http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/08/2258246


eh boy......

Shouldn't this be "A reason not to use Google Groups/Blogger some other services" but not Gmail?

I like my GMail account. There's a nice hack for it so you can upload stuff into your Gmail account and have it act as a backup storage on the internet. Quite handy to be honest.

I fully agree with you swizzi. Gmail is the best in email category. Just try with different addons on firefox and see its best usage. And we all know they were the first to revolutionize the email with GB's of storage. Before that yahoo & others was offering just 5MB space.

GK

What I found most interesting was this (http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=515944&cid=23007432) comment.

What I found most interesting was this (http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=515944&cid=23007432) comment.

Yeah I read exactly the same thing. A few comments down someone else confirmed the exact same issue. Let me know if you find any more information on that... I use Gmail religiously.

Yeah I read exactly the same thing. A few comments down someone else confirmed the exact same issue. Let me know if you find any more information on that... I use Gmail religiously.
If this really is happening, and Google is facing yet another XSS-flaw, then it will hopefully surface pretty quick. (I, as you I'd believe, am not feeling too comfortable knowing that there might be an 0-day floating around... again.)

If this really is happening, and Google is facing yet another XSS-flaw, then it will hopefully surface pretty quick. (I, as you I'd believe, am not feeling too comfortable knowing that there might be an 0-day floating around... again.)

Yeah I forgot about that. Didn't that exploit essentially do exactly the same thing? Allow people to access your contacts on any site as long as you were logged into Gmail? I'm going to have to do some research...

Yeah I forgot about that. Didn't that exploit essentially do exactly the same thing? Allow people to access your contacts on any site as long as you were logged into Gmail? I'm going to have to do some research...

Quoting from memory; You are correct.

Now that I think about it, I've been getting a lot of bounce back emails. Actually all my emails sent were bounced back. Time to move away... I really liked their 'applications' especially spreadsheet!

My main reason for not using them is the whole data mining thing. I can't imagine letting them have FULL access to ALL of your email transactions and putting together God knows what level of profile on you. Give them your SSN and bank info for adwords, all of your site info using their Webmaster Controls, your search and surfing habits, and then all of your email communications? Insanity.

It's all to improve our online experience, dwrunyon!!!!!! :rolleyes:

I've gradually been shying away from free email providers and moving to self-hosted solutions that I can control.

I am still investigating the issue but I recieved the following e-mail. Thank god I did not update my bank information. I have not placed an order through google since Nov of 2007. My faith in google is fading.

Sorry, because you still haven't updated your credit card information, your order from Synapse Global Corporation has been cancelled. If you'd like to place another order, you must review and update your credit card information in your Google Account first.

Order Details - Apr 5, 2008 5:23 PM GMT+07:00
Google Order #40XXXXXXXXXXX49

Shipping Status Qty Item Price
Not yet shipped 1 Synapse Global Corporation - Invoice XXX $179.70
Tax (SC) : $0.00
Total : $179.70

Yeah I read exactly the same thing. A few comments down someone else confirmed the exact same issue. Let me know if you find any more information on that... I use Gmail religiously.

That's an old issue - it has to do with their JavaScript libs and how it caches parts/all of your contact list in the browser. Other sites just go in and grab it.



Regards,

I've gradually been shying away from free email providers and moving to self-hosted solutions that I can control.

Your refreshing brand of intellect and forethought has no place on this board!





;)

One of the reasons I made this thread, besides being an interesting topic of conversation, is that there seems to be no shortage these days of kool-aid drinking google sheeple. I cannot speak for others, but I get concerned about something when people start to think a product or service does things others cannot do, is revolutionary when it is in fact not, or similar perspectives.

As for some of the other posts, there are a few 0-days for Gmail and some of the other Google apps I've seen, aside from what was mentioned in the /. thread. You though those were bad. How about logging in to anyones Gmail account, provided you already have one?


The bottom line is if you do not pay someone money or compensate them monetarily, in the US you have virtually no legal recourse against services.



Regards,

.Gmail is the best in email category.
GK
:agree:
I‘m also think so!

Until I find a better email solution, I'm sticking with Gmail.

is there any chance gmail team reads this thread?

is there any chance gmail team reads this thread?
Why would it matter? I'm sure they're aware of the problem.

