Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

The Troubles With the Yahool Mail Beta

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago | from the competition-means-we-win dept.

239

An anonymous reader writes "Yahoo Mail recently launched their new webmail service, dubbed Beta (yes just like gmail) no doubt hoping to win back market share in the world of webmail. Their prime competition is gmail, which they've modeled some of the new features on, but Yahoo Mail Beta falls very short of offering a similar experience. The ad infested new Yahoo Mail is patchwork of ideas halfway implemented and glaring usability problems."

cancel ×

239 comments

YAHOOL (0, Troll)

Sexual Asspussy (453406) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265065)

LOOL @ YUOO

1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (4, Interesting)

iMaple (769378) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265067)

The article claims that

yahoomail gives you 1gb, either way it's much more than anyone will ever need.


Well, I dont know if this is the norm and I am just an exception but my gmail account says "You are currently using 1301 MB (47%) of your 2769 MB."

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265111)

I'm sure you would die without all that too... Learn to manage your god damned email better.

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265205)

From gmail's homepage [google.com] :
Over 2769.995340 megabytes (and counting) of free storage so you'll never need to delete another message.
Gmail is largely based on the idea that a user should only have to spend a minimal amount of time managing their email. After all, some people have better things to do with their time.

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (1)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265471)

Shameless shill for Yahoo or brainless troll?

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (2, Funny)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265149)

Well that's for a couple of reasons:

1. GMail has 2769MB currently (and counting)

2. It's really a new service by "Yahool Mail Beta" and not "Yahoo! Mail Beta". Yahool is a Trademark of Google Inc. and is not to be confused with Yahoo! in any way!

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265261)

The 2769 MB is what I see as well. Must be the same for most people. :-)

I'm only using a couple hundred MB, however. I would use more if the gdrive filesystem was available for WinXP/Linux/MacOSX and was completely compatible amongst the three. ;-)

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (3, Insightful)

AaronDunlap (953673) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265265)

Gmail is superior in every way to any mail platform except some corp/gov custom environments.

Once my users understand how it's meant to be used, it's a universal winner.

What seals the deal is being implemented with SSL POP access... so the dinosaurs who refuse to budge don't have to.

Better mousetrap

Gmail only superior in some ways. (2, Interesting)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265367)

"Gmail is superior in every way to any mail platform except some corp/gov custom environments."

It's better when it comes to how the UI looks (colors, characters) and the lack of add clutter. It's much worse the way it jumbles inbox/etc emails into "groups" that have nothing to do with anything and make it hard to find past received emails. This idea isn't that hot: notice the lack of other companies immitating the useless scrambling of Gmail's folders. (I understand how it is MEANT to be used, and how it is SUPPOSED to work. However, I prefer my email properly organized for ease of use, and don't like how Gmail is not good at what it is supposed to do and ends up breaking a single "conversation" into several different groups).

Re:Gmail only superior in some ways. (3, Insightful)

pyros (61399) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266205)

don't like how Gmail is not good at what it is supposed to do and ends up breaking a single "conversation" into several different groups


I have no idea what you're referring to. For me, a single conversation thread (both sent and received) is displayed all in one page, and I can apply multiple labels to the thread to have the whole thread appear in all relevant categorizations I want without having multiple copies of any of the emails within that thread. Can you clarify what you are seeing?

Re:Gmail only superior in some ways. (3, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266325)

The only differences between labels and folders are that you can label something as work+project A+Reference and not be stuck choosing between your work->project A folder or your Reference folder, and it is a bit more difficult to select work+Project A than it is to click on work->Project A.

For me, it is better; I figured that out when I noticed myself looking for the archive button in other email systems.

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (2, Insightful)

jmelchio (681199) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265371)

In Canada where we get the service through Rogers cable (they partner with Yahoo on their internet offering) we get 2GB of space on our mail accounts. Having said that I find I'm currently only using 430 Mb on my Gmail account and a fraction of that on my Yahoo mail account. Maybe I should get a life, on the other hand, it might show I have one ... you decide.

Although I prefer Gmail as my main mail account I think the Yahoo mail interface is not bad at all. As mentioned elsewhere in this thread they seem to be going for a desktop look and they're doing a decent job.

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265383)

Lycos recently upgraded their email service. They claim to give out 3gb for a free email account.

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (1)

pvera (250260) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265565)

It is the norm. Your Gmail space is increased little by little in real time. Log out of gmail and go to the front page, see that the number goes up in real time. Right now it says:

"Over 2770.008107 megabytes (and counting) of free storage so you'll never need to delete another message."

Re:1GB is more than enough ? ... not for me (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16266427)

I can't be bothered to reply to each post going on about the amount of space Gmail offers individually, but this applies to just about all of you:

Well done on missing the point! What the parent was trying to point out is that the blog entry which is the article claims "no one needs more than 1Gb", whereas the parent is already using around 1.3Gb. Anyone who can't understand that some people might have a legitimate use for that much space shouldn't be reviewing anything, IMO.

One of the professors I work with has an Exchange mailbox which at last count was well over 2 gigs, and I'm sure he's not the only one. Admittedly this also includes things like tasks etc, but I'm led to believe that the size of these is generally very minimal compared to the email side of things.

Comparitively (4, Interesting)

cuteseal (794590) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265073)

Well it's certainly not as smooth or polished as Gmail, but I definitely prefer it to Windows Live Mail. I feel it falls into a different kettle of fish to Gmail though. Yahoo Mail attempts to emulate the desktop type feel, while Gmail is just doin' it's own thing. :D

Re:Comparitively (1)

DoraLives (622001) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265191)

Well it's certainly not as smooth or polished as Gmail, but I definitely prefer it to Windows Live Mail.

Well there's damning it with faint praise, eh?

PLEASE SLASHDOT EDITORS!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265081)

Stop having anonymous users promote their own blogs. It makes you look like a bunch of idiots.

Re:PLEASE SLASHDOT EDITORS!! (2, Insightful)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265207)

Is the story interesting?
Yes.

Does the blog provide good information and sufficient media (i.e. pictures)?
Yes.

