"A significant number of testers liked the old version better." What they didn't say is that to use the new drag and drop features you have to be using IE or your forced to use the classic interface. I don't see any technical reason behind this Yahoo's new beta works in most all major browsers.
Yahoo's new web mail client does not work on Pocket PC 2003 (IE 4.0). I must use the classic version. And even that does not fully work. For all the talk about mobile computing, the vendors seem to have abandoned this latform. There isn't even a Yahoo Internet Messenger for Pocket PC.
I was a longtime HoTMaiL (see I know what it means ;) ) user saddled with a pretty useless email address...(absoulutely not hotmail's fault...just a victim of its popularity I know)
When GMAIL came out it gave me the opportunity to get the exact email address I wanted (and 1 for each of my kids for future use).
From this article it sounds like I should be able to get a new .live one at some point but since I've grown up on web based email the Outlook 'look' does nothing for me.
Therefore...do I leave .gmail for .live for what the article says is basically MS just catching up. Probably not.
It also sounds from the article that MS is going to embed ads (for 3rd parties) into OUTGOING emails...that is something I really would not want to see and I would probably leave .gmail if they started to do that too.
So, in summary, it looks like Hotmail is doing a good job to 'catch up' and that should help MS stay relevant moving forward. I do think, however, that those it lost are probably gone for good.
10 years is a good time to change. The original Hotmail was on BSD, then they changed the outside to windows servers to look like it was windows running the service. I hear they are using LAMP architecture for Windows Live.
If this, in your opinion, is a 'typically crappy effort by MSN (??)' why are you using hotmail?
This is a BETA and I would expect MS to 'perfect' their product to work within THEIR products before making it work within a 3rd party product that has 10-15% of market share.
Again...I'm not using it but I think we have to a: cut them some slack so they get it right on their browser first and b: continue to encourage innovation by all players (Yahoo/Google/Aol/MS) in the web services area. It makes it better for us that want to pick and choose.
I am currently using Firefox ver. 1.0.7 & hotmail renders fine for me. Also as I dual boot Ubuntu-Linux & Windows, I also use Firefox (not sure which version) in Windows & again I have no problem with Hotmail rendering - although I used to before I upgraded to the latest Firefox version. Maybe you just need to update? God Bless You - Beagleburt.
Why do none of these stories ever talk about how neither Hotmail/Livemail or Yahoo ever offer auto-forwarding or filters that can forward mail (like Gmail)? I want to hear a straight answer from MS and Yahoo about why they don't do that. Gmail does.
With a huge ad on the top and another on the right, even with my 1280x800 screen, the usuable area is down to a small 800x500 area, making the outlook style useless and impossible to use. My PDA device is almost better than the new hotmail. You need a 1600x1200 screen for it to look good and work well. Can't they just to stick to one smaller banner ad at the top?
With a huge ad on the top and another on the right, even with my 1280x800 screen, the usuable area is down to a small 800x500 area, making the outlook style useless and impossible to use. My PDA device is almost better than the new hotmail. You need a 1600x1200 screen for it to look good and work well. Can't they just to stick to one smaller banner ad at the top?
Glad to see the vertical ad is being removed. I realize they have to have them, but the placement of that one makes using the viewing pane a non-starter. That will be a huge improvement.
I just about choked when I read the line that implied that the name change is 'gifted' as if this is some kind of advantage. They gotta be kidding!
Let me get this straight. They change from a snappy, easy to say name that is far enough removed from Microsoft that many people don't realize the connection there, to a name that is harder to say and guarantees an association in peoples minds with viruses and security flaws.
And it is tied to a browser that is the worst on the planet, then they think people will swallow ads on their private messages. No wonder these guys can't figure out why other companies are doing so well.
Go Google! Microsoft just gave me a reason to get myself a g- mail account.
Co-incidentally there is another news item with the above title in PC Mag by John Dvorak about IE (which is so intimately tied to the new Hotmail) here that is interesting reading in light of the Hotmail / IE connection.
Article is here: <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1952997,00.asp" target="_newWindow">http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1952997,00.asp</a>
I get the feeling that the new Hotmail may be cobbled together by the same means described by Dvorak.
Honestly...who cares about the Hotmail interface? I use MS Outlook Express or VZW with MSN on my cell phone to view my Hotmail emails. What I REALLY want is a serious SPAM blocker and the ability to block more than a limited number (what is it, 35? 50?) of domain names and/or email addresses. Yahoo! Mail does a MUCH better job of this. As a paying Hotmail Plus customer, I am tempted to move to Yahoo! permanently if MS doesn't get its SPAM act together soon.
I am so sick of having 95% of my Yaaoo email be spam. I have the spam blocker turned on and wrote my own filters, but I still get pelted by these time wasters. All Yahoo needs to do is allow me to block email from country level domains such as China and Korea. Why is this so hard!!! The first email service that let me do this would have me as a new, paying customer.