I'm sure they'll fix it before it comes out of beta :D

Why would it matter? I'm sure they're aware of the problem.
why are you so mean ?

why are you so confident ?? do you work @google?

Why would anyone use Google for anything other than searches is beyond me. Do you not realize how much of your personal information Google has and stores? Ever think what would happen if that information fell into the wrong hands or Google's 'do no evil' philosophies fade?
I trust Microsoft more and occasionally use Hotmail for what I need. And www.com (http://www.com)

http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/08/2258246


eh boy......

I am very certain that Gmail is not the only provider which has this problem. Gmail is one thing Google has done right - kind of sad to see it attacked like this.

I am very certain that Gmail is not the only provider which has this problem. Gmail is one thing Google has done right - kind of sad to see it attacked like this.

If this is something they did right I perish to see what they did wrong.



Regards,

I do not like their search engine, but their email/productivity suite is one service that allows me to be more productive than any other package I've tried. I have a personal/business Gmail account, and a Google Apps account for the company. I am very pleased with both.

If this is something they did right I perish to see what they did wrong.



Regards,

Touche. Can I include that in my signature? ;)

one reason to use gmail - its free :) stop moaning about a free service.. :D

The expert opinion in this thread and the /. comments is just staggering. Has, Gmail had issues before, of course, and so did most every other provider. I would still rather trust Google over some other private provider. I'm not really sure what instantly makes any other service suddenly immune from all the accusations that, say karl specifically, is making against it. Am I supposed to just take every other provider on their word that they won't turn around and do something shady with that very same information? Hardly seems like a tangible argument, but it does look nice to pretend to be an expert.

I fully agree with you swizzi. Gmail is the best in email category. Just try with different addons on firefox and see its best usage. And we all know they were the first to revolutionize the email with GB's of storage. Before that yahoo & others was offering just 5MB space.


They were not the first to provide gigabytes of space to users I know people who had several gigs of email long before gmail was launched.

and why would you need several gigs of email storage? I always thought my 1GB or so (I forget what I set it at) was overkill.

6608.309498MB of space! what are you emailing? A movie?

That's an old issue - it has to do with their JavaScript libs and how it caches parts/all of your contact list in the browser. Other sites just go in and grab it.


The XSS-flaw quote above was fixed - however, it is entirely possible that there's a new hole, perhaps with the new version of Gmail.

In either case, it is not good if the reports coming are accurate.


one reason to use gmail - its free :) stop moaning about a free service.. :D

There is a premium (read paid for) version of Google Apps, where Google Mail (Gmail) is an integral part of this service offer.


They were not the first to provide gigabytes of space to users I know people who had several gigs of email long before gmail was launched.

and why would you need several gigs of email storage? I always thought my 1GB or so (I forget what I set it at) was overkill.

6608.309498MB of space! what are you emailing? A movie?

If you use the same email-account over a period of time, the storage does build up to numbers over several GB. (And no, this doesn't have to do with "emailing movies", rather normal day to day-usage.)

why are you so mean ?

why are you so confident ?? do you work @google?
The story was on Slashdot. Besides, Gmail is still in beta, so what do you expect?

Touche. Can I include that in my signature? ;)

By all means! I grant you full copyright use. :)



Kind Regards,

The expert opinion in this thread and the /. comments is just staggering. Has, Gmail had issues before, of course, and so did most every other provider. I would still rather trust Google over some other private provider. I'm not really sure what instantly makes any other service suddenly immune from all the accusations that, say karl specifically, is making against it. Am I supposed to just take every other provider on their word that they won't turn around and do something shady with that very same information? Hardly seems like a tangible argument, but it does look nice to pretend to be an expert.

It takes some common sense and perhaps some business acumen is all. If you give someone money for something there are inherent rights you receive, along with the product or service. Google has everyone in one place: their paid services and the free services, so everyone get's the same headaches.

You don't have to take providers "at their word" when you give them money. You take them at their policies governing such practices. At least with other providers you have recourse. With google's free services you have no legal recourse. Keep in mind google's paid services are using -identical- code to their free services.

