Users Being Migrated To New Version of Hotmail 215
An anonymous reader writes "Microsoft has started work on migrating Hotmail users to a new version after testing the new system on select customers for almost two years. Microsoft stated in the article that more than 20 million users provided feedback to the new-look Hotmail. 'For now, Microsoft will give Hotmail users the option to continue using the old version if they don't want to switch to the upgraded version. However, at some point, everyone will be unilaterally migrated over to Windows Live Hotmail ... New users will be automatically signed up for Windows Live Hotmail but, like any user of the new service, they will get to choose from two user interfaces: a "classic" layout that closely resembles the old Hotmail; or the new interface, which was designed to look like Microsoft's Outlook e-mail and calendaring desktop application.'"
20 Million users contributed feedback (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:20 Million users contributed feedback (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I received in invitation years ago, signed up but realy didn't use it. Now I can't sign up using that old email I used to register and I'm not able to retreive the old account info from Google.
Re: (Score:2)
I really like their spam filter and Pop implementation. I've got my own domain, but I still use Gmail for my primary email provider. There was a blip earlier this week when things went wrong for half a day, but over the last year that I've used Gmail, they've been more consistent than any other email provider I've ever had, free or otherwise.
I don't own any Google stock (wait, yes I do), and when I
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It's a feature. They know their user's pen1s size.
(please forgive me, this was not a personal attack, just a cheap joke)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I will admit to still having one hotmail account, which I use as a spam catcher. If I ever need to provide an email account for something on the web that I know is going to generate spam, I just give 'em the old hotmail account, which I check once every month or so.
So just in case you didn't know -- if you own mycoolname@gmail.com, then mail sent to mycoolname+anything@gmail.com will reach you as well. When I sign up with spammywebsite.com, for example, I use the address mycoolname+spammywebsite@gmail.com. If I wind up with spam from them, I know it, and can immediately set a filter to flag all such email appropriately.
This doesn't *always* work. There are some websites whose form validators reject email addresses with a plus sign in them. And I've even seen sites th
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
MOD PARENT UP (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:20 Million users contributed feedback (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
My issues with it are:
* Clicking on the tick boxes in order to select emails for deletion or whatever is all well and good except that it's far too easy to miss the tick box and open the email inste
D'oh (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The original Mac OS UI standardized on a single location to find actions: The Menu Bar. Whatever you had to do, you knew where to look. This was in direct contrast to command line applications where you either had to keep the commands in your head, or look them up in documentation. Now, we have a proliferation of places to look for actions in a graphical interface: Menu Bar, multiple Toolbars, contextual menus, etc.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
You're really an Apple apologist. First, you claim Apple had the best approach using soley the Menu Bar and than
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
mod? (Score:2)
How is a discussion of the interface to Hotmail with regard to Apple's standard mouse configurations, offtopic for an article about the new interface to Hotmail?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:20 Million users contributed feedback (Score:5, Insightful)
The fact that there is a mechanism for this does not refute the previous poster's point. Right-clicking should never, ever be the only way to get to some functionality. I'm not sure I've ever seen a interface design or usability book that did not mention this. I think even MS's own UI design guidelines mention it. Right-clciking and selecting a menu option is a lot slower and less learnable than a button, but aside from that the important thing is relying upon multiple buttons breaks the interface for a wide variety of alternative input methods. Try doing that using a screen reader for the blind, or a stylus on a tablet, or even using MS's own voice recognition interface. Try it on a touch screen kiosk, using a control stick for people with palsey, or using a browser that does not support that function for one reason or another.
When people are lower level developers and don't have any real UI training and are creating an application for internal use or for a special purpose with limited audience, I can forgive this sort of thing. When one of the largest software development houses on the planet does it for a program they plan to roll to millions of the general public it is just fucking absurd. I want to know. Where does MS hire their UI people and why can't they manage to avoid basic mistakes that have been known to the industry for decades now?
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that Microsoft aren't even following their own UI guidelines is pretty stupid, though.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Bullshiz. Lets just use Live Hotmail as an example. I've been a beta tester for it since a month after beta testing started. I've asked for a lot of things and each time after the next revision I got them(after of course they started supporting firefox). Not bad in my opinion. But the one thing I didn't ask for was "Mark as read." I have literally used that function twice in my life. And never in Hotmail/Live Hotmail. So lets ju
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshiz.
Obviously a well-reasoned and professional opinion will follow.
Should we clutter up a interface just so that we have a function that we will only use twice a year? How about "Use as template" or "Add sender to Contact List." I'm sure there is no end to the buttons you could add to a interface but having the context menu for little used items are fine.
I never specified the method that should be used to add these features, only the method that should not be used as the exclusive method to add these features. You can put them in a drop down menu of a dozen rarely used features. You can add them as buttons. You can do a combination. You can do all sorts of things, so long as you don't make them completely inaccessible to many classes of users, by only putting them in the right-click menu.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't buy that. Context menus allow you to pare down the available functions to what's appropriate. Buttons are always there, so there's going to be a lot more of them, most of which are irrelevant. They could also be anywhere on your screen, a context menu is linear. So it's going to be a lot easier and faster to find the option on the context menu than pretty much anywhere else. As for less learnable, how do
Re: (Score:2)
Context menus allow you to pare down the available functions to what's appropriate.