Should Slashdot wait/hope for another source like an official news paper to bring up this story instead of delivering the news as fast as possible?
Possibly, but not in this case.

delivering the news as fast as possible? (1)

IANAAC (692242) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265757)

Should Slashdot wait/hope for another source like an official news paper to bring up this story instead of delivering the news as fast as possible?

Except this is not in any way news, fast or not. It's one person's blog, which, if you look at any of the other blog entries, are nothing more than a series of opinions of many different, unrelated things.

dubbed (5, Funny)

Threni (635302) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265101)

> "Yahoo Mail recently launched their new webmail service, dubbed Beta (yes just like gmail)

I don't think that word means what you think it means....

Re:dubbed (2, Funny)

arashi no garou (699761) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265595)

Inconceivable!

A step in the right direction (4, Informative)

Yo Grark (465041) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265109)

I've taken a look at it and think it's WAY better than MSN Mail for a feature-to-feature comparrison. It's faster, and just flows a lot better without any annoying banner ads.

Gmail is for plain mail. Yahoo seems to be for those who want the outlook emulation via web-browser. Gmail never captured my interest in the look/feel of an outlook replacement.

Yahoo has a way to go to get me to switch, but for a yahoo-hater in the past like me, I have to give them a thumbs up for the effort.

Yo Grark

Re: Old School Yahoo Mail (1)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265153)

Yahoo has had mail around for a long time, so I've long since ignored Google. I have also ignored yahoo's attempts to add features. I use a weblink on my page to open "regular mail" and it seems to continue working, despite reports of problems other people are contributing.

I use the Trilogy of Yahoo Mail, Messenger, and Yahoo Advanced Search, so I'm a customer for life unless they make the mistake of trying to charge.

you aren't missing anything. (0, Redundant)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265377)

"I use the Trilogy of Yahoo Mail, Messenger, and Yahoo Advanced Search, so I'm a customer for life unless they make the mistake of trying to charge."

Stay away from gmail. After using Yahoo's clean organization of what comes into your inbox, you will be sorely disappointed at Gmail's scrambling of incoming messages. Some like it, but most say "no way". They don't even give an option to switch to standard organization.

Re:you aren't missing anything. (2)

flosofl (626809) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265861)

I've read your other comments (which are bascially minor variations on a theme) and have come to the conclusion that you really don't know how to use Gmail.

I have yet to experience this scambling of incoming messages and "blackhole" you keep referencing. I have two accounts. One for personal mail and the other for all the security mailing lists I subscribe to.

The organizational level is light years beyond Yahoo. I have rulesets set up to automatically label messages and get them out of the inbox (I *hate* cluttered inboxes). But the threaded nature of how it presents email is where it really shines. For example in my mailing lists I don't have to deal with a seperate message for the original topic and seperate messages for every RE: scattered willy-nilly all over the list (based on time received). Gmail groups them all into one nice little threaded message. It automatically collapses the previously read messages, but I can easily expand if I need to reference an earlier one.

If you don't like it, that's your perogative. But you keep claiming that everyone should stay away because you, personally, have had a bad experience (which I suspect is related to not learning the interface). Seriously, one or maybe two comments to that effect is fine. But you keep cluttering up threads here to counter anyone who may have had a decent experience with Gmail. Your opinion is not that important.

Re:you aren't missing anything. (0, Redundant)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266027)

"I've read your other comments (which are bascially minor variations on a theme) and have come to the conclusion that you really don't know how to use Gmail."

Yes, the messages are TOO similar. However, I DO know how to use it. I just don't LIKE it due to the extra steps involved in doing things due to its design flaws. I don't LIKE it that emails are much harder to find and I have to use search to find everything. If you have used it, you have seen the "scrambling of the messages" into the "conversation groups": something which is half-assed as to be useless. Most of the time, my single email "conversations" are broken into several scrambled clumps. I do not like the threaded nature of the emails at all. I know how to use it, but prefer the superior standard. organization.

The "Gmail groups them all into one nice little threaded message" you claim just does not happen (unless there is a configuration setting that I am missing). One exchange broken into several variations on "me, Bob" just does not cut it. I'd also rather not have them grouped even if Google was actually good at doing it automatically (which it is not)

I'm not the only one who dislikes Google's scrambling. There's a good reason that the many other free services have not copied the idea. It's not a very good one. My opinion may not be important, but it is more important than yours here (as most users still prefer cleanly organized emails instead of random clumps).

Gmail's worst design flaw is not having a switch to let the users go to the superior (in the opinion of must email users) standard organization. Do you also defend the design flaw where you have to click on "edit subject" to edit the subject? Every other service I've seen has the subject in a text-box, no extra click necessary. That's a minor annoyance comapred to message-scrambling, but a flaw nonetheless.

Re:you aren't missing anything. (1)

Tremor (APi) (678603) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266583)

I just don't LIKE it due to the extra steps involved in doing things due to its design flaws. I don't LIKE it that emails are much harder to find and I have to use search to find everything. If you have used it, you have seen the "scrambling of the messages" into the "conversation groups": something which is half-assed as to be useless. Most of the time, my single email "conversations" are broken into several scrambled clumps. I do not like the threaded nature of the emails at all. I know how to use it, but prefer the superior standard. organization.

You seem to be having some confusion here between "opinion" and "fact". You say "design flaws" when you really mean things that you personally do not like; this is not a flaw, it is a personal preference. You say you "prefer the superior standard" - well, everyone prefers the superior thing, because it's superior. In this case, you call it superior because you prefer it, not the other way around. That's opinion, not fact.

The "Gmail groups them all into one nice little threaded message" you claim just does not happen (unless there is a configuration setting that I am missing). One exchange broken into several variations on "me, Bob" just does not cut it.

I've noticed the problem you're describing, however, it only ever happens when the subject of the emails is blank (or a reply to no subject, e.g., "Re: ") and thus Gmail has no basis to use to determine what is a reply to what.

My opinion may not be important, but it is more important than yours here (as most users still prefer cleanly organized emails instead of random clumps).