And yes, I am an expert at this as people pay me to be one: everything from architecting high-performance compute clusters(with real grids (http://sun.com/grid/)) to geographic CDNs, including all the legal import/export/trade/govt. coup-in-progress headaches that accompany such. They also pay my team and I to run a legitimate company with lawyers and all, so I have had experience asking counsel these questions, in fact, these exact questions.



Regards,

They were not the first to provide gigabytes of space to users I know people who had several gigs of email long before gmail was launched.

and why would you need several gigs of email storage? I always thought my 1GB or so (I forget what I set it at) was overkill.

6608.309498MB of space! what are you emailing? A movie?
No gmail was not the first who offered 1gb mail box but it's the first big player that made it mainstream. Why did Yahoo or MSN offer larger mail box only after gmail introduced ?

It's not the storage space that makes gmail no. 1 ... We don't use gmail just because of its gigantic storage but many many other features.

I don't understand why big sites would be taking advantage of what is essentially an exploit to get users contacts, wouldn't that just ruin users trust for a website, instead of getting them to "invite" their friends?

I don't understand why big sites would be taking advantage of what is essentially an exploit to get users contacts, wouldn't that just ruin users trust for a website, instead of getting them to "invite" their friends?

I doubt most users would understand the implications.

It takes some common sense and perhaps some business acumen is all. If you give someone money for something there are inherent rights you receive, along with the product or service. Google has everyone in one place: their paid services and the free services, so everyone get's the same headaches.Okay, so you're implying that by paying money I get some legal protection rights, which is correct. But what does that have anything to do with the second part of this paragraph? If I pay for the Google services, do I not get the same rights as if I paid for say your services? What tie are you trying to make between the first part which implies legal repercussions and the fact that the code offering behind the free and paid Google services are 99% identical?

You don't have to take providers "at their word" when you give them money. You take them at their policies governing such practices. At least with other providers you have recourse.So since you've seemingly taken effort in the first paragraph to tie the free and paid Google services, why now are you splitting the two up? The service agreement that goes along with the Google account is acceptable to me. Frankly, I can't even find the terms of service that you offer on your services on your site. I'm sure they're listed somewhere, maybe in the section after I've given you my money, but that seems rather far in the process.


To get back to the original link you've provided. It talked about one specific feature that the particular user did not agree with on /. I gotta be totally open with you, if someone wanted to just spam an account, I'm certain they would find an easier way than to first of all spam the Gmail servers with a falsified from address. That entire post was sensationalist commentary at best.

And yes, I am an expert at this as people pay me to be one...
I don't question your experience, but then please, by all means, provide a valid argument for what the many reasons that you feel exist to not use the Gmail service and please do include on how you feel other providers do it differently. I find it hard to understand, why, if being such an expert you choose to link /. comments and use that as the entire basis for your expert argument.

Cheers!

I have recently started using google apps with a small student company that I work for. It is so much easier and user friendly then working with horde or squirel mail that comes with cpanel.

I was weary about gmail back in the early days, but a couple of years later, I am starting to trust it a bit more.

Hotmail annoys me so much - microsoft are too restrictive on it free services compared to google!

Okay, so you're implying that by paying money I get some legal protection rights, which is correct. But what does that have anything to do with the second part of this paragraph? If I pay for the Google services, do I not get the same rights as if I paid for say your services? What tie are you trying to make between the first part which implies legal repercussions and the fact that the code offering behind the free and paid Google services are 99% identical?

You do, however, we don't have issues with 1000s of spammers using our servers, breaking captchas for email accounts.

So since you've seemingly taken effort in the first paragraph to tie the free and paid Google services, why now are you splitting the two up? The service agreement that goes along with the Google account is acceptable to me. Frankly, I can't even find the terms of service that you offer on your services on your site. I'm sure they're listed somewhere, maybe in the section after I've given you my money, but that seems rather far in the process.They are linked to in the sign up process, also you can view them on any page from the menu: About->Policies.


To get back to the original link you've provided. It talked about one specific feature that the particular user did not agree with on /. I gotta be totally open with you, if someone wanted to just spam an account, I'm certain they would find an easier way than to first of all spam the Gmail servers with a falsified from address. That entire post was sensationalist commentary at best.Hundreds of people disagree with you enough to take time and comment on /. about it, but we all are entitled to our own opinion.

