Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Yahoo To Update Mail Service

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 9 years ago | from the see-capitalism-is-a-good-thing dept.

Businesses 302

tonyq writes "Yahoo! is beginning beta testing of a completely reworked UI for Yahoo! Mail that incorporates DHTML technologies. The web-based application resembles a desktop e-mail client. Features include message preview; drag-and-drop filing; the capability of quickly searching e-mail headers, body text and attachments; and the ability to view multiple e-mails at the same time in separate windows and scroll through all message headers in a folder rather than one page at a time. Other niceties are auto-complete, right-click menus and standard keyboard shortcuts. A user who got an early look has graciously posted screenshots. Yahoo is also taking signups on their what's new for Mail page."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yawnhoo (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13561993)

Google cures cancer, while Yahoo offers a new band-aid shape.

Re:Yawnhoo (-1, Offtopic)

TRIEventHorizon (744457) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562327)

Who gives a shit about yahoo!

How about some real news: Delta Airlines and Northwest Airlines FILE FOR BANKRUPTCY!!!

It looks impressive (5, Interesting)

madstork2000 (143169) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562000)

I saw the new interface when my cousin, who works for yahoo was visiting. He was borrowing a computer, and I looked up and saw what I thought was Outlook Express. I went over to tell him the virtues of Firefox, when I realized what I saw was really an impressive browser based mail client.

This was back in early August, he said employees had been using it for a while, but it was hush-hush. He seemed pretty sheepish about it, and made me promise not to post on Slashdot, apparently yahoo wanted it under wraps for as long as possible.

He did give me the dog and pony show, and I must say that it really is a pretty slick application. Though I did not get to really test it, just watched him walk through it.

I own a small hosting company,and wanted to see what web-based mail clients were out there that I could use for my customers. Squirelmail and TWIG looked pretty ugly in comparison. Incidently I found an open source mail client that has a lot of similar functions: Round Cube I haveinstalled that and it is almost as impressive. [roundcube.net]

Anyway, it is amzing how far web applications have come in such a short period.

-MS2k

Re:It looks impressive (0, Flamebait)

vigyanik (781631) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562074)

What has firefox got to do with outlook express? Are you referring to Thunderbird? I lost you some where between "web-based mail" and "installed"

Re:It looks impressive (5, Informative)

Elwood P Dowd (16933) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562150)

I lost you some where between "web-based mail" and "installed"
He installed it on his web host, smart guy.

Re:It looks impressive (1)

madstork2000 (143169) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562367)

Whoops, I did mean Thunderbird....

Re:It looks impressive (5, Funny)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562140)

Squirelmail [. . .] looked pretty ugly in comparison.


Hey! Don't call my baby ugly!

-Peter
Former SquirrelMail "Head Nut"

PS: It's spelled with StudlyCaps.

Re:It looks impressive (1)

madstork2000 (143169) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562413)

Some babies have faces only a mother could love :)

Seriously, though thank you for SquirellMail. It along with TWIG, and Iloha mail have been open source staples for my clients for a long time.

In many cases these mail clients were the first direct exposure (hands on) that those users had to open source software. I have many users insist upon using SquirrellMail as their sole email application.

Thanks again,
Brandon

Re:It looks impressive (2, Insightful)

Seumas (6865) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562195)

Yeah, I'm going to trust my email and privacy to a company that worked with the Chinese government to imprison a journalist for a decade.

if you were really that concerned (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562353)

you wouldn't be using some free web-based service to begin with.

but i forgot this is slashdot and some virgin comic book fan thinks people actually care to read his e-mail of linux mailing lists.

Re:It looks impressive (0, Troll)

carlivar (119811) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562370)

You're right, Yahoo should refuse all requests from the Chinese government and ignore the soon-to-be largest Internet users in the world (since the government would kick them out). In fact they should pump their money into a Chinese revolution towards true freedom.

Oh, wait, no one does that, not even the "do no evil" Google. I wonder how Google operates in China at all without doing evil, given that some might argue any support of the country is evil?

