for the inbox or folder in general. It's the same as right clicking in Windows to bring up a context menu; the menu will always be different depending on the object selected, but it is a consistent way to bring up actions that can made made on that object.

This notion of context is the only way to simplify user interfaces. You can't just keep adding menu options or filling the screen with buttons. It's OK to hate it, but I haven't seen another model that moves UI forward yet. Have you?

It is clear to me from the pitch that the essential function of Inbox is to programmatically assist you in managing large volumes of e-mail. It uses context -- ah, context again -- to decide how to display data, working to learn based on your choices, to get smarter about how to help you.

This is, almost by definition, a very intrusive process, letting the system take over the organizing work for you. It demands that you trust the system, that you train the system, that you surrender to the system.

For people who don't do their own organizing, they take this as just the way things work. And for people who are ready to give the job to the system, well, they are early adopters, helping develop and mature the system to help those who never organized much in the first place.

This is clearly the direction that is so incredibly Googly, moving decision making about presentation and priorities away from the individual and onto the system. It's how they have worked so hard to "make search results relevant" by having the system make choices about what to present and how. It's what the Google Now system does, for example.

I have very little doubt that the best work in the world at having the system automatically optimize information management for individuals is being done at Google and is far ahead of my meagre understanding.

The problem is that if you are a person who is used to managing their own data, who used to set search results to outrageously high numbers and scan through the results, well, having the system get between you and the data does feel intrusive.

I'd love to see Inbox, but I know that I am not the target client for it. I don't get outrageous amounts of mail, don't do conventional and expected business, don't stay logged into one Google account if I can help it, don't really want help.

I get a bit annoyed that Google remembers old search results in Maps, for example, places I looked up for a friend and will never use again. I don't like Google Now deciding what my important addresses are and getting them wrong.

Google isn't building for me, but they are building for people I support, for people who would like the system to help. I get that.

I will never be a person who wants to skin my apps. I loved setting AltaVista results to 200 and didn't care what they looked like. But I know, though, that I am far from a typical user and will never be one.

Inbox is a Google attempt to deliver a new way to interact with e-mail using the power of the system to determine context and presentation in a direct and forceful way. It is backed up by extensive user research and conceptual thought, of this I have no doubt, because Google may not always create winners, but they always create considered quality.

Inbox isn't for me, but I get the point and am looking forward to seeing it, to see what new things Google knows about how to use the system to determine context, including priorities, to deliver more useful information in an elegant way.

Is Inbox intrusive, opaque, non-traditional and odd? Sure. That's what makes it good. Is it counter-intuitive? That's a crap term for interfaces that don't work the way you expect because you refuse to learn them. I believe that it is consistent, which in the end is what makes software usable, even if that consistency is very context driven

The world is gonna keep moving forward. If Google thinks that Inbox is a good guess for a direction that computing is going to go, I am excited to see it, because Google is usually right, always includes some brilliance, and is fun to watch.

But that's just me.

guillaume · 30 Oct 2014, 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaptitsky

I am excited to see it, because Google is usually right, always includes some brilliance, and is fun to watch.

Google is usually right ? mmm

-They've been trying to rethinking computing with Chrome OS and chromebooks. it failed
- They've been trying to rethink TV. Three times. It failed
- For years, everyone was waiting for a GDrive. They only produced a mere clone of Dropbox
- They've been trying ot rethink Music but only offer an archaic locker asking people to upload their thousands tracks on their server. It failed and they had to offer an alternative of Spotify by adding a streaming service after a while
- They tried to rethink email with Google Wave. They failed
- Even Android. It may be popular, but it's the only mobile OS today that requires a quad core CPU to offer a fluid and responsive interface. Windows 95 was popular too, huh ?

And they want me to try their self-driving car... ?!

Give me one good recent Google service. Sure they used to be disruptive. But the truth is, they are not anymore, at least not for me. They're far from right.

Quote:

Is it counter-intuitive? That's a crap term for interfaces that don't work the way you expect because you refuse to learn them.

Learning a new interface ? You really mean that I have to actually learn how to use a Web service ? You really mean that they can produce any crappy design they want, I would have to deal with it ?
I'm sorry, this is not how things work

kaptitsky · 30 Oct 2014, 05:49 PM

To me, a list of places where Google hasn't yet succeeded is just sour grapes.

Does Google always succeed in every attempt? Absolutely not.

In areas they consider vital do they keep trying and usually get a good product? Yup.

The amazing thing about Google's successes is that they don't appear remarkable, they just appear inevitable. Products like Maps, Gmail and Google Now, the astounding success of Android, the increasing success of Chromebooks after some disappointing results don't look amazing, they just look like natural evolution of where computing is going.

