"Then demonstrate that by showing that you DO actually grok how gmail works and have made a conscious decision based on that fact and still want it the outlook way. That would be a different case however."
I don't particularly like Outlook, but I've used Yahoo mail AND Gmail together for (what is it) a couple of years now? I prefer the organization in Yahoo.
"I never really liked email much. Pain in the ass to organize and keep track of. Along comes Google with this innovative way of organizing everything and *gasp* all of the sudden email becomes useful to me."
And to me, they came along and made email LESS useful with their jumbled "lost in a black hole" inbox and silly extra steps to set the "subject". But hey, at least the spam filter CANNOT BE BEAT!
"To each their own"
....exactly...
"and amazingly, GMail does it all."
Except allow for preferred/standard email organization as a user-selectible OPTION.
"My god, I can't believe how many people just can't figure this out."
Ever think that this might be because so many others have different preferences of how an email system should work? That they have "figured it out" but just don't prefer doing it the same way you do?
"There is nothing to 'fix', except how you view email."
A feature to be able to view email in the preferred way sure would be nice, even if it is not technically a "fix" for a bug.
"Is email simply a chronoligical list of snippits of information?"
That's the way I'd like it to work, yes.
"Maybe email can be more than you allow it to be, if you were to just let it do so."
Sorry, I think apps should serve the users, rather than users be forced to deal with limitations of apps because of some "moral" decision by a designer, and I dislike the random clumps of emails that Gmail chooses to group things into against my will. There's also the glitch of having to click an extra button just to change the subject (which better email programs let you do without an extra step, even lowly Hotmail).
"My god, I can't believe how many people just can't figure this out."
I figured it out. I just don't like it. I rely on the "Search Mail" button almost exclusively when I use gmail, rather than the random jumble in the inbox listing.
"Take a second, look at your emails in google. Now, take a close look at the messages that are grouped together...oh look! It's actually a series of replies, IE: A CONVERSATION"
No, it's just a broken-up group of clumps of emails. The "conversation" thing only works so-so. Gmail decided to break up an email exchange I had with someone into four different "conversation" clumps using who knows what criteria.
"GMail is not broken"
It's not broken. It's just missing a feature. I search and could not find the simple "Options" setting to make it organize email in the standard, more useful way. That feature would help it a lot: let the user decide which way to do it.
"Remember trying to piece back together an actual conversation? No, of course not, because it's all but impossible."
I'd rather look at my emails mainly through the dates they came in on. It's not a bad design decision. The best email program would allow users to choose which way they want to go, rather than force someone's subjective preference on all.
"Now take a look at GMail again. Take 30 seconds to actually 'see' what's going on. Once it clicks, you'll never go back."
I've used it ever since it was launched. I "see" what is going on with the incomplete/buggy grouping into "conversations" even if I do not want them grouped that way in the first place. I've gone back.
Both are examples of data that there is no good reason to retain.
"Perhaps because that's useful data that they can use to turn their results and make their product more useful?"
You mean in the same way spyware and Adclick cookies are "useful"? Can you name any good reason to have this data correlated to real identifiable persons?
"However, the problem is not with Google or libraries -- the problem is with a society that assumes search results and the books you read are "evidence" in a court of law."
The problem is with Google and the libraries, not the courts of law. If they did not retain personally-identifiable information that there is no good reason to retain, the courts would have nothing to dig for.
"Once you get used to it, and realize that's the way it should have been ALL ALONG, you're off to the races."
I've been using it for quite a while now, and I still do not like it compared to normal email organization. Unfortunately, I could not this morning find a way in the settings to 'fix' Gmail either. It's a matter of preference. I would not say that either way is "the way it should have been all along" for everyone.
"and tried in the court of public opinion with no regard to any formal legal process"
There's no formal legal process (or even a trial) in the "court of public opinion" because this "court" really is not a "court" at all. All it is is individuals making up their own mind and expressing their opinion as is their right. No court? Yes. No trial, conviction, sentencing, or punishment either. No jail time, no fines.
" that he has the ability to stand up and say "give this man a fair trial, unlike what was done for me." says an awful lot about his character and faith in the legal system"
Or it says he is a smooth-talking politician (which he actually is) who knows to say the thing that will give the best image to the public.
"That would explain this huge pod [about.com] which formed off of Wales (no pun, there, really). Obviously, they're forming a class action suit."
When Apple wins the suit against the whales, they are going to have to extract payment somehow, and we know whales have no money. Apple's going to have no good idea of what to do with their unique lawsuit winnings, so we can look forward to getting a free bonus tub 'o' blubber with each Mac Mini purchase once the lawsuit is settled.
It's still not all revealed. How could this guy get into and spend time in the Ramsey house at Christmas time without the Ramsey parents knowing about it. And if they did know about it, why did they never mention this houseguest to police? Something is still incomplete here, but the way things are going this too might be answered in days or even hours.
....but there is going to be hell to pay once their server farm of Vic-20s sends all those viruses through Fidonet at 300 baud in order to bring America's SychroNET and C-NET C64 BBS user base to its knees.