I don't question your experience, but then please, by all means, provide a valid argument for what the many reasons that you feel exist to not use the Gmail service and please do include on how you feel other providers do it differently. I find it hard to understand, why, if being such an expert you choose to link /. comments and use that as the entire basis for your expert argument.

Cheers!The link was to spur discussion, that's all. It was not meant as any form of basis for anything let alone an argument. It was to discuss in a place where more people are concerned with hosting then on /. . That's all.

I feel that any paid provider that does not allow a free automated way onto their systems does it better then GMail. I feel that any provider that doesn't cache private information in the browser does it better then Gmail. There were many issues brought up in the thread, backscatter being only one.



Kind Regards,

You do, however, we don't have issues with 1000s of spammers using our servers, breaking captchas for email accountDo you feel this is because of the superiority of your service offered, or simply because the volume and availability of the Gmail offering completely eclipses yours?

They are linked to in the sign up process, also you can view them on any page from the menu: About->Policies.Ooops, thanks for that. I didn't seem to get the hover options the first time around so I simply clicked the about image link.

Reading over your SLA section, just because that's what I consider to be the best statement of repercussions for service disagreements. Let me briefly summarise some quick things I've noticed. You guarantee reply times, but go on to stipulate that resolution can take a much longer time, put a clause on the types of questions that aren't covered at all and provide at best a 24-48 hour clause on actual resolutions.

The SLA claims 100% availability, but goes on to exclude in a non-comprehensive list, DoS, hardware failure, network maintenance, emergency maintenance, unexpected failure, amongst others.

I also took a read over the Privacy Policy, and while it explicitely says that no personally identifiable data is collected from visitors it does not make the same extension to service members from what I can see. It also has several exit clauses which do allow for usage of said private data. It also specifically states that there is a collection of non-personally identifiable data, but data that could be considered private anyway.

What I'm getting at here, is precisely what makes your agreement (and I use yours as simply the most convenient at the moment) better then the agreement that say Gmail offers. They're all fairly standard legal documents that provide enough avenues for the provider that they for the most part get a lot of control over what and how the user interacts with the service.

To me, unless you nitpick very specific words and sentences, the spirit of both and most of the wording is the same. The user has few avenues of repercussion and damages claimed are always limited.

I feel that any paid provider that does not allow a free automated way onto their systems does it better then GMail. I feel that any provider that doesn't cache private information in the browser does it better then Gmail. There were many issues brought up in the thread, backscatter being only one.Fair enough, there are some issues, I've admitted to as much earlier. How do you propose that a largescale provider do sign-ups then if not automatically? Do you believe that every account must be researched and approved by a person?


Hundreds of people disagree with you enough to take time and comment on /. about it, but we all are entitled to our own opinion.

The link was to spur discussion, that's all. It was not meant as any form of basis for anything let alone an argument. It was to discuss in a place where more people are concerned with hosting then on /. . That's all.At the time of the posting, the primary thing I read was the original comment on spam. There're more now, some are more valid than others, but that seems natural given that it's posted on /.

And once again to reiterate, for my examples, I didn't pick on you specifically, it was just convenient to use your policies as examples.

I use argument in the best possible intonation and perhaps discussion is a more appropriate description :)

I think that's mostly all for now.

Cheers.

Keep in mind google's paid services are using -identical- code to their free services.

Yes, they most likely do - but what does this have to do with anything? Their premium service comes with a SLA, dedicated support and such.


And yes, I am an expert at this as people pay me to be one: everything from architecting high-performance compute clusters(with real grids (http://sun.com/grid/)) to geographic CDNs, including all the legal import/export/trade/govt. coup-in-progress headaches that accompany such. They also pay my team and I to run a legitimate company with lawyers and all, so I have had experience asking counsel these questions, in fact, these exact questions.Are you implying that Google doesn't know how to build their network and their services? If so, that is quite a bold statement there Karl.


I doubt most users would understand the implications.

Indeed you are correct here, Orien. I brought these issues up on another forum and I don't think one of the people commenting understood the big picture.

I fail to see "why" people find Gmail so great or even use it. I pipe all my domains and ISP email accounts in to Outlook 07 which is far superior to Gmail's interface.

Frankly i think Gmail is horrible.