Re:It looks impressive (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562415)

You have a good point! Yahoo China should operate by US law! In fact everywhere should operate by US law! Go USA!!!

Sorry about the sarcasm. I suppose you could live in China and have a legitimate concern.

Re:It looks impressive (5, Funny)

uberchicken (121048) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562199)

> He seemed pretty sheepish about it, and made me promise not to post on Slashdot

You're claiming some kind of twisted "first post" aren't you.

Round Cube requires MySQL (1)

doorbot.com (184378) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562256)

Incidently I found an open source mail client that has a lot of similar functions: Round Cube I have installed that and it is almost as impressive

It looks pretty nice, but I am just surprised it requires MySQL. Is that for storing configs? SquirrelMail works without MySQL and it manages to save my configs just fine.

I'm definitely happy with SquirrelMail; I wish I was a real web developer as I could do something useful towards Async Javascript integration into SM.

I've heard, however, that SM1.5 has a much better templating engine which should make for easier integration of DHTML/AJ goodies.

Re:It looks impressive (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562284)

Does this new interface make it easier for Yahoo! to turn Chinese dissadents over to the government for immediate torture? That's an important feature!

Re:It looks impressive (1)

wyatt12 (462857) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562339)

Hi,

I too own a small web hosting company. I just send my users to http://www.myemail.com/ [myemail.com] They provide a gmail/yahoo interface that allows users to not only check their pop3/imap accounts, but also store 1GB of emails for free. They have google advertisements within their interface, but very minimal advertising. The interface is extremely light yet very functional with address book, etc.

Wyatt

Wyatt

No Achievement Erases Disgrace (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562354)

Despite all of Yahoo!'s efforts, they do not erase the disgraceful acts of its management, including Jerry Yang [latimes.com] . He and his company acted as an extension of the brutal Chinese secret-police apparatus (according to Reporters Without Borders) in assisting Beijing to arrest and imprison (for 10 years) a reporter.

A dedicated group of computer professionals is now boycotting Yahoo!.

Argh. (4, Interesting)

DrEldarion (114072) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562012)

I hope this new interface is optional. Part of the reason I've been using Yahoo Mail for so long was BECAUSE of its very simple and straightforward interface. Taking that away removes yet another reason to stay with them instead of finally letting go.

Re:Argh. (2, Informative)

tonyquan (758115) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562067)

yes, the new interface is optional and you can switch back and forth between old and new.

The new interface is optional (3, Informative)

brianerst (549609) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562072)

According to this [com.com] article, the new interface is optional. You can actually switch between the two interfaces.

Re:Argh. (2, Interesting)

superspaz (902023) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562131)

At a glance, it doesn't seem to innovate, just cherrypicks features of other mail clients. Truthfully it looks like a cross between msn and outlook with a search my messages box.

I'm so sorry (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562013)

Second post

Invite (5, Funny)

karvind (833059) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562017)

Does anyone have invites ? :)

Re:Invite (1)

TwoTailedFox (894904) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562259)

Sign up for a Normal Yahoo Acount, and then fill out the Beta test. I'm a UK Resident, and I've had a Yahoo.com email account for years now, so it appears to have been accepted. Time will tell.

Slashdot Needs To Update Too (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562018)

I mean, cmon, this page is still boasting the same crappy HTML code and layout from 1997, when it looked shitty even back then.

I know this site is supposed to to be moving to CSS soon, but the layout will remain the same. They really need to update this site, and for God's sake please hire some designers who aren't color blind!! Shit-brown and piss-yellow color schemes aren't pleasing to the eye.

Technologies (-1, Offtopic)

alext (29323) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562023)

It's not a bug it's a technology.

Still no encryption? (5, Insightful)

Catamaran (106796) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562030)

I might switch back to yahoo from gmail if they ever allow me to log in encrypted and remain encrypted (I know that I can log in via https, but after that the connection reverts to unencrypted).

Re:Still no encryption? (4, Informative)

temojen (678985) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562156)

If you want worthwhile encryption on your email, use a host based email client that supports GPG. If your email is open to the world as it flies between servers and sits in their caches and spools, it doesn't really matter if it's open to the world as it flies between you and your webmail host.