Its FireFox for me all over again. I've been using G-Mail for so long now the only thing my hotmail account does is catch spam when I sign up for something on the net. At this point I simply don't care.
Actually the original hotmail setup not only has more features, but is less cluttered and has a clean, easy to use interface.
When I say features I mean simple things like being able to empty a trash can without tagging every message with a mouse click and then hitting the delete.
This is especially annoying if you receive large amounts of junk mail.
The layout looks like it was "designed" by someone who was given web page layout software for the first time and felt it necessary to put everything on screen at once. It reminds me of when DTP software first started to become popular, and companies would start attempting to design their own literature instead of leaving it to the professionals - which is exactly what Microsoft should do here.
Let someone who knows what they're doing design their websites and mail portals, because they clearly don't have a clue.
Windows Live is probably one of the worst websites I've ever seen in my life.
What is it with Gmail? Two years later and it is still in beta. You can't sign up for it unles you are "invited" by an existing member. This is just silly. Google, either sh*t or get off the pot with Gmail.
Gmail might still be in beta but do you realize why it's in beta? Google's trying to make it the best of the best web mails out their and they don't want to release it until it is the best of the best and it appeals to everyone.
Not just You, me, but everyone. That's whats keeping it in Beta right now.
It's not the best of the best yet. It's still got a long ways to go and still got alot more features to add in to appeal to every user to make every user happy.
(By the way you do know you can still sign up with a cellphone right?)
Another big reason why they won't allow people to sign up without an invite or a cellphone is to keep people who just want to have multiple gmail accounts to use to spam people with. You get what I mean?
I moved onto gmail at the beginning of the year and haven't once looked back. The 2GB mailbox allows me to use it as a repository for Vonage voicemails hence giving me random access to my voicemail (Vonage's front end is PATHETICALLY slow). That on top of regular email effectively makes gmail the ultimate message repository.
So it says BETA next to it, who cares? It works fine. I think the invite only system is a good method to avoid propagation of spam accounts. It's not hard to find someone to invite you.
Spell check is probably the best feature. It checks for spelling as you type and puts a curly underline (just like in word) if the spelling is wrong and right clicking on the misspelled word would give you suggestions with the right spelling!!!
I have been using Hotmail since before MS took over. Keeping the "classic" option was a good idea both for long time users like myself but also it keeps things simple to just pop on for a moment. On the plus side the MS changes over the years have been useful when there is time to bother with them. On the down side some of the animated ads can slow down the browser on a brand new system and for an even slightly older one can make hotmail unusable while the ad is running. For spam a lot gets through in part because a handful are coming from the ones who pay for those annoying ads on hotmail while many of the others are from MS lifting the original user name restrictions. So now when joeshmoe10000000 signs up for something and joeshmoe1 gets their junk instead because 10000000 missed a few numbers on registering for whatever. (note the pre-MShotmail would not allow the numbers so that there could be only one joeshmoe)
I tried it for a couple of weeks, and switched back to the old Hotmail style. The useable screen area was absurdly small. Way too cluttered with ads and other useless stuff. Yes I left feedback saying this when I opted out!
Perhaps I should try it again, if MS has removed the long ad down the right side of the screen.
For newsletters. And given they killed POP connectivity for newer accounts I am not moving unless they can promise I keep that connection. I'll get a second gmail account for newsletters before I drop to a site that dosen't offer connectivity to Outlook or Thunder bird.
I don't even logon to the hotmail server anymore, just use my OE to read my newsletters because the online servers make it such a pain.
Some people would find it too much of a hassle moving over all the newsletters they subscribe to.
Besides which, I have a gmail account which I use for other things.
Besides which, with the setup I have I hardly get any spam, And given I use that account for newsletters, no matter WHICH company email I used, I'd get some spam. So I can't compair them equally.
I believe that most people now use Outlook, Thunderbird, or Outlook Express. None of the webmail offerers offer a GOOD tool that synchronizes the webmail with the client. Yahoo tried but their Intellisynch does not work reliably and they offer no support. MSN offers an upgrade version that supposedly does synchronize, but it does not work and their technical support is horrible; they always bump you to another person to whom to write and try to sell you another service. I truly do not believe that ads are the source of the problem, but rather a well thought out complete, reliable solution that offers sound technical support for both laypeople and IT people.
Manage updates with the Download App
One feature which I liked the most is my spam mails have been reduced by a good percentage, now I very rarely get Spam mails.
What they didn't say is that to use the new drag and drop features you have to be using IE or your forced to use the classic interface. I don't see any technical reason behind this Yahoo's new beta works in most all major browsers.
When GMAIL came out it gave me the opportunity to get the exact email address I wanted (and 1 for each of my kids for future use).
From this article it sounds like I should be able to get a new .live one at some point but since I've grown up on web based email the Outlook 'look' does nothing for me.
