Skip to navigation

PCPro-Computing in the Real World Printed from www.pcpro.co.uk

Register to receive our regular email newsletter at http://www.pcpro.co.uk/registration.

The newsletter contains links to our latest PC news, product reviews, features and how-to guides, plus special offers and competitions.

// Home / Blogs

Posted on February 22nd, 2012 by Stewart Mitchell

Why is email so ugly?

fluent

When the decorators come in for a makeover, you’d hope that the end result would a nicer, new-look living room – otherwise, what’s the point? But sometimes, a look “just works”, making changes a perfect example of fixing something that isn’t broken.

App designers are caught between these two divergent camps, which is perhaps why email clients and services seem never to have had a proper revamp – they are still based on linear rolls of messages that generally have all the design hallmarks of a 1970s filing cabinet, which perhaps reflects the way they are used.

It’s no wonder that younger generations are turned off by this formal, stiff approach and are turning to IM and social networks at the expense of the older communications tool.

Google chose to switch to icon-based buttons — there’s no longer any blindingly obvious indication which button is ‘reply’

Even when email services do change their appearance it is more a lick of paint than a proper, function-enhancing makeover. When Google gave its free mail service a facelift, the reaction was largely negative. From a small straw poll of users, most have switched back to the classic look rather than the update.

To make the clunky appearance even less navigable, Google chose to switch to icon-based buttons. There’s no longer any blindingly obvious indication which button is “reply”, even. In recent weeks, three non-techie friends have been in touch to ask how to use a function, compared to none in the years since the service launched.

Fluent email

Not a bad time, then, for a trio of former Googlers to set up a new look email service that taps into Gmail for content, but presents it with the sort of interface you’d normally see on a social network.

The Australians behind Fluent worked on Google’s doomed Wave project, and the social aspects of their background are clear from the chatty presentation of the service, with in-line reply boxes immediately below message content.

Attached images are browsable and expandable from within the email, and multiple accounts can be used within the same feed. It all looks and feels intuitive, clean, and friendly. According to the founders, the service also makes dealing with email 20% faster.

The site is being as exclusive as a Mayfair club in its invitations and we are on the list, and will report back on the experience, but the early signs are good — making us wonder why our specialist inboxes, from Outlook to Gmail and dozens of other services, remain so humdrum.

When email clients first appeared they were a direct decendent of the business filing mentality, and little has changed. Fluent, or similar enhanced “skins”, could be the sort of hybrid to show that email still has a huge role to play and incorporate more features of our social lives, but also that it doesn’t need the stiffness of a bowler hat any more.

Tags: ,

Posted in: Random

Permalink

Follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

9 Responses to “ Why is email so ugly? ”

  1. Rory Holland Says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 3:36 pm

    “20% faster”?

    I’m on the lookout for anything else confirming these guys as bronies, because that *could* just be a coincidence…

     
  2. Steve A Says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 4:53 pm

    “but presents it with the sort of interface you’d normally see on a social network.”

    OMG, I hope not, those interfaces are awful.

     
  3. Mike Walsh Says:
    February 22nd, 2012 at 5:10 pm

    I agree 100% with the comments on the GMail re-do. I’m still thinking “which icon” every time I even delete something.

    MS have done something similar in their TechNet forums (not yet in the other forums such as MSDN). From being a clean, useful interface to the forums it’s now a beautiful (I suppose) totally useless mess.
    One MS person commented that these days a web page is also about marketing. Clearly the idea that a forum is a support channel has gone by the board – instead it’s supposed to be a lead-in to the Metro look.

     
  4. David Wright Says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 5:13 am

    It looks more like Twitter than an e-mail client.

    It certainly wouldn’t work for me, at least not as displayed.

     
  5. David Wright Says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:29 am

    Just taken a look at the demo and video. It looks impressive, but it needs to go a ways, before I would consider using it.

    1. Signatures – there are legal requirements for all e-mails going out; I have to include the list of directors names, the company registration number, which court has jurisdiction and with which company register we are registered with – additionally, the company insists that each mail includes name, phone number and a greeting.

    2. I’d like to see it track conversations, which none of the big e-mail clients can currently do – Outlook and GMail keep claiming that they can follow conversations, but they just lump topics together, you can’t actually follow the conversation, once it starts to split up. KMail / Kontakt on KDE used to be able to do that, but I haven’t seen a web or Windows based client that can do it.

    I like that it strips a lot of the formatting out, but that would be a no-no for many companies, as it would “ruin” their finely crafted CI.

     
  6. Anteaus Says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 10:55 am

    Daft gimmicks=damn nuisance.
    I’m tired of getting email filled with animated gifs and other multimedia sh*te. Worse are emails which try to download images from remote sites -which action my security blocks anyway, leaving big holes in the page.

    Text is king, as far as I’m concerned. Preferably, in a font where I and l can be distinguished, too.

     
  7. Steve Cassidy Says:
    February 23rd, 2012 at 1:22 pm

    I’d actually argue that Gmail isn’t really email anyway. You can bring the messages into Outlook and friends, at which point they become much more like a traditional email structured conversation store: sitting on google’s servers, your messages are far less private, less amenable to categorisation, less clearly in the context of your workflow… the list of not-email attributes for them is painful, if you’re coming from the PST Packrat small business email user tribe.

     
  8. Fred Says:
    February 24th, 2012 at 9:31 am

    I agree with Anteaus about emails with embedded gunk.
    |
    It really defeats the object of the exercise for marketing emails since in many cases there are very few words – just a framework of empty spaces (and the Thunderbird message that images have been omitted). I usually just delete the mail rather than authorising the images downloads.

     
  9. AlanS Says:
    February 24th, 2012 at 8:13 pm

    What does SMTP stand for?

    A message is the text, all else should be able to be lost and it still serve its purpose.

     

Leave a Reply

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

* required fields

* Will not be published

Authors

Categories

Archives

advertisement

SEARCH
SIGN UP

Your email:

Your password:

remember me

advertisement


Hitwise Top 10 Website 2010