Re:Still no encryption? (2, Interesting)

Catamaran (106796) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562182)

If your email is open to the world as it flies between servers and sits in their caches and spools, it doesn't really matter if it's open to the world as it flies between you and your webmail host.

It matters that the sys-admins at the company where I work can't read it.

Re:Still no encryption? (1)

temojen (678985) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562262)

They can still read it.





(Unless you take the computer home every night and they never have physical access to it.)

Re:Still no encryption? (1)

Catamaran (106796) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562348)

But they wouldn't know how to read it because my computer runs linux.

Re:Still no encryption? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562410)

But they wouldn't know how to read it because my computer runs linux.

You just keep telling yourself that.

Re:Still no encryption? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562228)

Use http://fastmail.fm/ [fastmail.fm] . The free version has a small inbox, but everything is SSl'd, and there's IMAP support.

BUSH ADMITS FAULT FOR KATRINA DEATH IMPEACHMENT? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562032)


 
  By Bush claiming all responsibility for people dieing in the Katrina aftermath should'nt he be impeached ? President Clinton got impeached for somthing as small as lieing about having sex, where bush has killed hundred of people for his monkey like response to a real disaster.

Please talk about this immidiatly as it should be addressed.

Re:BUSH ADMITS FAULT FOR KATRINA DEATH IMPEACHMENT (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562097)

IGNORE the fact that the president has no duties other than PR in such a disaster, and that state and local authorities are required under the emergeny management plans in place for decades to provide all disaster releif for the first 72 hours, because FEMA knows it will take that long to reach the affected! This can only hurt our cause! Smirchimply McHitlerburton must go down!!!!!!!TWELVE!!!

yahoo's answer to gmail. (4, Interesting)

Brigadier (12956) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562033)



I'm guessing this is Yahoo's answer to gmail. If so where is my 2Gig mail box.

To be honest I think simplicity is paramount there is a reason I don't use outlook. I've found the gmail interface to be almost perfect for my personal back and forth e-mail.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (5, Informative)

winkydink (650484) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562044)

Yahoo doesn't need an answer to Gmail. They have an order of magnitude more users (63.3 mln vs 5.4 mln).

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (2, Interesting)

Brigadier (12956) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562092)



yea didn't netscape use this argument againts microsoft.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (1)

winkydink (650484) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562144)

google lacks an OS to bundle its free email service with.

Different argument.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (2, Insightful)

soft_guy (534437) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562100)

That's right. I've probably signed up 10 or 12 times for Yahoo mail accounts, but I've never even had a GMail invite.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (1, Informative)

winkydink (650484) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562121)

Well, once you get one, you can invite yourself a whole bunch of times and set up 10 or 12 there too.

The numbers represent the number of unique visitors to the email portion of the site each month. RTFA.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (1, Flamebait)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562066)

My Yahoo! mail box is 2 GB.

It has been 2 GB before GMail even existed.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562117)

... difference is gmail is free, MyYahoo's 2G offering was only for paying customers. Also, gmail offers pop access for free, MyYahoo's is, again, only for paying customers.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562250)

But you still can't get GMail without advertisements plastered all over the inbox and the messages.

And Google have always said that they may discontinue pop access without notice. Which isn't going to happen with Yahoo since it's a paid service.

So I guess it's like most things - you get what you pay for. I'm quite happy to pay for Yahoo mail ($19 a *year*), as it's a convenient way to handle my email.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (1)

rolfwind (528248) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562148)

Then you must have a paid annual subscription to a mailbox - before GMail my biggest free account was only 100MB (had many yahoo accounts, they seemed to increase some mailboxes' size with age or something for loyal 'customers').

Switched back in June. Right now, I still like GMail just for the "conversation" feature which keeps my mailbox from being cluttered with "re:re:re:adinfinity" crap. I'm probably gonna stick with it unless Yahoo really comes out with something killer.