This is my favorite part, right here: this little blast of stunning logic is so good I'm thinking about putting it in my sig. What a succinct way of saying "even though this is just my personal opinion, it's more important that any opinion any of you sorry sods can come up with, because my opinion is the right one!" That's the kind of logic I can really appreciate. My favorite part here, and this is classic, is where you validate your opinion that your opinion matters the most by backing it up with your opinion that "most users" agree with you. Unless you've performed a study of email users to determine if that's the case, you just made that up. No one has an opinion any more important than anyone else's, especially here on /. - that's the whole point. And if you really want to rate one opinion against another, given that all opinions are equally valid (nomatter how idiotic), they can only be rated on the basis of how well they are argued - and by that yardstick, my dear friend, your opinion is not very important at all.

Re: Old School Yahoo Mail (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265385)

Well, the question I guess is: "Do you know what you are missing?". Yes, it can be a PITA to move your email address and make sure all your contacts know it. Don't try that at first! Instead, just play around with a gmail (or whatever) account for a while. Most email clients will let you change your sender email address to make people think you are using another domain (ie: send mail from you@gmail, but have the recipient think you are sending it from you@yahoo), so there is no harm in trying these things out.

You don't know what you don't have unless you look around. :-)

Re:A step in the right direction (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265171)

Hmmm. If Yahoo mail beta is faster than MSN, I really don't want to know just how slow MSN mail is.

Re:A step in the right direction (2, Insightful)

DuncanE (35734) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265237)

Because of course we all want to be using Outlook right??!!

Gmail has real innovation in an email client. Discussion topics are grouped, labels are better than folders and "archive and search" has changed the way I file emails - who needs an elaborate outlook style folder structures, just archive and search ;-)

I'm so used to Gmail for my personal email that I have installed Google desktop search at work (where we HAVE to use outlook) just so I can properly search my emails and I know longer have to spend all that time filing emails away in folders.

Not a good "innovation" (0, Redundant)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265345)

"Gmail has real innovation in an email client. Discussion topics are grouped,..."

They are grouped poorly by some sort of random criteria that basically renders looking at the inbox uselsss. I had two email exchanges with someone named Rob. Now I have these inscrutable "me, Rob" groups for them. One single conversation has been broken up by Gmail's inbox-scrambler into 5 or 6 of their "conversation" groupings. The "group by conversation" idea is bad one and is poorly implimented. It's senseless, annoying, and I sure with there was a configuration option to go back to useful, standard inbox/etc organization with complete email addresses and names showing. Not only that, there is the serious design flaw that Gmail has that no others have where they hid "change subject" behind a link. I guess they want to encourage users not to have accurate subjects! Even Hotmail makes it easy to edit the eubject.

I've used Gmail for well over a year, side by side with Yahoo, and with Gmail it's like everything falls into a black hole, and I have to "search" every single time I want to find something. At least with Yahoo, the organization makes a lot more sense, and I have to do "search" a lot less.

Re:Not a good "innovation" (1)

brunes69 (86786) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265879)

I've used Gmail for well over a year, side by side with Yahoo, and with Gmail it's like everything falls into a black hole, and I have to "search" every single time I want to find something. At least with Yahoo, the organization makes a lot more sense, and I have to do "search" a lot less.

This illisurates why you do not like GMail. You sound like an old man clamoring on and on about how "cars were more reliable in his day", totally ignoring the statistical facts.

The whole point of GMail is the exact reason you say you hate it. You shouldn't have to organize your email, it's 2006. Let the computer (aka GMail) do it for you. If you added up all the time wasted in Outlook/Yahoo selecting email and moving it into folders, then later having to hunt through the folder for that email later, I think you'd be surprised at how much time Gmails archive+search saves you over a year.

All other things being equal, I would wager a good sum of money GMail would return a list of search results faster than Yahoo or Outlook would even fully load a decent size folder over the network!

Re:Not a good "innovation" (0)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266089)

"This illisurates why you do not like GMail. You sound like an old man clamoring on and on about how "cars were more reliable in his day", totally ignoring the statistical facts."

To complete the analogy, it is like if I hate a car with a very loose steering wheel that crashes into the wall every time you try and go somewhere in it.

"The whole point of GMail is the exact reason you say you hate it."

Actually, it's got some kick-ass spam filters. That is what drew me to it, and that is one reason I've not shut off my Gmail account.

"You shouldn't have to organize your email, it's 2006. Let the computer (aka GMail) do it for you"

No thanks. Gmail does a terrible job of it. I just looked now and there is one SInGLE "conversation" I had with someone named Bob organized into 5 or 6 clumps of emails with some sort of way too terse variation on "me, Bob" telling me where it came from. That's a pretty bad job of organizing it has done.

" think you'd be surprised at how much time Gmails archive+search saves you over a year."
How does it "save" me time when Google's organization is so poor I can't rely on it at all, and have to use "Search" in order to find any email at all?

Re:A step in the right direction (2, Informative)

raduf (307723) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265547)

Yes! Just why I resisted on beta only a couple of minutes. The second I realised the interface wanted to make me think I'm in outlook I switched back and thought with dread at the moment the "beta" will come off.

I don't want to use outlook. Or any other replacement really. I tried, honestly, but it's just not the same as web-based email. I'm used to quality, and I don't intend to go a step down. Using AJAX is a nice touch, and it was to be expected, but outlook is definitely not what I want from a mail app.

Re:A step in the right direction (1, Insightful)

merreborn (853723) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265643)

Because of course we all want to be using Outlook right??!!

I know you were being sarcastic, but quite frankly, the answer from millions of office workers would indeed be a resounding "Yes!"

I know this is slashdot. We're all more technical than that, and loathe outlook for a myriad of reasons. Yahoo! Mail isn't really targeted at us. We're a minority that can never really be pleased anyway.

The CEO, his executive assistant, HR, and the receptionist, on the other hand, like outlook, because it's what they know.

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

The_Wilschon (782534) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266505)

The CEO, his executive assistant, HR, and the receptionist, on the other hand, like outlook, because it's what they know.
How is this insightful? Everyone knows this; everyone says this all the time.

The sky is blue. Whee-hee-hee I'm insightful!

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

ejp1082 (934575) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266025)

Well that's the thing - some people do want to use Outlook, mostly because it's what they're used to. That's the audience Yahoo is going for.

Google's customer base (for products other than their basic search) seems to be a lot geekier than Yahoo's. So whereas the Slashdot crowd is likely to appreciate the way Gmail works, Yahoo's customers are less technically inclined and would value familiarity above all.