And I wouldn't touch Outlook ** with a ten foot pole... Tastes differ...

Find me a webmail client that I can use with a webhost that compares to gmail/yahoo and I'll use it. The closest I've seen is zimbra which will cost me about $30/month for one account.

I fail to see "why" people find Gmail so great or even use it. I pipe all my domains and ISP email accounts in to Outlook 07 which is far superior to Gmail's interface.

Frankly i think Gmail is horrible.

Outlook is a "fat" client that you have to use on one machine, or licence for each.

In fact you can use Outlook and GMail together. It works really well. Read your mail through the web interface and then access with POP or IMAP through Outlook when you are back at base.

With IMAP the mail stays on the server so is effectively backed up and searchable. With POP you have the option to leave a copy on the server so the same works.

The spam filtering is the best I've seen and free. I've now switched off Outlook's junk mail filter. Yahoo! and Hotmail's spam filtering is poor.

If you don't like the webmail interface you can forward to Yahoo! or use Yahoo! to grab it via POP, or another webmail that lets you add a POP collector.

Outlook is a "fat" client.

Launching Firefox with Gmail loaded on 1 tab pulls 75.9MB, and Outlook running uses 9.5MB


In fact you can use Outlook and GMail together. It works really well. Read your mail through the web interface and then access with POP or IMAP through Outlook when you are back at base.

With IMAP the mail stays on the server so is effectively backed up and searchable. With POP you have the option to leave a copy on the server so the same works.

The junk Gmail account i had for sign-ups was piped directly in to Outlook so i didn't have to visit the site or look at Gmails interface, and yes it works well. I also access my mail on PDA/Mobile phone with ProfiMail (http://www.lonelycatgames.com/?app=profimail), and yes that works with Gmail also.


The spam filtering is the best I've seen and free. I've now switched off Outlook's junk mail filter. Yahoo! and Hotmail's spam filtering is poor.

I don't use Outlooks junk filter either, that's handled by a combination of McAfee Anti-Spam and the spam software on my server.. Which is "nearly" perfect.


If you don't like the webmail interface you can forward to Yahoo! or use Yahoo! to grab it via POP, or another webmail that lets you add a POP collector.

I just don't like the thought of my mail and personal information sitting on someone else's hardware whether it be Gmail, Yahoo or Hotmail. I'd much rather have it archived locally, and i really can't work out why people trust their data to a Gmail account when there is far better solutions.

Launching Firefox with Gmail loaded on 1 tab pulls 75.9MB, and Outlook running uses 9.5MB



The junk Gmail account i had for sign-ups was piped directly in to Outlook so i didn't have to visit the site or look at Gmails interface, and yes it works well. I also access my mail on PDA/Mobile phone with ProfiMail (http://www.lonelycatgames.com/?app=profimail), and yes that works with Gmail also.



I don't use Outlooks junk filter either, that's handled by a combination of McAfee Anti-Spam and the spam software on my server.. Which is "nearly" perfect.



I just don't like the thought of my mail and personal information sitting on someone else's hardware whether it be Gmail, Yahoo or Hotmail. I'd much rather have it archived locally, and i really can't work out why people trust their data to a Gmail account when there is far better solutions.

By "fat" client (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_client), all I meant was that you have to install software locally and are tied to machines with the software installed.

You can pay for anti-spam software if you like. :D I'm tired of fixing other people's PCs because of problems with McAfee and Norton :mad:

You were originally complaining about the interface. Data privacy is another issue which people have to make a call on.

"Far better solutions" depends on your point of view :) What did you have in mind?

My main reason for not using them is the whole data mining thing. I can't imagine letting them have FULL access to ALL of your email transactions and putting together God knows what level of profile on you. Give them your SSN and bank info for adwords, all of your site info using their Webmaster Controls, your search and surfing habits, and then all of your email communications? Insanity.

Do you think Google individually goes through each and every e-mail going through their systems? No! Can other providers which have been around earlier such as MSN do the same? Yes! It isn't just Google who has access to your personal information... I guess if you're so paranoid about Google then no online information should be submitted and no purchases etc :p

Do you think Google individually goes through each and every e-mail going through their systems?
I do. That's how you are able to use their powerful Search feature to locate information in one of your emails.