"No one wants to change their email address from @yahoo to @gmail because its a hassle."
I have both and prefer Yahoo. This is because of the default settings (mail organization in Yahoo is a lot nicer than in Gmail). The preference might change if I bothered to find the settings in Gmail so it wouldn't be bogged down by the odd dis-organization of the messages.
"Windows Live Mail seems like someone tried to take Outlook and GMail and just mash the two of them together. However, Microsoft has still dropped the ball in making it easy to work with. For anyone who is part of the beta just try and delete multiple mails at the same time"
Exactly! I stopped beta-testing it because they made it so difficult to delete the spams. In the regular hotmail, you can tag-check the spams in your inbox quickly and then delete the tagged ones. In "Live", you have to right-click all of them and then left-click the "Delete" button which is too close to the "Print" button so you end up accidentally printing spams instead of deleting them. Of course, if Microsoft/Hotmail were to ever bother to put a spam filter in place, this would be much less of a problem.
They're already evil. Why else would they be retaining personally-identifiable search information? So far, they've refused to divulge it. But a change in company policy or a court-order could change that. (It's like the library information controversy in the PATRIOT Act arguments: once you've returned the books, why should the library retain any sort of record of your past book checkouts AT ALL????)
"Gmail is by far my favorite web-based email client"
It filters pretty well. I'd like it even more if I could find the obscure settings to make it work in a more useful fashion (all emails in date order with no odd groupings, and the ability to easily change the Subject without digging for it: you know, the easier standard way for email to work).
Where I draw the line was that he was never charged with it. AWOL is a specific crime, and he was never charged or accused and he even concluded his service with honorable discharge. Perhaps he should have been charged with it, but he wasn't. It's not like, say, his DUI, which is a complete matter of record.
Slashdot Mirror
And all the quality that Chinese tech-firms are known for.
"Then demonstrate that by showing that you DO actually grok how gmail works and have made a conscious decision based on that fact and still want it the outlook way. That would be a different case however."
I don't particularly like Outlook, but I've used Yahoo mail AND Gmail together for (what is it) a couple of years now? I prefer the organization in Yahoo.
"I would also like to know how they are controlling the spin in every possible direction"
They've either contracted with him or James Carville.
Definition of politician:
a) One who is actively involved in politics, especially party politics.
b) One who holds or seeks a political office.
"What elected office did John Ramsey ever hold, and where?"
He ran for a state legislative seat just a few years ago, as an active and involved Republican.
"Has he done you some personal injury?"
Sorry, I did not know that "politician" was a grievous insult.
"I never really liked email much. Pain in the ass to organize and keep track of. Along comes Google with this innovative way of organizing everything and *gasp* all of the sudden email becomes useful to me."
....exactly...
And to me, they came along and made email LESS useful with their jumbled "lost in a black hole" inbox and silly extra steps to set the "subject". But hey, at least the spam filter CANNOT BE BEAT!
"To each their own"
"and amazingly, GMail does it all."
Except allow for preferred/standard email organization as a user-selectible OPTION.
"Yes, you don't understand it."
....I guess that is one reason I prefer other email clients/systems where you don't HAVE to do this to get it to work well.
It is clear that he understands it, but does not like the organization.
"Archive everything to keep your Inbox clear."
"My god, I can't believe how many people just can't figure this out."
Ever think that this might be because so many others have different preferences of how an email system should work? That they have "figured it out" but just don't prefer doing it the same way you do?
"There is nothing to 'fix', except how you view email."
A feature to be able to view email in the preferred way sure would be nice, even if it is not technically a "fix" for a bug.
"Is email simply a chronoligical list of snippits of information?"
That's the way I'd like it to work, yes.
"Maybe email can be more than you allow it to be, if you were to just let it do so."
Sorry, I think apps should serve the users, rather than users be forced to deal with limitations of apps because of some "moral" decision by a designer, and I dislike the random clumps of emails that Gmail chooses to group things into against my will. There's also the glitch of having to click an extra button just to change the subject (which better email programs let you do without an extra step, even lowly Hotmail).
"My god, I can't believe how many people just can't figure this out."
I figured it out. I just don't like it. I rely on the "Search Mail" button almost exclusively when I use gmail, rather than the random jumble in the inbox listing.
"Take a second, look at your emails in google. Now, take a close look at the messages that are grouped together...oh look! It's actually a series of replies, IE: A CONVERSATION"
No, it's just a broken-up group of clumps of emails. The "conversation" thing only works so-so. Gmail decided to break up an email exchange I had with someone into four different "conversation" clumps using who knows what criteria.
"GMail is not broken"
It's not broken. It's just missing a feature. I search and could not find the simple "Options" setting to make it organize email in the standard, more useful way. That feature would help it a lot: let the user decide which way to do it.
"Remember trying to piece back together an actual conversation? No, of course not, because it's all but impossible."
I'd rather look at my emails mainly through the dates they came in on. It's not a bad design decision. The best email program would allow users to choose which way they want to go, rather than force someone's subjective preference on all.
"Now take a look at GMail again. Take 30 seconds to actually 'see' what's going on. Once it clicks, you'll never go back."