The problem with the Slashdot crowd's thinking (and most tech bloggers for that matter) is they imagine that there's one giant market for webmail, and Gmail/Yahoo/Hotmail are going head-to-head. But that's not how Google, Yahoo, and Microsoft are thinking about it. They see it in terms of geek webmail users, power users, casual users, internet-savvy users, technophobic users, etc. Then they sit and ask themselves which segments they stand the best chance of capturing, and build a product tailored for those markets.

(Personally, I love Gmail - it actually got me away from using Thunderbird as my mail client because I like the webmail UI so much. But I'm a geek.)

Re:A step in the right direction (1)

Warbothong (905464) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266303)

But Yahoo! stop you from using OutLook itself! The reason Gmail doesn't try to emulate an email client program is because if that is what you want then use a real one using POP. Yahoo!'s target audience seems to be people who like desktop email programs, but the ONLY feature those people want (since they can apply their own spam filters, etc.) is the ability to use their desktop email program! I admit that my University's webmail system is useful considering how many computers I can use it from around the campus, but for my personal email I only use one computer so I don't care if is accessible from anywhere, because I only need it accessible from here. (And before you say that is my specific usage and many other people prefer webmail, then Gmail offers both!)

Bloatware... (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265113)

Yahoo Mail Beta is complete and utter bloatware as they went too far. I LOVE the old yahoomail, and if they force me to use the new interface, they might very well lose a customer.

CUSTOMERS BUY THINGS (1)

Proctal Relapse (467579) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265161)

nt

Re:Bloatware... (1)

hey (83763) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266129)

Yeah, can live without a drag-n-drop way to move messages to folders.

Needs free POP3. (1)

DrunkenTerror (561616) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265123)

Needs free POP3.

Re:Needs free POP3. (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265165)

Free POP3 like keeping mails (including deleted) forever and analysing private message text to display ads?

No, thanks.

It lacks IMAP option for paid users I agree but they have a reason for it. It seems like they need a huge mainframe farm to handle that many users which are connected 24/7 over IMAP.

Re:Needs free POP3. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265283)

If you're talking about Yahoo!, I think they did do IMAP for a while ... At least that's what it looks like [weblogsinc.com] .

So, it is not like they don't have the IMAP server, they merely can't handle the connections it'll need to keep alive (hmmm... paid customers, that's no more too, I think).

Re:Needs free POP3. (1)

DrunkenTerror (561616) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265347)

Free POP3 like keeping mails (including deleted) forever

I've been using my yahoo mail address since at least before 2000, generally as a quasi-throwaway account. You know, signing up for websites like slashdot with it. Honestly, I really don't give a shit that Yahoo knows that some of my comments have been replied to or that I forgot my password to MetaFilter. So that's not an issue of concern for me.

analyzing private message text to display ads?

Umm, you know, with a email client like T-bird retrieving your mail from Yahoo, there are no ads to display.

Anyway, I was just saying it sure is a PitA to have to load up the yahoo web-based mail all the time, instead of getting it right there in my client without any action on my part, and the thought of paying them for what others give away for free irks me.

Re:Needs free POP3. (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265431)

I was commenting about how Google manages to give away pop3 for free by analysing the message text.

If Yahoo had such policies, I wouldn't be a Yahoo user since '98 when accounts were introduced. ;)

Re:Needs free POP3. (1)

evilbessie (873633) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266193)

No offence but if you have a Yahoo account and want free POP access perhaps you should go to the options page and turn it the damn on from the yahoo mail site "Yahoo! Mail gives you even more flexibility with two free features! As a Yahoo! Delivers member (you asked to receive special offers via when you registered with us), you can take advantage of email forwarding and POP access. Each one is free, exclusively for Yahoo! Delivers members." So I've got FREE access to POP with my yahoo account and have advised many others that they can do this (when working for an anti-spam company which required POP) So you obviously don't look before criticising. NOt that i like yahoo mail anyway but don't go spreading lies as it just makes you look stupid.

allocating 828×588 pixels to Firefox seems we (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265131)

To make one of his point, the guy points out that 828x588 are allocated to Firefox on his desktop. So either he's running on an old CRT monitor at a weird resolution or he's on a 1024x768 screen and he's some kind of a masochist. I don't see the point, in this day and age, to run Firefox in 828x588 when you can go "fullscreen". Note that I don't say you should always run Firefox in full screen (I sure wouldn't a 30" display, for example) and I'm not "defending" webdesigner pooping website that only looks OK at 1024x768 or more. But here, the guy needs to learn to use virtual desktops... Or simply alt+tab. I mean, frankly, what's the fscking point of running Firefox not maximized *on a small 1024x768 monitor* !? Maybe to see the "ooooh shiny desktop icons" (because of course the mouse is essential to navigate/launch proggys)? This post brought to you on a 1600x1168 Firefox window, located on one out of 12 virtual desktops, on a Metacity window manager that has no icon (no Nautilus, thank you very much). I really mean: WTF?

Re:allocating 828×588 pixels to Firefox seems (1)

MooUK (905450) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265279)

I don't use firefox full-screen except when I need to. My screen resolution is 1280x1024. I have a couple of other windows peeking out from behind the browser window that I also like to keep an eye on. I find it vastly quicker to slide my mouse sideways and click on the window to switch to it rather than use keyboard shortcuts of the taskbar. And unlike alt-tab, I never have to cycle through a few windows - including minimised ones - to get to the one I want.

Re:allocating 828×588 pixels to Firefox seems (1)

jargon82 (996613) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266527)

check out http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/power toys/xppowertoys.mspx [microsoft.com] the taskswitch powertoy at this link. It gives you a small graphic of the window inside the alt-tab interface, so you can see what your switching to, if for example, you have a handful of firefox windows open, or any other "several of the same" windows. It really changed the way I felt about alt-tab.

Re:allocating 828×588 pixels to Firefox seems (1)

SpcAgentOrange (936329) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265805)

If I had a 10 acre plot of land, I wouldn't build a house to cover the entire area. I would use part of the land for a house, part of the land for a garage, part of the land for a yard, and part of the land for a pool. It's called multitasking.

One of the benefits of a larger monitor (larger than, say, the 14 inch monitor I first started computing on) is that I can have more than one window open at a time, and see information in both windows at the same time.