Therefore...do I leave .gmail for .live for what the article says is basically MS just catching up. Probably not.
It also sounds from the article that MS is going to embed ads (for 3rd parties) into OUTGOING emails...that is something I really would not want to see and I would probably leave .gmail if they started to do that too.
So, in summary, it looks like Hotmail is doing a good job to 'catch up' and that should help MS stay relevant moving forward. I do think, however, that those it lost are probably gone for good.
My 2cents.
BSD, then they changed the outside to windows servers to look like
it was windows running the service. I hear they are using LAMP
architecture for Windows Live.
Typical crappy effort by MSN
B: I'm a Gmail user
If this, in your opinion, is a 'typically crappy effort by MSN (??)' why are you using hotmail?
This is a BETA and I would expect MS to 'perfect' their product to work within THEIR products before making it work within a 3rd party product that has 10-15% of market share.
Again...I'm not using it but I think we have to a: cut them some slack so they get it right on their browser first and b: continue to encourage innovation by all players (Yahoo/Google/Aol/MS) in the web services area. It makes it better for us that want to pick and choose.
Oh wait, this is MS we are talking about.
Competition where MS plays is a good thing - especially from the likes of Google.
name change is 'gifted' as if this is some kind of advantage.
They gotta be kidding!
Let me get this straight. They change from a snappy, easy to say
name that is far enough removed from Microsoft that many
people don't realize the connection there, to a name that is
harder to say and guarantees an association in peoples minds
with viruses and security flaws.
And it is tied to a browser that is the worst on the planet, then
they think people will swallow ads on their private messages. No
wonder these guys can't figure out why other companies are
doing so well.
Go Google! Microsoft just gave me a reason to get myself a g-
mail account.
PC Mag by John Dvorak about IE (which is so intimately tied to
the new Hotmail) here that is interesting reading in light of the
Hotmail / IE connection.
Article is here:
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1952997,00.asp" target="_newWindow">http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1952997,00.asp</a>
I get the feeling that the new Hotmail may be cobbled together
by the same means described by Dvorak.
When I say features I mean simple things like being able to empty a trash can without tagging every message with a mouse click and then hitting the delete.
This is especially annoying if you receive large amounts of junk mail.
The layout looks like it was "designed" by someone who was given web page layout software for the first time and felt it necessary to put everything on screen at once. It reminds me of when DTP software first started to become popular, and companies would start attempting to design their own literature instead of leaving it to the professionals - which is exactly what Microsoft should do here.
Let someone who knows what they're doing design their websites and mail portals, because they clearly don't have a clue.
Windows Live is probably one of the worst websites I've ever seen in my life.
Not just You, me, but everyone. That's whats keeping it in Beta right now.
It's not the best of the best yet. It's still got a long ways to go and still got alot more features to add in to appeal to every user to make every user happy.
(By the way you do know you can still sign up with a cellphone right?)
Another big reason why they won't allow people to sign up without an invite or a cellphone is to keep people who just want to have multiple gmail accounts to use to spam people with. You get what I mean?
I think the invite only system is a good method to avoid propagation of spam accounts.
It's not hard to find someone to invite you.
Windows Live Mail, on the other hand, requires IE and IE only, or else you get "classic" Hotmail.
No contest: as has been happening more and more often, Microsoft is left behind due to its stubborn insistence on rejecting Web standards.
On the plus side the MS changes over the years have been useful when there is time to bother with them.
On the down side some of the animated ads can slow down the browser on a brand new system and for an even slightly older one can make hotmail unusable while the ad is running.
For spam a lot gets through in part because a handful are coming from the ones who pay for those annoying ads on hotmail while many of the others are from MS lifting the original user name restrictions. So now when joeshmoe10000000 signs up for something and joeshmoe1 gets their junk instead because 10000000 missed a few numbers on registering for whatever. (note the pre-MShotmail would not allow the numbers so that there could be only one joeshmoe)
Perhaps I should try it again, if MS has removed the long ad down the right side of the screen.
I don't even logon to the hotmail server anymore, just use my OE to read my newsletters because the online servers make it such a pain.
several years, they've become the T-Rex stuck in the tar pit.
TRY GMAIL.
you'll wonder how you could have ever been so foolish.
you get over 2gb of space AND with gspace (firefox extension),
you can use your gmail account as a file server.
oh... and google is actually trying to protect your privacy
whereas most every other company handed over anything dubya
asked for.
how could you be so foolish?
Besides which, I have a gmail account which I use for other things.
Besides which, with the setup I have I hardly get any spam, And given I use that account for newsletters, no matter WHICH company email I used, I'd get some spam. So I can't compair them equally.
I must say the mail.live interface looks good - very similar to outlook
MS cut that likely for the very add free reason that you like. Unless they changed that, resently.