They aren't. They wouldn't exist without Google's continuous innovation. Google remade the market more than any other company and made it look easy and simple. It isn't.

Inbox is a trial balloon, sure. It's not a mainstream product, not for everyday. It's a shot into the future.

Will today's Inbox product be the platform of the future? Probably not.

But will concepts trialled and pioneered in Inbox become part of the simple, ubiquitous computing landscape of tomorrow? Probably.

That's what happened with Wave. The product didn't continue, but ideas developed in creating it did.

Google are the people showing us how things work, how they just work, not you. You can choose not to use Google products and services, that is absolutely your choice. The market will decide the winner, slowly, over time, shaped by the choices of millions of consumers.

In 2014, though, it is clear that Google is pretty damn good at creating winners. Google has become ubiquitous and easy, even in a very competitive landscape.

Part of that is failing well, attempting the new and very different and learning from that. Part of that is incredible smarts and part persistence.

Is Google perfect? Far from it. They are just smart and good with an incredible commitment to enhancing the user experience, for consumers, for the world, and for Google's bottom line.

But betting against them in the long run doesn't seem at all a wise choice.

guillaume · 30 Oct 2014, 06:40 PM

Quote:

To me, a list of places where Google hasn't yet succeeded is just sour grapes

.

>>> Just facts. Putting things in perspective

Quote:

Does Google always succeed in every attempt? Absolutely not.

In areas they consider vital do they keep trying and usually get a good product? Yup.

>>> Again they keep trying on TV (Google TV, Android TV, Chromecast, and now Nexus TV. Three applications to manage task and they still haven't nailed it...

Quote:

The amazing thing about Google's successes is that they don't appear remarkable, they just appear inevitable. Products like Maps, Gmail and Google Now, the astounding success of Android, the increasing success of Chromebooks after some disappointing results don't look amazing, they just look like natural evolution of where computing is going.

>>> If I remember well the new version of Maps was not that welcomed. Increasing success of chromebooks... well I'm still waiting to see people with those. Computing is not going there right now. I see more laptop/tablet hybrid machines than cloud based computers

Quote:

They aren't. They wouldn't exist without Google's continuous innovation. Google remade the market more than any other company and made it look easy and simple. It isn't.

>>> What market ?

Quote:

Inbox is a trial balloon, sure. It's not a mainstream product, not for everyday. It's a shot into the future.

Will today's Inbox product be the platform of the future? Probably not.

But will concepts trialled and pioneered in Inbox become part of the simple, ubiquitous computing landscape of tomorrow? Probably.

>>> But what does it bring really ? It' s not a Google shot to snooze email. they did not invent it. Threads and labels may be coming from Google, but that was 10 years ago

Quote:

That's what happened with Wave. The product didn't continue, but ideas developed in creating it did.

Google are the people showing us how things work, how they just work, not you. You can choose not to use Google products and services, that is absolutely your choice. The market will decide the winner, slowly, over time, shaped by the choices of millions of consumers.

>>> The market and the general adoption does not mean this is a good product. Again Windows 95 had 95% marketshare

Quote:

In 2014, though, it is clear that Google is pretty damn good at creating winners.

>>> Like... ?

Quote:

Google has become ubiquitous and easy, even in a very competitive landscape.

Part of that is failing well, attempting the new and very different and learning from that. Part of that is incredible smarts and part persistence.

Is Google perfect? Far from it. They are just smart and good with an incredible commitment to enhancing the user experience, for consumers, for the world, and for Google's bottom line.

>>> If you had tried Google Inbox and followed the evolution of Gmail since 2004 you'd know that the user experience has clearly not been enhanced over time

kaptitsky · 30 Oct 2014, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

I gave up my GMail account a long, long, time ago, but am thinking of going back. I really miss the ability to create custom Google maps, And also would like to be able to check out the new 'Inbox' feature.

For me, this quote is more telling than someone cherry picking a few points to try and refute. For example, calling Windows 95 a failure is just silly Windows still has 92% of desktop market share, though that market is shrinking.

David walked away from Google for his own reasons, but now finds the products compelling enough to draw him back.

No amount of arm waving about how Google is crap can change that direction.

Is it easy to pick at where Google has not succeeded? Yes. Does that tell us much without understanding where they have succeeded? No. It warps perspective rather than giving it.

Your arguments, though, seem based in doctrine and not in pragmatics.

Inbox has good and bad bits, I am sure. Did you find any good ones? Or is Google just all bad now?

guillaume · 30 Oct 2014, 09:05 PM

As I said, I like the Snooze feature. Until now one had to install a dedicated extension for Chrome or Firefox. The native support is interesting to me.