And yes, I actually do this. I keep trying the beta, but they give so much of their real estate over to ads, that there's little left for my actual mail. Sure, I could open my Yahoo mail up in a new window instead of a tab, and maximise that one window, but why should I have to change my browsing habit for one program. For me, Yahoo Mail Beta's worst sin is that it is absolutely unforgiving to anybody who doesn't wish to turn over the whole monitor to an email program. K

Re:allocating 828×588 pixels to Firefox seems (1)

Cal Paterson (881180) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265935)

I use virtual desktops heavily (I use twenty-six of them, to be precise), but you really have to accept that some people actually dislike that method of working.

Windows and Mac (IIRC) have never been very big on the vitual desktop thing, and while I find it second nature, it's important to realise that some people prefer to use a taskbar.

This kind of debate comes out in user interface design. Some people want to have unique windows for every instance of a program, and others prefer to use tabs. At the moment there are only really these two ways for handling multiple windows, but I'm sure people will think of more as time goes on. Multiple screens for example, might bring up some new ideas.

Either way, virtual desktops are a very unixy thing, so don't be surprised when windows or mac users keep many, small windows. People have been thinking in terms of many, small windows for many years - people probably won't be switching around their method of work so soon.

Re:allocating 828×588 pixels to Firefox seems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16266471)

Is there some reason that pages should be broken at 1024x768, even if you run your web browser in a window and not fullscreen? Is it so hard? Gmail can do, why not yahoo mail? Oh yeah, because yahoo sucks.

Ads? (1)

ShakaZ (1002825) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265133)

The ad infested new Yahoo Mail is patchwork of ideas halfway implemented and glaring usability problems."
What ads ;p
Thank you Adblock & Adblock G.Filterset updater...

Funny how this "news" just shows up when another news talks about yahoo mail opening up their registration process, if i remember correctly it's already been several months since yahoo mail provided a beta as alternative.

Re:Ads? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265281)

They just starting switching users over to try it with the option of switching back if you don't like it, that's why it's news now.

The problem with yahoo... (3, Interesting)

ravee (201020) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265139)

The main problem with yahoo mail beta is the time it takes to load the interface in the web browser. It takes much longer to load yahoo beta than it takes gmail to load its mail interface.

On top of that, when you compare the sheer number of features that come with gmail, yahoo mail falls too short.

But I do like the new interface of yahoo mail beta - maybe they need to make further refinements and add new features which provide value.

the important feature that Gmail lacks (0, Redundant)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265231)

"On top of that, when you compare the sheer number of features that come with gmail, yahoo mail falls too short."

I'd consider Gmail if not for an important feature it lacks that Yahoo has: organization of the inbox. The useless scrambling of messages in Gmail is basically a black hole where I have to rely on "Search" to find anything at all (unlike Yahoo where I can page down through the inbox). All they need to add is an option switch. There's a reason that few if any other email services have copied the "scramble mailbox contents into an useless pile" approach that Gmail has.

Re:the important feature that Gmail lacks (1)

spiritraveller (641174) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265955)

I'd consider Gmail if not for an important feature it lacks that Yahoo has: organization of the inbox.

Gmail has great organizational features for the inbox. Instead of moving things to different "boxes", it uses a much more sensible approach, IMHO. You can label a conversation (manually or through an automatic filter you've set up). You can then view all messages with a particular label by clicking the name of that label on the left hand side of your screen.

The search feature is there, but I've never used it. Labels provide the same function as folders, and they are simpler and easier than folders in my opinion.

It's the extensive use of AJAX. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265365)

Like most Google web products, GMail uses just the right amount of AJAX. It's used where necessary, and where the benefit clearly outweight the drawbacks.

Yahoo! Mail, on the other hand, does not make such a distinction. AJAX is used all over the place, even for tasks where it is not needed, if not outright detrimental. It's this excessive use of AJAX that makes it so slow. Whereas GMail often uses the most sensible technological choice, Yahoo! Mail just uses AJAX. And as with most typical AJAX applications, the number of asynchronous requests are massive, and consume much bandwidth and client-side processing time. On a broadband connection it is barely tolerable, and on dialup it is virtually useless.

AJAX in moderation can be beneficial. AJAX used for complete web application development is a recipe for disaster.

The problem with gmail... (1)

Bob The Mutant Hamst (1005725) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265653)

is that you can't block those annyoning text ads
At least in yahoo mail you can use adblock or another such firefox extension to block them permanently.

Re:The problem with gmail... (1)

NanoGriever (592781) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266079)

It is possible. If you are using Firefox, try the Greasemonkey extension and you can digg up a few ad blocking scripts from userscripts.org. It works pretty well. I also use a Greasemonkey script to force gmail to display emails with fixed fonts. Reading mails from a mailing list without fixed fonts drives me crazy.

It lacks a feature of course (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265143)

It doesn't keep your messages forever and doesn't analyse your private mails to display "relevant" ads which includes Spyware, phishing, pirate site "harmless" text.

Also Gmail userbase is a joke compared to Yahoo userbase, every statistic on web will tell you.

Google fanboys especially anonymous ones really started to be irritating.

Come on.. (3, Interesting)

eebra82 (907996) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265147)

If only companies who advertise on sites like Yahoo Mail realized that less is more, we wouldn't have this kind of problem.

Why not pay five times more to get ten times the attention? It's common sense: put your cheap ad on page 23 of a news paper, filled with tons of other ads and you end up paying for very little attention.

I personally notice the ads on Slashdot every time I visit this page, but if it was filled up, it would just blur into the rest of the page and become less valuable.

Re:Come on.. (1)

jargon82 (996613) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266547)

There's ads on slashdot? Oh wow... your right! Never noticed those...

Just got the yahoo beta today. (3, Interesting)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265157)

First my background: I was a big Yahoo email guy for a number of years. I started using gmail a couple years ago. I still keep my yahoo email address but don't use it much.

I find the yahoo approach somewhat old compared to the clean lines of gmail. In particular, after tagging emails in gmail, it's a little hard to go back to the folder paradigm. Another issue is the home page within the email client that doesn't show you your email. If I want yahoo as my home page, I will set it up that way. It also seems somewhat slow (I'm using a 3GHz P4 w/ 2GB ram running firefox on WinXP on a T1 connection) compared to gmail.