Yahoo 2Gig account = $19.99/yr =! free (1, Informative)

Brigadier (12956) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562193)



Get more control and more capacity. Mail Plus includes virus protection from Norton AntiVirus, personalized spam filtering with SpamGuard Plus, no graphical ads, POP access, 20MB message size, virtually unlimited storage 2GB and more. Learn more.

                Give your email that personal touch with mail made just for
you get you@your-name.com or any other address that is available! Personal Address includes your own domain and five different email addresses that you can assign to anyone you'd like. Learn more.

only $19.99/year
less than $2/month

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (1)

bjbyrne (28514) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562287)

My gmail account is at 2594MB and growing every day.

Re:yahoo's answer to gmail. (1)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562351)

I'm guessing this is Yahoo's answer to gmail. If so where is my 2Gig mail box.

With all the features Gmail like POP3 has for free, is a mailbox over 1 GB all you're looking for?

blah! (0, Offtopic)

SARSpatient (679467) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562042)

Without user created chat rooms, it's nuthin'.

Re:blah! (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562076)

Without user created chat rooms, it's nuthin'.

You already get that with Yahoo! Messenger. I've done long-distance web chat with tallgirl in NYC and I live in Seattle, including the webcam traffic, and all over a basic 11b/g wireless setup (and she's on - get this - DIALUP!!!)

Who needs chat rooms when you already have it?

Beta-test is US only (4, Informative)

RonnyJ (651856) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562048)

Yahoo is also taking signups on their what's new for Mail page.

Unfortunately for a great number of people (including me) who don't live in America, the page states 'The beta version is only available to Yahoo! Mail users in the U.S.'.

Re:Beta-test is US only (1)

Werkhaus (549466) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562090)

>Unfortunately for a great number of people (including me) who don't live in America, the page states 'The beta version is only available to Yahoo! Mail users in the U.S.'

It's available if you are an Oddpost account holder. I signed up for Oddpost a couple of months before they were bought out and received my invite for the Yahoo beta a couple of days ago.

The contacts upgrade and mailto look good (-1, Redundant)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562052)

I for one would be willing to switch to it just for that extra capability.

Mind you, I've got something like ten email accounts.

No plaintext protocols for login, please (2, Insightful)

gdav (2540) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562054)

Or, for that matter, for my data.

Why do any webmail services still use unencrypted http? I'd be quite glad to see nothing but https on any services that I log in to.

Re:No plaintext protocols for login, please (5, Insightful)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562218)

Why do any webmail services still use unencrypted http?

Have you forgotten that typical emails will pass between a number of hosts unencrypted as it is being delivered? Where's the advantage in encrypting the last leg of the journey if none of the others are encrypted?

Re:No plaintext protocols for login, please (1)

temojen (678985) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562219)

Because your mail is still unencrypted on their disk and when travelling between servers.

If you want confidentiality, authentication, and non-repudiation, use GPG and a host based email client. If you want a throw away account for signing up to web forums and personals sites, use webmail services.

(But I think they should be using TLS for the login stage of webmail services)

Re:No plaintext protocols for login, please (4, Interesting)

dragonman97 (185927) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562368)

Actually, I read a bunch of the YoSucker(..sf.net) source code awhile ago, and as far as I could tell, Yahoo! apparently did Javascript hashing (~MD5) of your password before sending it over HTTP, with some kind of session negotiation/salt done before the form submission page. I thought that was pretty damn cool. Personally, I always hit "Shift-tab, 'sec [enter]" in Firefox before ever logging into Yahoo! mail, but I think you stand a bit more of a chance with security on their site than others.

Technology (0, Offtopic)

shawb (16347) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562061)

Does it bother anyone else that an article with the headline Britney Spears gives birth to baby boy [yahoo.com] is listed under technology news?

Re:Technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562113)

im sure they used a sonogram or something tech. why isint that posted on slashdot?

Re:Technology (0, Offtopic)

lunartik (94926) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562154)

Does it bother anyone else that an article with the headline Britney Spears gives birth to baby boy is listed under technology news?

We can rebuild her. We have the technology.

Re:Technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562387)

Does it bother anyone else that an article with the headline Britney Spears gives birth to baby boy [yahoo.com] is listed under technology news?