But if we are honest, this is not an idea from Google. threaded message and labels were indeed new in 2004

I like the ability to create tasks and set up a reminder right from the Inbox
But why should it be half baked and not sync with other task-oriented services offered by Google ?

Apart from those two features, Inbox looks like a step backward to me. The auto-categorizing feature works bad for me. And again, that not new. AOL tried this with Alto Mail. And it does not differ much from labels + filters.

I'm not gonna go over it all again but how does randomly mixing up email with random categories and removing the timestamps help me dealing with my email ? I mean, this is an honest question.

I believe Google was indeed "disruptive" in the past and helped push forward the Web 2.0. But that was back in 2006-2007.

And i'm only talking about one product, not about privacy issues or their commercial practices which are other subjects...

William9 · 31 Oct 2014, 12:19 AM

Here is a review of Inbox published in PC Magazine.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0%2c28...70955%2c00.asp

guillaume · 31 Oct 2014, 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by William9

Here is a review of Inbox published in PC Magazine.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0%2c28...70955%2c00.asp

Guess the bottom line is quite clear

"If your email is in dire need of help, the invite-only Inbox for Gmail app could be a breath of fresh air, helping you get your inbox back on track. Savvy email users, however, will find this app likely repeats functionality of their existing system."

This does not answer the needs of heavy email users, those that Google actually targets with Inbox

Pfolson · 31 Oct 2014, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guillaume

labels were indeed new in 2004

Actually, in the interests of historical accuracy, Opera's M2 e-mail client introduced the concept of a single mail database viewed through multiple labels (or as they called them at the time, "access points") more than a year before Gmail arrived on the scene. Gmail may have brought the label concept to the mass market, but many of us M2 users recognized and understood it immediately, because we'd already been using it for a long time.

rockman · 26 Nov 2014, 02:26 AM

Meh. Fail.

Inky does a much better job if you are into a fancy inbox sorter.
http://inky.com/

rockman · 26 Nov 2014, 02:27 AM

Outlook.com is the new, free killer webmail.

janusz · 26 Nov 2014, 03:01 AM

New? It's been around for over a year... As to being a killer, it's a matter of opinion.

kaptitsky · 18 Apr 2015, 04:45 AM

"Because you use categories (like Social and Promotions) you are invited to try the new Inbox app from Google."

Just got that message in my Gmail app on Android.

I'm not all that excited to use it, but interesting to know that invitations are still being spawned and to have a hint of the criteria being used.

30 Oct 2014, 12:25 PM	#16
kaptitsky The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,186	I read the three dot button as Options on Android and so when I see the screen shot, I know that the lower button refers to options for that bit of mail and the upper button is options for the inbox or folder in general. It's the same as right clicking in Windows to bring up a context menu; the menu will always be different depending on the object selected, but it is a consistent way to bring up actions that can made made on that object. This notion of context is the only way to simplify user interfaces. You can't just keep adding menu options or filling the screen with buttons. It's OK to hate it, but I haven't seen another model that moves UI forward yet. Have you? It is clear to me from the pitch that the essential function of Inbox is to programmatically assist you in managing large volumes of e-mail. It uses context -- ah, context again -- to decide how to display data, working to learn based on your choices, to get smarter about how to help you. This is, almost by definition, a very intrusive process, letting the system take over the organizing work for you. It demands that you trust the system, that you train the system, that you surrender to the system. For people who don't do their own organizing, they take this as just the way things work. And for people who are ready to give the job to the system, well, they are early adopters, helping develop and mature the system to help those who never organized much in the first place. This is clearly the direction that is so incredibly Googly, moving decision making about presentation and priorities away from the individual and onto the system. It's how they have worked so hard to "make search results relevant" by having the system make choices about what to present and how. It's what the Google Now system does, for example. I have very little doubt that the best work in the world at having the system automatically optimize information management for individuals is being done at Google and is far ahead of my meagre understanding. The problem is that if you are a person who is used to managing their own data, who used to set search results to outrageously high numbers and scan through the results, well, having the system get between you and the data does feel intrusive. I'd love to see Inbox, but I know that I am not the target client for it. I don't get outrageous amounts of mail, don't do conventional and expected business, don't stay logged into one Google account if I can help it, don't really want help. I get a bit annoyed that Google remembers old search results in Maps, for example, places I looked up for a friend and will never use again. I don't like Google Now deciding what my important addresses are and getting them wrong. Google isn't building for me, but they are building for people I support, for people who would like the system to help. I get that. I will never be a person who wants to skin my apps. I loved setting AltaVista results to 200 and didn't care what they looked like. But I know, though, that I am far from a typical user and will never be one. Inbox is a Google attempt to deliver a new way to interact with e-mail using the power of the system to determine context and presentation in a direct and forceful way. It is backed up by extensive user research and conceptual thought, of this I have no doubt, because Google may not always create winners, but they always create considered quality. Inbox isn't for me, but I get the point and am looking forward to seeing it, to see what new things Google knows about how to use the system to determine context, including priorities, to deliver more useful information in an elegant way. Is Inbox intrusive, opaque, non-traditional and odd? Sure. That's what makes it good. Is it counter-intuitive? That's a crap term for interfaces that don't work the way you expect because you refuse to learn them. I believe that it is consistent, which in the end is what makes software usable, even if that consistency is very context driven The world is gonna keep moving forward. If Google thinks that Inbox is a good guess for a direction that computing is going to go, I am excited to see it, because Google is usually right, always includes some brilliance, and is fun to watch. But that's just me. Last edited by kaptitsky : 30 Oct 2014 at 12:35 PM.