I guess if you're so paranoid about Google then no online information should be submitted and no purchases

Not terribly paranoid, but I do admit to having a bit of concern with how much insider info Google has on me because I use my Gmail account for almost all my internet accounts. I am definitely rethinking this!

Do you feel this is because of the superiority of your service offered, or simply because the volume and availability of the Gmail offering completely eclipses yours?

You totally missed the point. If anything, ours is superior (besides the individuals running it) because we charge for it. You would be amazed how much a price-tag deters spammers from creating email accounts.




Ooops, thanks for that. I didn't seem to get the hover options the first time around so I simply clicked the about image link.

Reading over your SLA section, just because that's what I consider to be the best statement of repercussions for service disagreements. Let me briefly summarise some quick things I've noticed. You guarantee reply times, but go on to stipulate that resolution can take a much longer time, put a clause on the types of questions that aren't covered at all and provide at best a 24-48 hour clause on actual resolutions.

The SLA claims 100% availability, but goes on to exclude in a non-comprehensive list, DoS, hardware failure, network maintenance, emergency maintenance, unexpected failure, amongst others.

I also took a read over the Privacy Policy, and while it explicitely says that no personally identifiable data is collected from visitors it does not make the same extension to service members from what I can see. It also has several exit clauses which do allow for usage of said private data. It also specifically states that there is a collection of non-personally identifiable data, but data that could be considered private anyway.Now seriously, would that make any sense to not have personal information of clients? Things like name, billing information, etc? Seriously now....

What I'm getting at here, is precisely what makes your agreement (and I use yours as simply the most convenient at the moment) better then the agreement that say Gmail offers. They're all fairly standard legal documents that provide enough avenues for the provider that they for the most part get a lot of control over what and how the user interacts with the service.

To me, unless you nitpick very specific words and sentences, the spirit of both and most of the wording is the same. The user has few avenues of repercussion and damages claimed are always limited.

Fair enough, there are some issues, I've admitted to as much earlier. How do you propose that a largescale provider do sign-ups then if not automatically? Do you believe that every account must be researched and approved by a person?
We have fully-automated signups. Again, no issues with 1000s of spammers signing up for accounts here.


At the time of the posting, the primary thing I read was the original comment on spam. There're more now, some are more valid than others, but that seems natural given that it's posted on /.

And once again to reiterate, for my examples, I didn't pick on you specifically, it was just convenient to use your policies as examples.

I use argument in the best possible intonation and perhaps discussion is a more appropriate description :)

I think that's mostly all for now.

Cheers.I understand. I enjoy the discussion.



Regards,

Are you implying that Google doesn't know how to build their network and their services? If so, that is quite a bold statement there Karl.You are way off-base. My comment had nothing to do with google and everything to do with my expertise. Please reread.

Gmail is simply an amazing email application. Combine that with the other perks the "apps" package has to offer and you have a real winner!

You guys smoked too much when you were younger... paranoia is setting in!

Launching Firefox with Gmail loaded on 1 tab pulls 75.9MB, and Outlook running uses 9.5MB


Does outlook still use that single PST-file system?

Though there are a number of bad points about gmail, Gmail is the best mail to myself, with its quick speed and large space.:D

Does outlook still use that single PST-file system?

Yes it does.

g-mail isn't as quite popular as hotmail or yahoo.

I love my Gmail.

(Re. PST)

Yes it does.

And that is one of the reasons to why I wouldn't use Outlook any day soon.

(Re. PST)



And that is one of the reasons to why I wouldn't use Outlook any day soon.

And Outlook 2007 is still the best email client on the planet...

Google... my goodness, where to start? Crappy filters, no control over email, security & privacy issues, and on and on... But that goes with hotmail, aol, yahoo... all of them.

If you like imap, I'd go with aol... aol had free imap a year before gmail introduced that sorry excuse for a service they called imap (more like their "version" of imap).

If you need reliable email, the best thing to do is go with a company that does email... everyone.net, mailtrust.com, etc, etc. That way YOU control YOUR email.

Those of you who get excited any time some mentions anything negative about gmail....

Get off the

Geez... Way to react there...

Anyway, I can agree regarding IMAP with Gmail - it is crap.

