Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Looks At Integrating Forums and E-mail

prostoalex writes "Scott Hanselman shares a document from Microsoft Research internal Web site on Gina Venolia's latest research in user interface design. Since half of the e-mail conversations require reply and then further replies, the model is not too different from current Web forums. Future Outlook versions might integrate the nested interface for e-mail conversations." Gotta say, that'd be pretty nice to have.

5 of 462 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Outlook already does this by YU+Nicks+NE+Way · · Score: 4, Interesting

    No, it isn't just silly.

    If you've ever been in a long multi-person thread, you know that writers will sometimes respond to more than one message in a single response. More than that, they're change the subject when the subject of their particular message is different from the rest of the conversation. This makes their e-mails more effective at communicating with the other people involved.

    More than that, this research has applications to recognizing the relationship among different mails in my inbox without being limited to the things which a computer can recognize with simple pattern matching. That's useful: searching my mail store is a huge chore unless I know exactly what I'm looking for. Unfortunately, I need to search precisely when I only remember the general outlines of a conversation.

  2. Moderation & Controls by chadjg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Ithink that the "invitation only" part of this might be a bit deceptive. How do you ignore somebody that works a couple of cubes down? God knows you have to ignore most people in chat rooms and nearly all of them on usenet.

    Maybe if Microsoft built a user adjustable moderation system, with some meta-supervision built in it would be easier to gracefully ignore the office yahoo. Something tells me that they may have to spend a couple of bucks for a license to this, I think I've seen it before.

    Some kind of control is essential, I think. I half remember a .sig somewhere about usenet being in aspect and product like a panicked herd of circus elephants.

    I think this could be great, but I hope they think about it before they do it. Having most of the world's emailers with acess to a slashdot would be a freaking disaster.

    --
    Why do I have this? I don't smoke.
  3. Re:Why has this taken so long? by Bazzargh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not sure if MS aren't talking about something different from what most of this discussion thinks they are. Rather than showing the thread of discussion of whole emails (which we're all used to in other clients) it might be they mean something more like this old discussion of what e-mail discussions should look like by Ka Ping-Yee..

    In case you manage to /. that, the idea is that it shows the responses to pieces of your email - the kind where someone says "see my responses inline" and responds to each of your points piecemeal, then you do the same to their responses, and so on.

    I've often thought it would be cool to write something to parse emails the KPY way, but the heuristics would have to be pretty damn clever to deal with supercite. Specifically what I wanted was something that combined KPY's ideas with text-autosummarization , and some 'author ranking' information to produce mailing list summaries from gmane which are like Kernel Traffic and Cousins, or the now-defunct Eclectic.

    Oh well, I can always wait until MS put this in Outlook 2010 ;)

  4. Re:As I suspected... by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Problem: doing this requires first solving the natural-language parsing problem. We're on our third generation of linguistics PhDs who can't find a solution to that problem, I don't think one researcher at MS has managed it, and without that breakthrough we're left with a simple threaded view again.

  5. shocking, given what they just did to hotmail by avi33 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's remarkable what they just did to make hotmail unusable:

    1. You can no longer open your messages in another window, (to have them load in the background).
    2. Once you open a message, you have to read the remaining ones in order.
    3. Once you reply, you need to advance through a confirmation screen, then click to get back to the main menu, where you have to start this nonsense all over again.

    All because they now force you to use javascript to view a message, in effect taking away certain web features (the ability to spawn multiple windows, load in the background) and turned it into a single-interface client...one that inherently takes SEVERAL SECONDS to get from one screen to another. I realize that some of this is to drive more ad views, but they've done this sort of thing before without doubling or tripling the effort required to read mail.

    hm, limiting functionality, slower response times? Sound like par-for-the-course MS improvements to me.

    It's finally enough to make me kill that address, which is annoying since I've had it since before the MS 'occupation.'