Nope ... but it bothers the hell out of me that she's getting a C-Section.

...and it takes 30 seconds to load the javascript (4, Funny)

Serveert (102805) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562075)

in order to read your 14 character "buy viagra now" spam message.

Get in line, folks.

Zimbra's offering is very similar to Yahoo's (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562084)

This new company called Zimbra launched a few days ago a web-based email application that looks very similar to Yahoo's new mail service.

I guess it sucks to be them (Zimbra) now. They thought they created a very innovative email app.

Some screenshots:
http://www.zimbra.com/screenshots/ [zimbra.com]

Looks Great, but... (2, Insightful)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562095)

Where are the ads? This is Yahoo and they need to generate revenue. I don't like Yahoo mail because of all the ads in the current incarnation. I think this is probably a bit deceptive. There's gotta be ads in there somewhere, lots of them.

Any good IMAP services? (0)

Eunuch (844280) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562104)

Does yahoo do IMAP? I'm settling on either mac.com or fusemail. All others seem to have bandwidth limits or are lame. For-pay is fine (actually preffered).

Re:Any good IMAP services? (1)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562239)

AOL's free webmail [aol.com] is available through IMAP as well.

Yahoo vs GMail (1)

Saiyine (689367) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562107)


Ah, the good ol' competition. What the Google answer will be?

--
Superb hosting [dreamhost.com] 4800MB Storage, 120GB bandwidth, $7,95.
Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).

I just hope (2, Interesting)

blue_adept (40915) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562111)

I just hope that it still works if you turn off your javacript!! IE I hope they still serve a non-DHTML version for old browsers and/or custom crawlers/userAgents.

Coral link (3, Informative)

fejikso (567395) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562125)

The server is beginning to be sluggish...

Try the snappy Coral link:
http://patcavit.com.nyud.net:8090/2005/09/14/y-mai l-beta-impressions/ [nyud.net]

Re:Coral link (4, Informative)

TopSpin (753) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562352)

Unfortunately, the images are (not) being served from another server entirely; tivac.com, which is now also slashdotted... Here are the images linked through Coral.

contacts.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
drag.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
nodrag.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
editcontact.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
message.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
resized.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
indent.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
centered.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
rightalign.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
addcontacts.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
colors.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
smilies.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
autocomplete.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
hyperlink.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
hyperlinkoptions.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
writing.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)
confirm.png [nyud.net] (long lines make slashcode happy)

"Bigger" Doesn't Mean "Better" (3, Interesting)

TwoTailedFox (894904) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562126)

Sometimes, aiming to make a UI *too* feature-intensive, can be it's undoing.

Take Gmail. It's clear, concise, and uses Basic HTML to navigate. Frankly, DHTML is just the web-equivalent of "Feature Bloat". Fine, it looks good, and it'll dazzle the users, but it may also overwhelm them, too.

I saw DHTML in practice when Barryworld still existed. The DHTML interface was so slow, and so horrible (Even on a 4MB Line, with Dell Optiplexes), I went back to POP3. I'm hoping Yahoo won't make the same mistakes, and at least offer a more "Streamlined" approach for the users that don't care about bells and whistles.

Re:"Bigger" Doesn't Mean "Better" (1)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562278)

Take Gmail. It's clear, concise, and uses Basic HTML to navigate.

No it doesn't.

Re:"Bigger" Doesn't Mean "Better" (1)

TwoTailedFox (894904) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562307)

Sorry, it uses Javascript too. Can't forget that.

Still, it *is* Clear, and Concise.

Re:"Bigger" Doesn't Mean "Better" (2, Informative)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562337)

Take Gmail. It's clear, concise, and uses Basic HTML to navigate.

The special version provided for older browsers does. But normal GMail certainly doesn't. It's really frustrating to try and open links in new windows only to find that they aren't links at all but some kind of pseudo-link created with spans and onclicks that doesn't work properly.

Google really don't have a clue when it comes to Javascript. Yeah, they come up with good features, but their implementation sucks. For example, it took them two years to fix a relatively simple Javascript security hole in their site, [jibbering.com] which could have allowed phishers to use Google to con people.