Context menus are great as a secondary way to access common functions. They are terrible as a primary way for the reasons I listed.
Buttons are always there, so there's going to be a lot more of them, most of which are irrelevant.
Buttons are fine and menus are fine (conceptually, implementations can be poor). Users understand that they exist and can look through them for the function they want.
They could also be anywhere on your screen, a context menu is linear.
Umm, linear? How is a context menu more linear than say a drop down menu? More importantly, how is it more usable?
So it's going to be a lot easier and faster to find the option on the context menu than pretty much anywhere else.
Well it certainly isn't going to be faster to find for a person using a screen reader, s
Dropping the Web-based E-mail Ball (Score:5, Insightful)
Sometime between a year ago and today, it's become fully compliant with Firefox 2.0--I'm pretty impressed and actually don't mind using web-based Outlook when I'm out of the office.
Why did Microsoft sit on their hands as Google slowly built up their capabilities to match those of Outlook? Why didn't Microsoft work on porting what they had done for Outlook to their Hotmail servers? I guess server load could always be the answer to those questions but I'm starting to think that Microsoft thought Hotmail would always be number one in personal e-mail. Thankfully, it looks like the competition is putting the pressure on them to improve their service.
I used this tool two years ago, way to drop the ball, Microsoft. You could have beat Google to a calendar application and solidified Hotmail.
Re:Dropping the Web-based E-mail Ball (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Dropping the Web-based E-mail Ball (Score:5, Informative)
Assuming you mean webmail, then yes, HoTMaiL most certainly was number one at one time. It was practically synonymous with webmail. That's why Microsoft bought it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Why did Microsoft sit on their hands as Google slowly built up their capabilities to match those of Outlook?
for teh same reason the didn't upgrade IE for several years. There was no competetion in the webmail space. Yahoo! was virtually the only reliable alternate service and it sucked.
I guess server load could always be the answer to those questions
Are you kidding me? that is how microsoft operates. They never improve a product unless:
1. Its market place is in danger or
2. It's a new product.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Blatant OS Discrimination from Microsoft. But then, what else is new?
Re: (Score:2)
Hotmail features (Score:4, Funny)
spin city (Score:5, Funny)
Steve: Hey, PR flack, the Hotmail group has been hemorrhaging users ever since I sugges... er, those idiots decided to "update" that user interface. How can we make that sound like a good thing?
PR Flack: Easy, Mr. Ballmer. Voi la
Kudos to MS (Score:2, Interesting)
Dragging and dropping emails
Quick Preview of Emails
Equaling Google's mail st
Re:Kudos to MS (Score:5, Funny)
Okay.. how much did they pay you for this?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Outlook is an e-mail client? I thought it was a rootkit!
Re: (Score:2)
People still use hotmail? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now it works like it should with regard to spam.
I've not had to whitelist my yahoo account yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Likewise. The only hotmail accounts I see are from spammers and phishers.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Usually the more techy oriented people use gmail, but those aren't the bulk of the population. I've lost count of the times when I've been asked if I can send them a video I'm working on trough email (hea
Re: (Score:2)
I have to agree with OP. It has been probably over a year since I've seen email from a hotmail or AOL account.
pocket msn (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Hotmail is Awesome (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Now if only someone would come up with a universal client that allows voice and video.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft's internal spam (Score:5, Funny)
I'd LOVE it if I could be taken to my gorram emails when I log in, rather than to their fluff pseudo journalism hackfest until I find and click the 'inbox' button.
Gawds, it's annoying enough to be taken there when you log out, but when you log in? Urge to kill... rising.
Re: (Score:2)
But is it Exchange based? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is this news? (Score:3, Interesting)
Now, I've been a hotmail user since early 1997. I switched to Gmail when it came out, but kept my Hotmail account for sentimental purposes. A few months back though, I finally completely gave up on it.
20 million feedbacks? Ha! Most likely, they haven't read any of it - and certainly haven't read mine. I wrote them about the maddening lack of 'Check all' function, and the fact that when you start checking emails one by one, if you miss by a few pixels - it will select that one email, and lose all your other selections.
This pretty much makes Live Hotmail completely unusable to anyone who needs to delete a bunch of spam emails (and with Hotmail, you get a LOT of spam.)
At least it sounded good in theory - Gmail is still far behind Outlook, imho. And when somebody makes GOOD web-based Outlook, I'll be sold.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Adding a SenderID or making your e-mail less spammy doesn't do a damn thing if your ISP's mail server was used by someone -- at some point in the distant past -- to send something MS decided was spam. And the only recourse is to pay something like $1,400 to some magical e-mail certification service.