When it comes to Outlook, the need for this client is disappearing as there are competing services offering the same functionality for a lower cost or even free. (Not to mentione one would escape from the proprietary claws of Microsoft.)

For a company not dealing with hyper-sensitive R&D documents, Google's Gmail could be a perfect outsourcing partner.

And back on topic again;
Anything new regarding the potential xss-hole?

And Outlook 2007 is still the best email client on the planet...

Google... my goodness, where to start? Crappy filters, no control over email, security & privacy issues, and on and on... But that goes with hotmail, aol, yahoo... all of them.

If you like imap, I'd go with aol... aol had free imap a year before gmail introduced that sorry excuse for a service they called imap (more like their "version" of imap).

If you need reliable email, the best thing to do is go with a company that does email... everyone.net, mailtrust.com, etc, etc. That way YOU control YOUR email.

Those of you who get excited any time some mentions anything negative about gmail....

Get off the


Best. Post. Ever.






People that think Gmail is great don't do real business or don't have the business acumen to see why to not use it. The same holds true for all free email accounts.

In a knife fight between Exchange and Gmail I would take Exchange any day of the week. People that think MS is so evil need to stop wasting time on their soapboxes and do some serious business. We've done 10,000+ seat deployments with Exchange. If we were to ever mention Gmail we would get laughed off the property.



Kind Regards,

I get way too much spam with Gmail. I'm looking to change very soon. I average 50 spam emails in 24 hours and no apparent way to filter them. What's not to hate about Gmail?:mad:

My isp has that bounce back issue.

Gmail is the best web mail service on the earth.

that I do agree with.

You people get worked up so easily over something so simple. If you don't like it, dont use it. You don't have to convince people its bad.

It's like convincing windows users to switch to linux, but they don't listen.. WHY? because windows does what they want.

People that think Gmail is great don't do real business or don't have the business acumen to see why to not use it.

I don't agree with this statement and would even go as far to say that I think you are in-correct.

Used correctly, Google Apps (premium edition) can be a good business tool. For example, Stephan Ekbergh (http://ekbergh.blogspot.com) (wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan_Ekbergh)) and his company TravelStart seem to have been able to utilize Google Apps in a beneficiary fashion.

I am pretty sure that he wouldn't agree with you.


PS. How come you are so negative against Google and their services? Not attacking you here in any way Karl, though I am curious.

I do. That's how you are able to use their powerful Search feature to locate information in one of your emails.

Sorry.. what I meant was, do you think the staff at Google manually go through each of your e-mails? No! The powerful search features are great - you can't down them :p That's simply machines searching through your mail, the machines arn't going to start stealing account information. If you're worried about that then no e-mail provider should be used, they all have to store your data somewhere?

I don't agree with this statement and would even go as far to say that I think you are in-correct.

Used correctly, Google Apps (premium edition) can be a good business tool. For example, Stephan Ekbergh (http://ekbergh.blogspot.com) (wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephan_Ekbergh)) and his company TravelStart seem to have been able to utilize Google Apps in a beneficiary fashion.

I am pretty sure that he wouldn't agree with you.


PS. How come you are so negative against Google and their services? Not attacking you here in any way Karl, though I am curious.

My opinion has nothing to do with google as a whole and everything to do with the issue at hand: Gmail. I take issue with people thinking that free services can compare with most paid service providers. We get too many people coming to us asking "well, we can get that for free at <insert name>" and I kindly tell them to take their business elsewhere as we would not be a good fit. In a way I feel that providers making all these obscene promises of unlimited email storage, etc. are responsible for dumbing-down the public; actually providing a dis-service.



Regards,

@Karl Stephan's company isn't using the free version of Google Apps, and the premium edition is targeting businesses.

@Karl Stephan's company isn't using the free version of Google Apps, and the premium edition is targeting businesses.


My issue with that is that the free google services and the paid services are on the same platform, using the same codebase. Both users have the same issues.



Regards,

I've never really tried google Gmail.. I'm content with Yahoo! mail.

My issue with that is that the free google services and the paid services are on the same platform, using the same codebase. Both users have the same issues.


You are indeed entitled to your opinion, Karl. However I do not agree with you as you are generalizing too much in this particular topic, imo.