Frankly, DHTML is just the web-equivalent of "Feature Bloat".

Er, GMail uses what most people describe as "DHTML". You are saying GMail is better because it doesn't use something that it does, in fact, use.

I saw DHTML in practice when Barryworld still existed. The DHTML interface was so slow, and so horrible (Even on a 4MB Line, with Dell Optiplexes)

You know how GMail is so much faster than most other webmail services? That's because they use DHTML.

You've got some very odd ideas about DHTML. All it is is Javascript that alters the composition of a page. There's nothing inherently slow about DHTML; in fact in many cases, DHTML is used to speed up web applications.

Wow. Tabs for multiple message windows! (3, Informative)

WoTG (610710) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562147)

It's too bad that I've been phasing out my Yahoo email account. Anyone know of an opensource webmail package that is even close to this interface? Squirrelmail is looking a little shabby in comparison.

PS. Screenshots are /.'ed. Try mirrordot or coral cache [nyud.net]

Re:Wow. Tabs for multiple message windows! (1)

rcs1000 (462363) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562288)

Try Horde/IMP.

There are probably others but IMP is great.

Does it have Google-like labels? (5, Interesting)

jvj24601 (178471) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562152)

I use Yahoo for nearly everything (all family events in Calendar, saved Maps for soccer fields and restaurants, Weather, and Contacts/ToDo), but I switched to Gmail for email as soon as I could.

I am so reliant on Labels - it just makes so much sense that any email can really be in more than one folder. (In fact, since being forced to use Outlook 2003 at work, I've forgone folders and used it’s Category feature which work remarkable similar to Gmail Labels to organize my work email - I can use Outlook's search to organize/search by Category).

If Yahoo Mail were to offer anything like Labels, I’d switch back.

Re:Does it have Google-like labels? (1)

whovian (107062) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562374)

If Yahoo Mail were to offer anything like Labels, I'd switch back.

SBC Yahoo! has 8 color labels. (I assume it's the same as the Yahoo! Mail that you would pay for.) I have the color labels associated with my disposable email addresses.

Compatibility? (2, Insightful)

pwnage (856708) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562181)

How come none of you goofballs has asked the important question yet: does this new interface work with standards-compliant browsers, or is this just more crap that will require Internet Explorer?

Re:Compatibility? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562208)

it works with IE and firefox.

The real question (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562237)

I think what he's trying to ask is "does it run linux"

Ummm... I mean, "does it run on linux?"

CRAP! Internet stuff.
"will it work with FireFox?"

Re:Compatibility? the big question (1)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562251)

How come none of you goofballs has asked the important question yet: does this new interface work with standards-compliant browsers, or is this just more crap that will require Internet Explorer?

That's a very good question.

I had problems getting the Yahoo! Radio and Yahoo! Music working on either Opera or Firefox, had to install a plugin for Firefox to almost work with them.

So if this new email means it doesn't work with Firefox, or at least Opera (on non-IE format), then I can't see using the new version.

And that goes for my $400K in investments that I manage with the Yahoo portfolio right now. I'll switch rather than fight - to another provider.

Re:Compatibility? (1)

tonyquan (758115) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562266)

Both IE and Firefox are supported.

Yahoo += Oddpost; (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562183)

I will bet good money that the people from oddpost had alot to do with their improvments.
Simply put, the aquisition of oddpost, which included their engineers was the best move they made in the land of Email.
Oddpost engineers did/do things with DHTML that you could only have a wet dream about.

Thanks for the mirrors (1)

Tivac (852225) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562212)

I didn't really figure on getting slashdotted, but it's kind of exciting at the same time.

I really enjoy the new interface and can see myself using it a lot. The initial load time isn't horrible, and not having to go through page after page of 50 email lists like Gmail is really nice.

Interoperability (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562216)

I have used yahoo! mail as my primary mail service; this is in preference to hotmail and gmail, both of which I've used.