This is totally separate from the gross number of adds on the email site. Thankfully, adblock seems to be able to block out the vast majority of them.

While I had high hopes for the new yahoo email client (I actually like the yahoo.com site redesign), I think it's too little, too late.

Re:Just got the yahoo beta today. (2, Interesting)

garcia (6573) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265311)

after tagging emails in gmail, it's a little hard to go back to the folder paradigm.

While I use GMail for archival of all my e-mail (since 6/22/04), I don't find the labels to be all that great of a feature. In fact, I use them just like I do folders. I tag e-mails based on whatever and then, in order to effectively search, I have to click the tag and then search within the tag (the search function *never* returns what I'm looking for if I search all e-mail)).

So while I use the tags it's not exactly like they are being used any differently for me than folders were and I know plenty of people that don't tag anything and instead just kind use GMail as if it had 6MB of space (my parents included).

Re:Just got the yahoo beta today. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265325)

Just got the yahoo beta today

Did it arrive in a tube?

I think the poster missed something (1)

Ichigo Kurosaki (886802) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265159)

"Yahoo Mail recently launched their new webmail service, dubbed Beta (yes just like gmail)"

Does he realize that by beta it simply means it is not final? It seems like the author thinks that beta is part of the name...

Re:I think the poster missed something (1)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265245)

There is a problem.

That "blog" doesn't uncover anything interesting, yes a free mail service has ads and new Ajax etc. stuff needs CPU/RAM to handle unlike old webmail. Big deal...

It is posted to blog right after Yahoo opens the API and create some good media.

Yahoo mail could be irritating (I cancelled plus after figuring no APOP or IMAP) but it is a very popular webmail internationally.

Check http://www.senderbase.org/ [senderbase.org] and look at their place in legit (non spam/zombie) providers. Where is Google?

Is Google playing "evil" games now with some anonymous blogs?

Who is that guy claiming a thing which any serious power user/developer will laugh? "why do Windows filesystems suck so?" (older entry)

No, Windows file systems, especially NTFS 5+ (2k,xp) does NOT suck. They are very modern systems and I am a OS X user saying it. Go ask any developer who isn't zealot, they will say too.

I mean why this Anonymous Blog entry submitted by AC poster is front page of Slashdot?

There is one mail service needing much more popularity and users, http://www.fastmail.fm/ [fastmail.fm] , now THAT is a webmail/imap service worth reviewing.

Whats a yahoo? (1)

lupine_stalker (1000459) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265163)

Is the answer I received from one of my Myspace-generation female friends. Yahoo needed to pull off something extraordinary to get back on top of the market, as in my eyes at least Yahoo is almost as old as the cowboy exclamation its name descends from.

Re:Whats a yahoo? (1)

enharmonix (988983) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265307)

at least Yahoo is almost as old as the cowboy exclamation its name descends from

I think the word you're thinking of is yeehaw. The word yahoo was coined by Jonathan Swift in Gulliver's Travels (wiki [wikipedia.org] ), not by cowboys.

Re:Whats a yahoo? (1)

lupine_stalker (1000459) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265331)

I stand corrected, always interesting to learn something new. Well, anyway, Gulliver's Travels is getting on in age now, so my point still stands.

will always prefer Yahoo mail over Gmail (0, Redundant)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265197)

I'll always prefer Yahoo mail over Gmail because Yahoo mail doesn't scramble the message inbox so I can't find anything, and Yahoo doesn't have annoyances like having to click a link just to edit the subject when replying.

mod do38 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265199)

theorists - [theos.c0m] on his

ummm, double click? (3, Informative)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265215)

When I click on a message title, I get about 5 lines of message text displayed in the display area, which is about as convenient as reading the same message off the screen of a cell phone. And this is it, there is no "open message in a new tab/window" or anything like that, this is the only way to view messages.

I guess genius here never tried to double click any of the messages. It opens it in a new minitab within the Y!mail main window/tab.

Ajax Bad (Re:ummm, double click?) (1)

migurski (545146) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265991)

Double click isn't a "normal" browser interaction. I've been using browsers since "1.0", and it would never occur to me to double click something on a web page. This is the worst temptation of Ajax, btw: duplicating or poorly imitating desktop interactions such as windows, drag & drop, or double-clicking in a page-based medium where they make no sense. Using Ajax to speed screen updates makes sense, but introducing new behaviors that can't be emulated with a page reload does not.

It's Not About GMail or AJAX or... (3, Insightful)

fupeg (653970) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266555)

It's about Outlook. Yahoo is not trying to imitate GMail. They are trying make Yahoo Mail just like using Outlook or Thunderbird or Evolution or Eudora or whatever. That's why they have a preview pane. That's why you double-click to open the message in its own "window." This is how desktop clients do it. Yahoo simply used AJAX to produce the same kind of behavior. Probably the only webmail that would be similar would be Exchange/Outlook webmail (you know the product that introduced XmlHttpRequest before anybody had ever heard of AJAX...)

I disagee (0, Troll)

QX-Mat (460729) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265223)

(this post is intentionally left blank to avoid being a troll)

Never (1)

Ice Wewe (936718) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265233)

Yahoo! mail will never be on the same level as GMail. I've used Yahoo! for longer than I've used GMail (I got a gmail account fairly early in the invitation process), and I've never really liked it. One thing I didn't like was that Yahoo! Mail basically forced me to accept their Beta stuff over the tried-and-trusted old interface. There was no "I don't want this" button to choose, much like many Windows dialogs. It was very frustrating, and I didn't appriciate it at all. GMail's web interface is nicer than Hotmail's (Don't get me started on how many flaws that has) and Yahoo!'s (to many graphical ads). One advantage that GMail had over the rest of the pack is that GMail allows for free POP3 access, although because I have multiple machines, I'd prefer IMAP. Yahoo! and Hotmail both want like $20/yr for POP3 access, which I find to be outragious. They're alreayd making revenue off the ads on my page, so why don't I get POP3 for free? Better yet, make it like adsense... since I have ads in my email, I should get paid. I also dislike Yahoo! sticking large graphical ads in their Groups emails.