30 Oct 2014, 05:49 PM	#18
kaptitsky The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,186	To me, a list of places where Google hasn't yet succeeded is just sour grapes. Does Google always succeed in every attempt? Absolutely not. In areas they consider vital do they keep trying and usually get a good product? Yup. The amazing thing about Google's successes is that they don't appear remarkable, they just appear inevitable. Products like Maps, Gmail and Google Now, the astounding success of Android, the increasing success of Chromebooks after some disappointing results don't look amazing, they just look like natural evolution of where computing is going. They aren't. They wouldn't exist without Google's continuous innovation. Google remade the market more than any other company and made it look easy and simple. It isn't. Inbox is a trial balloon, sure. It's not a mainstream product, not for everyday. It's a shot into the future. Will today's Inbox product be the platform of the future? Probably not. But will concepts trialled and pioneered in Inbox become part of the simple, ubiquitous computing landscape of tomorrow? Probably. That's what happened with Wave. The product didn't continue, but ideas developed in creating it did. Google are the people showing us how things work, how they just work, not you. You can choose not to use Google products and services, that is absolutely your choice. The market will decide the winner, slowly, over time, shaped by the choices of millions of consumers. In 2014, though, it is clear that Google is pretty damn good at creating winners. Google has become ubiquitous and easy, even in a very competitive landscape. Part of that is failing well, attempting the new and very different and learning from that. Part of that is incredible smarts and part persistence. Is Google perfect? Far from it. They are just smart and good with an incredible commitment to enhancing the user experience, for consumers, for the world, and for Google's bottom line. But betting against them in the long run doesn't seem at all a wise choice.

30 Oct 2014, 09:05 PM	#21
guillaume Essential Contributor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Paris, FRANCE Posts: 486	As I said, I like the Snooze feature. Until now one had to install a dedicated extension for Chrome or Firefox. The native support is interesting to me. But if we are honest, this is not an idea from Google. threaded message and labels were indeed new in 2004 I like the ability to create tasks and set up a reminder right from the Inbox But why should it be half baked and not sync with other task-oriented services offered by Google ? Apart from those two features, Inbox looks like a step backward to me. The auto-categorizing feature works bad for me. And again, that not new. AOL tried this with Alto Mail. And it does not differ much from labels + filters. I'm not gonna go over it all again but how does randomly mixing up email with random categories and removing the timestamps help me dealing with my email ? I mean, this is an honest question. I believe Google was indeed "disruptive" in the past and helped push forward the Web 2.0. But that was back in 2006-2007. And i'm only talking about one product, not about privacy issues or their commercial practices which are other subjects...

31 Oct 2014, 12:19 AM	#22
William9 The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: San Francisco Posts: 2,281	Here is a review of Inbox published in PC Magazine. http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0%2c28...70955%2c00.asp

26 Nov 2014, 02:26 AM	#25
rockman Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Seattle Posts: 115	Meh. Fail. Inky does a much better job if you are into a fancy inbox sorter. http://inky.com/

26 Nov 2014, 02:27 AM	#26
rockman Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Seattle Posts: 115	Outlook.com is the new, free killer webmail.

26 Nov 2014, 03:01 AM	#27
janusz The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: EU Posts: 4,944	New? It's been around for over a year... As to being a killer, it's a matter of opinion.

18 Apr 2015, 04:45 AM	#28
kaptitsky The "e" in e-mail Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,186	"Because you use categories (like Social and Promotions) you are invited to try the new Inbox app from Google." Just got that message in my Gmail app on Android. I'm not all that excited to use it, but interesting to know that invitations are still being spawned and to have a hint of the criteria being used.