I respect that many others will prefer hotmail or gmail; let me tell you why I prefer yahoo! mail:
    - it works no problem on firefox
    - it works no problem on IE
    - it even allows me to view mail from lynx (the console-mode browser!)

Yahoo! have been very thoughtful in ensuring that a browser is not completely dependent on javascript; not that this makes their client any less capable.

I have come to view yahoo! as a company that clearly employs thoughtful programmers, who aim for functionality but not at the cost of compatibility.

I really hope they continue to serve older browsers the way they so excellently have in the past.

Slashdottet (0, Offtopic)

sn0wflake (592745) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562224)

Okay, the term Slashdottet has existed for years now. When is Slashdot going to provide links to mirrors in the story? I hope the new Slashdot design will incorporate this as it's getting annoying to click on the link in the story, wait, wait, wait, abort, browse the comments for a mirror, and then see what the story is all about. For those of you that say I should just use this or this mirror, all I have to say is that if there's already automatic mirrors why not just include it in the story *sigh*.

GPG (1)

kevin_conaway (585204) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562277)

Anyone know of any webmail services that allow GPG?

Re:GPG (1)

Serveert (102805) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562402)

this GPL product claims it does:

http://www.roundcube.net/?p=about [roundcube.net]

Support for GPG/PGP encryption

Re:GPG (1)

Serveert (102805) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562414)

err that's a planned feature, sorry

Screenshot mirror (1)

alienfluid (677872) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562319)

Here [comcast.net]

So... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13562322)

Why should I change from outlook, it does everything I need it to do, etc etc. Since linsux/crapple losers troll MS topics/forums it's cool for me to post this for no reason here too, right?

based on technology from oddpost.com (4, Informative)

Dzimas (547818) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562340)

Yahoo bought out oddpost in 2004. If you'll remember, they were the first to put together a really slick DHTML-based email application. What you see here is a result of merging the technology Ethan and Ian had developed with Yahoo's infrastructure (plus a great deal more - tabs and other features that aren't part of oddpost). Glad to see a little dotrebound company like Oddpost make a mark!

Browser Reject... (1)

Auraiken (862386) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562408)

I just visited oddpost.com with Firefox and apparently their old service didn't support anything but Internet Explorer... I'm wondering what browsers are supported by this web-based email client.

Bastards... Why ruin the surprise! (1)

Browzer (17971) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562346)

The cosmetic changes will not convert a lot of non-yahoo mail users, but the new look would have been an unexpected but pleasant surprise to the regular yahoo mail users!

Isn't there some real news for nerds besides skin changes?

yahoo blahhoo (1, Troll)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562355)

i been using yahoo since the late 1990's and i am starting to become disgusted with them, there has been about three revisions of Yahoo Instant Messenger for Windows but their YIM for Linux has not been updated and left pretty much featureless, and since it has not been updated i somehow wonder if it is a security problem for users of Yahoo's Linux/BSD IM...

and their web based email when accessed with ANY web browser other than Internet Explorer is featureless and plain text only, when even google's gmail using Firefox on Linux offers more as in the ability of changing text font styles, size & color, gmail even has a built in spell checker too, i am just about to abandon yahoo like i abandoned msn back in 1998...

/rant!

Re:yahoo blahhoo (1)

mikejz84 (771717) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562391)

Yeah, Featureless Plain text e-mail sucks compared to HTML email with all its tracking and pictures of rolex's and viagra pills.

Re:yahoo blahhoo (1)

warriorpostman (648010) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562397)

Amen.

DHTML: Why isn't it in that broad use? (2, Interesting)

ShyGuy91284 (701108) | more than 9 years ago | (#13562399)

I am a CS person, and know very little about Web design, so this post may be somewhat unknowlegable. But I remember back 3 years ago doing some stuff w/ DHTML for a class. It seemed quick, simple, useful, yet DHTML was something I hardly ever saw (and still hardly every see) anywhere. Although not as flashy as flash-based interfaces (no pun intended), it seemed to work well on even fairly weak systems. Does this still hold true nowadays with so many web pages going with flash that sometimes maxes out my Athlon-XP 2500+ system?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?