Yahoo! Mail rating: 5.5/10 (graphical ads, inconvient settings area, bad UI)

Hotmail rating: 3/10 (graphical ads, not easy to access others profile if you don't have MSFT MSN Messenger, spam spam spam, hard to block people, small space limit)

GMail rating: 8/10 (no IMAP access, having a bot look at all my emails)

Uh (1)

biggerboy (512438) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265819)

Did you ever try clicking on the "switch back" link? It takes you back to the Y!M classic interface.

Never read the instructions, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265975)

Yahoo mail doesn't 'force' you to accept the beta version. You have to have made the initial request to get access to the beta and the first time you load it there's an animation showing you how to get back to the old interface if you don't like the beta.

Re: Bots reading your email on gmail - hate to tell ya, but there are bots reading your email on every one of these services.

Re:Never (1)

evilbessie (873633) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266151)

No offence but Yahoo has had free pop access for YEARS, you just have to turn it on in the options (something like pop access and forwarding option). I used to advise people how to do this when I worked for an anti-spam company which needed POP access to work. I have also access several of my own yahoo accounts over POP so know also from first hand experience that you are wrong.

Whatever. (5, Interesting)

BaldingByMicrosoft (585534) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265235)

Maybe this article will sway the opinion of people who are deciding on a new free email service to join. Hopefully folks will decide on more than this piece of writing.

The title of the article, "gmail beta vs yahoo mail beta", implies some sort of comparison between the services. What it seems to actually be is a 1,723 word (with associated screen-shots) criticism of Yahoo!'s product.

I had my Yahoo! email address before PigeonRank was a twinkle in a Google geek's eye. There are things I like and dislike about both Yahoo!'s and Google's interfaces. I consider Yahoo!'s new interface an improvement over the old one -- it's a considerable facelift, and works with IE and Firefox. Bottom line for me is that the real value of their services lies not in their interface, but the ability to exchange information. Yahoo! is more valuable to me, because folks know they can contact me at that address. It all makes me wonder if the author even bothered to give Yahoo! feedback on their product, or just wanted to show off their l33t ranting ability.

Re:Whatever. (1)

Timesprout (579035) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265349)

Its the usual fanboy raving. Google invented online email and do it better than anyone and your privacy is absolutely guaranteed. I love the fact that hotmail and aol, hundreds of millions of email accounts are completely overlooked. Google are just a tiny blip on the scanning your mail scene.

Come back to us when there are 200 million gmail accounts and people are not rejecting invitations because of privacy concerns.

So stupid (0)

pcgabe (712924) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265247)

This is not a news article! This is someone's blog post! I could get into why the post itself is stupid, but the point of that would be based on the premise that it is *supposed* to be informative/insightful in the first place. It's not! It's just a blog post.

What /. seriously needs is moderation for the articles.

Re:So stupid (1)

sjwest (948274) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265353)

Ok yahoo seem to think mac os, and windows xp are the only platforms that exist for there 'webmail beta', any /. doter who thinks that covers all web browsers is deluded For the record I stated this in /. ages ago.

mod% 0p (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16265305)

very sick and its sure that by the cris3o or lube.

I Like the New Yahoo! (2, Informative)

aplusjimages (939458) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265357)

I agree the adds blow, but it doesn't mean that the new Yahoo mail sucks. I like the drop and drag feature. I like the fact that you can see all your mail instead of only 100 at a time. The calander feature at the bottom of the page is cool as well. Does this mean I will give up my Gmail account? No. I'll just keep both.

IMAP (1)

Cochonou (576531) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265463)

And if I am not mistaken, just like GMail, YMail offers no IMAP support.
I do not really understand why they do not offer this service which is really handy when you use several computers or operating systems. GMail chose to stick to a strange implementation of POP3 where the mail you sent comes back to you through POP.
I guess not everybody has the use of an IMAP server, but until then I will continue to use other freemail services.

Problem attaching files with yahoo mail beta (1)

sweetnjguy29 (880256) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265493)

I tried out the yahoo mail beta last week, and I promptly dumped it in favor of the regular yahoo mail. I tried to attach some files to the email while using firefox, but the popup window to select the attachments was so small that I couldn't click on the browse button to find the attachment, I had to use the tab key to get to it. And there wasn't an 'ok' or 'attach' button in sight anywhere. Screw that.

Y! Mail has tonnes of features, but is dog slow (1)

hattig (47930) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265731)

What use is a fancy Ajax web interface when it is so slow?

It's slow on a dual-2.3GHz G5 machine, and it's positively sloth-like on a 1.33GHz G4 (Firefox). It's slow on Windows too (2GHz Athlon).

It has lots of nice features, and it looks like a stand-alone mail client with added tabs, so it is innovative too. But it is sooooo sllloooowwwww. I can't bear to use it to be honest, I switched back to classic view. There's no excuse for the multiple second delayed reactions when clicking on things in the interface.

GMail is nippy and featureful, and the labelling function does away with that pesky management of email folders issue.

Yahoo! Mail/Oddpost (5, Insightful)

brianerst (549609) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265747)

The title of this article should really be "Yahoo! Mail has a lot of ads", because that and the lack of "automatic" entry of addresses seems to be the only thing "reviewed".

Firstly, Yahoo! Mail Beta is a (slightly) reworked version of Oddpost [wikipedia.org] , which was doing its AJAXy goodness years before Gmail existed. Yahoo! bought Oddpost about three months after Gmail appeared (April 1 vs. July 9, 2004), which may have been a competitive response to gmail, but probably was already in the works. Very early Gmail really only had a few "killer" features, the big one being lots of space (1 gig), which all the major webmail providers matched within a few months (Yahoo! initially went to 100M from 10M, and then quickly moved to 1G). Considering that most people couldn't get a gmail account for months or years, this wasn't exactly an existential threat.

Even the original Yahoo! Mail was a purchased product (Rocketmail [wikipedia.org] by Four11), but it really was an innovation for the day (March 1997). The purchased Oddpost product was also a true innovation (it pretty much was the first major AJAX application that was widely deployed - and isn't AJAX the Slashdot Subject of the Year?).