Tried that too! In fact, I did everything the unhelpful Hotmail guy suggested except the $1400 magical service. Lo and behold, we are still blacklisted by them. I woulda just said "aw screw it" except for
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Uh, there is and always has been a 'check all' button. it's right at the top of the mail list. It does clear your check-selections IF you click on the line for the email, but not the check box as it loads that email into the preview pane. Does it do that if you don't have the preview pane
Re: (Score:2)
Whee free disk space (Score:2)
I've seen the new Hotmail.. (Score:2)
My Brief Review (Score:4, Informative)
RIP Outlook Express (Score:2)
-b.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's what I got: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Hotmail Vs. Gmail (Score:5, Interesting)
Okay, I don't have a hotmail account, although I do have a Gmail one. So how do the two stack up? From reading comments here and looking at public sources I see:
Does anyone have any other comparative features or info or corrections for the above list?
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly I agree, but there are a few things you've missed or mistakened...
I currently show 2,849MB of space. It goes up all the time. It's not a static limit. This is important to note because over time hotmail will remain at 2G and google mail will soon reach 3 gigs.
While this is certainly close to true, it's not entirely accurate. GM
Re: (Score:2)
While this is certainly close to true, it's not entirely accurate. GMail works very similarly across browsers, furthermore, not all features are supported on Safari or Opera, et al. The built-in google talk client does not work on Safari, for example.
I was talking about the e-mail features only. I believe the MSN chat function on the MS client is broken in alternative browsers as well. Are there ant GMail features that don't work (as opposed to integration with other Google services)?
Here is the revised list;
Re: (Score:2)
Gmail - Free POP support: It blows and no IMAP support. Used to be really buggy, I kind of doubt they put the effort to fix it.
POP is the only way I ever access my Gmail account and I've never noticed a problem with it. How does it "blow?" Also, don't you think free POP support and no IMAP support is better than Paid POP support and no IMAP support? This is a comparison of the two.
Gmail - prestige: Perhaps only for someone non-technical trying to judge. That's pretty sad to have an effect on your hiring practices.
Interesting assertion about the non-technical users, but I don't know of any support for it. Google is a more highly regarded brand according to most surveys in recent years. As for our hiring practices, it does make sense in a way. The types of tech
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I'd definitley say Gmail wins out on the interface if WinLive Hotmail is anything like Outlook Web Access. Gmail has a nice clean design, but OWA definitley feels as if they tried to shove a desktop app into a web browser, with little success.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Only got my gmail account now (webmail wise) and haven't had hotmail for about a year.
Spam: Gmail doesn't spam like hotmail does, IIRC. Hotmail announcements and crap like that you can't block.
I mean, really. I don't give a fuck, and don't wanna see that trash. I think I had a filter that moved them
to trash, but sometimes they'd still be in the inbox for one reason or another.
Uptime/Access: Main reason I don't hav
Re: (Score:2)
Some people would rather walk over hot coals than change their email address (or phone number for that matter), but Gmail makes it painless and free to do so. To me that means they've chosen to compete on features instead of lock-in.
Re:Hotmail Vs. Gmail (Score:5, Insightful)
Google realized they're in the business of extracting cash from advertisers. To do that, Google mines data. They scan emails and search for patterns so they can sell ads to those who are most likely to want to see them. In order to mine this data, it benefits Google if they see as much email as they possibly can. I think that's what explains the original 1GB size limit while others were doling out a measly 2-4MB: with all that space, you're encouraged to horde mail, and Google is free to mine information from it.
Same goes for your mail forwarding. Google sees every single message that is forwarded through their servers. They can keep that data and use it for marketing. Even if you're not using Gmail and seeing those ads, they might one day use that data to give you ads in another context.
Perhaps this is not a bad bargain, but few seem to realize that Google's goals are not altruistic here.
Re: (Score:2)
This is my favorite Hotmail feature while using Opera!
Hotmail Vs. Gmail - Update (Score:2)
The list updated with misc additions for others who replied:
Re: (Score:2)
Hotmail: Legit mail is blocked before you can get it.
There's spam filtering and then there's ridiculous blocking of email.
Pretty slick! (Score:2)
I've tried this (Score:2)
I know... "duh".
But the OLD hotmail does work correctly.
Some of the stupidity of Hotmail (Score:3, Insightful)
Messages in the Junk folder never get opened automatically.
and invites me to click an "Open message" link to have the message load in full. I do so. This presents the message, but any links contained therein are disabled. This is indicated by another yellow bar at the top of the e-mail saying:
Attachments, pictures, and links in this message have been blocked for your safety.
with a link saying "Show content", which finally brings about the message how I desired it, which should have happened in the first place when I clicked on it.
I don't like being treated like I'm a severely brain damaged five year old.
I just switched (Score:2)
FWIW I use GMail exclusively now (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh and BTW I don't see any ads at all [customizegoogle.com] in my GMail.
Spam? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:That's a lot of feedback! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I also do not try to juggle my life via some online
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:From the article (Score:4, Funny)
What? How dare they! When did Google and Yahoo give 'em permission to do that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)