I've used it ever since it was launched. I "see" what is going on with the incomplete/buggy grouping into "conversations" even if I do not want them grouped that way in the first place. I've gone back.
Both are examples of data that there is no good reason to retain.
"Perhaps because that's useful data that they can use to turn their results and make their product more useful?"
You mean in the same way spyware and Adclick cookies are "useful"? Can you name any good reason to have this data correlated to real identifiable persons?
"However, the problem is not with Google or libraries -- the problem is with a society that assumes search results and the books you read are "evidence" in a court of law."
The problem is with Google and the libraries, not the courts of law. If they did not retain personally-identifiable information that there is no good reason to retain, the courts would have nothing to dig for.
"Once you get used to it, and realize that's the way it should have been ALL ALONG, you're off to the races."
I've been using it for quite a while now, and I still do not like it compared to normal email organization. Unfortunately, I could not this morning find a way in the settings to 'fix' Gmail either. It's a matter of preference. I would not say that either way is "the way it should have been all along" for everyone.
"The Ramseys were smeared by the media as guilty"
Do you have any sources for this? Which media are you referring to?
"and tried in the court of public opinion with no regard to any formal legal process"
There's no formal legal process (or even a trial) in the "court of public opinion" because this "court" really is not a "court" at all. All it is is individuals making up their own mind and expressing their opinion as is their right. No court? Yes. No trial, conviction, sentencing, or punishment either. No jail time, no fines.
" that he has the ability to stand up and say "give this man a fair trial, unlike what was done for me." says an awful lot about his character and faith in the legal system"
Or it says he is a smooth-talking politician (which he actually is) who knows to say the thing that will give the best image to the public.
"That would explain this huge pod [about.com] which formed off of Wales (no pun, there, really). Obviously, they're forming a class action suit."
When Apple wins the suit against the whales, they are going to have to extract payment somehow, and we know whales have no money. Apple's going to have no good idea of what to do with their unique lawsuit winnings, so we can look forward to getting a free bonus tub 'o' blubber with each Mac Mini purchase once the lawsuit is settled.
"Pheasants (which originate in Asia) are better eating [uplandlife.com]"
I think you have an imperfect translation of Mao's little red book there. He was actually referring to how tasty peasants were.
"Token-Ringneck network topography."
Gollum must have been the ultimate pencil-necked geek if he could wear the One Ring around his neck!
"Ask the parents of JonBenet Ramsey"
It's still not all revealed. How could this guy get into and spend time in the Ramsey house at Christmas time without the Ramsey parents knowing about it. And if they did know about it, why did they never mention this houseguest to police? Something is still incomplete here, but the way things are going this too might be answered in days or even hours.
....but there is going to be hell to pay once their server farm of Vic-20s sends all those viruses through Fidonet at 300 baud in order to bring America's SychroNET and C-NET C64 BBS user base to its knees.
"No one wants to change their email address from @yahoo to @gmail because its a hassle."
I have both and prefer Yahoo. This is because of the default settings (mail organization in Yahoo is a lot nicer than in Gmail). The preference might change if I bothered to find the settings in Gmail so it wouldn't be bogged down by the odd dis-organization of the messages.
"Windows Live Mail seems like someone tried to take Outlook and GMail and just mash the two of them together. However, Microsoft has still dropped the ball in making it easy to work with. For anyone who is part of the beta just try and delete multiple mails at the same time"
Exactly! I stopped beta-testing it because they made it so difficult to delete the spams. In the regular hotmail, you can tag-check the spams in your inbox quickly and then delete the tagged ones. In "Live", you have to right-click all of them and then left-click the "Delete" button which is too close to the "Print" button so you end up accidentally printing spams instead of deleting them. Of course, if Microsoft/Hotmail were to ever bother to put a spam filter in place, this would be much less of a problem.
"but that would be sort of evil."
They're already evil. Why else would they be retaining personally-identifiable search information? So far, they've refused to divulge it. But a change in company policy or a court-order could change that. (It's like the library information controversy in the PATRIOT Act arguments: once you've returned the books, why should the library retain any sort of record of your past book checkouts AT ALL????)
"Gmail is by far my favorite web-based email client"
It filters pretty well. I'd like it even more if I could find the obscure settings to make it work in a more useful fashion (all emails in date order with no odd groupings, and the ability to easily change the Subject without digging for it: you know, the easier standard way for email to work).
"Show me a microbiologist who can help if sth. is out of control"
A microbiologist dealing with the sth threat had better be well-versed in midichlorians.
It'll never be too soon to apply the slashdot moderation system to the patent system and everything else.
"Things will all go smoothly until Matthew McConaughey demands to know whether the candidates believe in God."
You surprised me. I fully expected Bruce Willis or Pauly Shore ("Biodome") to show up in this item before MacConnaughey!
Where I draw the line was that he was never charged with it. AWOL is a specific crime, and he was never charged or accused and he even concluded his service with honorable discharge. Perhaps he should have been charged with it, but he wasn't. It's not like, say, his DUI, which is a complete matter of record.