Getting to the substance of the "review" - yes, the ads are a bit obnoxious on free Yahoo! accounts. But in order to get his vaunted 20% ratio, the reviewer had to come up with a very specific and somewhat narrow screen resolution (828x588 pixels). The Yahoo! Mail Folder Pane is a fixed size (200 pixels) and has four, two-line ads. The ad pane (which only exists on the free accounts) is 160 pixels. The center pane (tabs, mail folder, preview page) automatically resizes to take up the rest of the page. At my normal viewing size (1200x800), the ads take up about 14% of the space - and considering I use Adblock Plus, it's really just some blank space over on the right.

The Contact list stuff is even more silly. Yahoo! Mail will automatically add anyone you've ever sent mail to to your Contact list if you want, or ask for confirmation before doing so. Every email you read that came from someone you've never sent an email to has an "add to contacts" button next to the "From:" address (it's a little folder icon with a plus sign). What more exactly do you want? I, for one, don't want anyone who has ever sent an email to me to be a "contact" - that would clutter up my contacts. The GUI for handling contacts, adding them to lists, adding more information about them and the like is much slicker and better integrated than the equivalent Gmail version.

The "ad" for Yahoo! Calendar on the bottom isn't an ad at all - it's a single line that lists your next 3-4 calendar items. It's rather new (it only appeared about a week ago or so) and gives you a nice GUI for scanning upcoming calendar items and quickly adding a new one. Yahoo! was (rightly) being hammered for not upgrading its Calendar to the same AJAXy-goodness of the beta email, so again, what's the harm? Apparently, they need to add a "turn this off" button or right-click menu option to satisfy the reviewer. Sure, that'd be nice but it's not something I'm worrying about one week into the new functionality.

And that's the "review of the review". What the reviewer leaves out is all the really great features of Yahoo! Mail. It does just about everything the way a standalone mail client does - slick GUI, drag-and-drop, a multi-tabbed interface integrated into the client, message searching (results go into their own tab) and a whole bunch more. In my experience, the spam filter has been a lot better than gmail's.

I like both mail systems, but for average users, Yahoo!'s is a whole lot more natural and useful. I'd love to see message threading in Yahoo! and a slicker GUI in gmail.

The difference is easy to see (1)

angelwalkwithme (984267) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265893)

All one has to do to see the difference between what gmail and yahoo are trying to accomplish is go to each companies respective search page. Google.com, simple search bar, customize as needed. Yahoo.com, cluttered page, unwanted content, advertising, a total mess. I've used yahoo mail longer than any other service, that is, until they started to charge for their pop3 service. Then I switched over to gmail for my primary mail through thunderbird, but I still pop into yahoo mail for those "legacy" e-mails, or for services I sign up for so I won't get spam on my "normal" e-mail account. The yahoo mail interface is just more of the same bloated garbage that business people have in mind when cash is their bottom line.

Someone who hated yahoo mail (2, Informative)

teflaime (738532) | more than 7 years ago | (#16265953)

still hates yahoo mail! News at 11. Yahoo Mail Beta isn't that bad. Sure, it's a little annoying (I liked the old yahoo mail). Sure, they are trying to draw users back to boost their advertising rates (that's what you get with a free webmail client, people!). But the interface is more outlook like than gmail like (that will give them some fans, and some haters). Honestly, it is no worse than it was before, and it's not really much better. If you liked the old yahoo interface, you can function in this one, and it's no more intrusive that the last one was. If you didn't this one isn't going to win you over.

I don't agree. (1)

sixpacker (687012) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266133)

I'm using it and mostly satisfied with it, especially, with outlook likfe user interface. And when it comes to ads, ya it's annoying but nothing is free in this world.

Lastly, for gmail, come on, it's just a plain web mail. Comparing it with Yahoo mail beta is a non-sense to me.

OK, This is Lame (1)

elzbal (520537) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266203)

The author of this article criticizes viewing Yahoo email in its default email-list-at-top-preview-pane-at-bottom layout, using a small browser window size that was not up to the task of displaying all the information that he wanted to display. He gripes about not being able to open multiple tabs with several email messages like he used to be able to do with Firefox under the old email system.

Less than a minute after reading the so-called article, I had restored his favorite email-reading workflow in my Yahoo Mail Beta window. I was viewing a larger list of emails (by turning off the preview pane), and double-clicking several messages opened up several tabs within the Yahoo Mail window environment. In fact, I'd say that this is an improvement over the old feature set, as it provides his email-reading workflow for non-tabbed IE browsers. I think the author of the article was more in love with complaining than he was with exploring the features of Yahoo Mail.

He also criticises the ads displayed on the page. While it's definately more than before, it's not the 20% of screen real estate that he claims when using a reasonable browser window size. And anyway, most people's eyes have been trained to naturally flow away from advertizing.

To sum it all up... if Slashdot was Digg, this story would be buried under "OK, This is Lame".

I 100% disagree (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16266213)

I think Yahoo mail is one of the best ajax applications out there. It has all the functionality of outlook express and feels like a real application. The only problem is that the yahoo brand name is now so boring, noone is going to think its cool.

Author is clueless (0, Redundant)

Wovel (964431) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266355)

Odd to see a SlashDot article written by someone who does not know what a Beta is. In every sense this article completely misses the point. Yahoo mail has been around for over 10 years. They created an upgrade to their interface which is currently in BETA. The service is not named BETA (Either is Gmail) the NEW INTERFACE is in beta. Had the person done any research at all they would have noticed that yahoo mail and gmail are different services. I suppose any standard for an article being mildly are officially in the crapper.

Yahoo Mail Beta too broken for me (1)

Mark Maughan (763986) | more than 7 years ago | (#16266413)

I tried it on firefox at high resolution (2028x1536). My system DPI is set correctly to 144dpi. Firefox is set to render fonts at no less than 20pt.

Firstly the text is all scrunched up in the menus so that some things can't be read and some things are hard to click on. Obviously some idiot designed the page to be viewed at one resolution.

But more importantly, there is an empty frame that pokes out of the top left corner and covers the menu and the button to switch back to regular Yahoo mail. You have to slide the menu frame to the right to make it go away. I can even see the frame in the code and it doesn't seem to do anything.

All this sloppiness and I couldn't find anywhere to submit bug reports. If this is what Yahoo mail is switching to in the future, I will have to find another webemail provider.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...