Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?

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.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Users Being Migrated To New Version of Hotmail

Comments Filter:
  • by hudsonhawk ( 148194 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:43PM (#19038531)
    ...and none of them asked for a "Mark as read" button?
    • Its a feature, not a bug! How else would you be forced to read all those emails?
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by EvilEddie ( 243404 )
      Too little too and yahoo mail must have stole alot of market share.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @01:24PM (#19039135)
        Check out the bar graph at ZDNET []. Yahoo and Hotmail are virtually tied with Gmail significantly behind.
        • by Ucklak ( 755284 )
          Because Gmail required invitations for the first few years and is horrible on retreiving lost account info.

          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.

          • That's right. It's only been several months since Gmail has been open to anyone without requiring an invite.

            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)

              by instagib ( 879544 )
              "hotmail and yahoo can't seem to realize that an email with a message offering "pen1s enlargement" is spam"

              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)

              by notyou2 ( 202944 )

              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, then mail sent to will reach you as well. When I sign up with, for example, I use the address 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)

          Is that graph measured in 'millions of unique spammers'?
          • MOD PARENT UP (Score:2, Interesting)

            by ronocdh ( 906309 )
            Thank you for realizing this. Gmail's numbers are at least actual people. My e-mail addresses have NEVER seen spam from a Gmail address, but I've seen hoards from Yahoo alone. Please don't swallow those inflated statistics without choking.
    • by fondacio ( 835785 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:48PM (#19038633)
      Right-click message, "mark as read", done. Unless you're on an Apple, of course...
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by vertinox ( 846076 )
        I know you are trying to be humorous, but if Live is anything like Outlook Web Access 2003, you will be missing a good deal of features because you aren't running it in IE (like the right click options). This would apply to Fire Fox users on Windows as well.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Columcille ( 88542 ) *
          It's nothing like Outlook Web Access. Windows Live Mail is actually a pretty slick interface, and runs perfectly fine in Firefox. I still prefer gmail over Live Mail, but Microsoft at least moved substantially in the right direction.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by spoco2 ( 322835 )
          Actually it works fine in Firefox. I'm one of the ones that have been using it since the beta started and overall quite like it. The right click menus are great ('view source' being a favourite for working out if that suspect piece of mail really is spam or not), drag and drop works fine, and the themes are nice.

          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
      • I'm not sure how I missed that.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by joconor ( 889441 )
        This illustrates how Microsoft has taken User Interface development down a very bad path.

        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.

        • What's wrong with contextual menus? I think they're completely straightforward with "manipulate the object I'm clicking on" functions. Right click on a web page, and you get options relating to the web page. Right click on a graphic, and you get options relating to the graphic. Right click on highlighted text, and you get options relating to that text.

          Everything has its place:

          Menu bars: Control this application.
          Contextual menus: Control this object.
          Toolbars: Quick access to commonly used functions (almost always redundant with the other two).

          I can't find anything wrong with that at all, as long as you grasp the application/object difference.
        • "The original Mac OS UI standardized on a single location to find actions: The Menu Bar. ... Unfortunately, due to the monopoly position of Windows, even the Mac OS has been forced to go down this path of providing toolbars and contextual menus. One mitigating trend I've observed in some (not all) Macintosh software is the use of contextual menus to duplicate operations presented in the menu bar."

          You're really an Apple apologist. First, you claim Apple had the best approach using soley the Menu Bar and than
    • I guess 20 million users don't mind having their accounts to be deleted after 30 days of inactivity either. Funny how that doesn't happen with Gmail.
  • by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <> on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:46PM (#19038583) Journal
    Two years ago, the company I work for began offering MS Outlook through the web to employees. At first I was skeptical, I didn't think it would be that useful. But, a year after that, it was seriously fully functional Outlook over a website. I also use Hotmail for my personal life and had wondered why in the hell Microsoft didn't apply the same great ideas from the web-based Outlook client to their Hotmail site. I don't think my company would drop its control of its Exchange Servers if Hotmail offered the same look and feel. I didn't think Microsoft would lose any business at all but they would have cornered the market in e-mail.

    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.
    • by CastrTroy ( 595695 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:52PM (#19038677) Homepage
      I don't think that Hotmail was ever number 1 in online email. I think the only reason that anybody signed up was because they wanted to use MSN messenger, and it's extremely hard for most people to figure out that you can use a non-hotmail address, let alone figuring out the process for actually doing so. I've always found their spam filtering, amount of space (2 MB up until google's huge storage made them upgrade it) , and entire interface to be lacking. The biggest missing feature is an option to "Mark as read" as another poster pointed out. The only reason so many people have signed up, is because they think it's the only way to get on MSN Messenger.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by ady1 ( 873490 )

      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.

      • by jZnat ( 793348 ) *
        What about ISP webmail? Or the millions of SquirrelMail and other webmail apps strewn across the intarwebs? Hotmail had lots of competition, but Yahoo! was probably one of the few (if any) large enough to be considered a competitor.
        • Why did you ask a question for which you provided the answer? Sure there were plenty of alternatives to Hotmail, but none of those alternatives was really an option for the average user wanting an email address. The pressure grew when other viable options grew, but until gmail, Hotmail continued to lead the pack. And as noted by a previous commenter, Hotmail and Yahoo mail still lead the pack [].
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by AirRaven ( 843900 )
      My only gripe with Windows Live Hotmail's Firefox support is that it automatically kicks you down to the slower, less flashy "classic" view if you access it from a Linux client- if you spoof your User Agent string to make it appear that you're using Firefox on Windows, the full AJAX interface works perfectly.

      Blatant OS Discrimination from Microsoft. But then, what else is new?
      • I've never had this problem. Windows Live Mail works fine for me using Firefox under Linux without any need to change settings or spoof the UA.
  • by sakdoctor ( 1087155 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:46PM (#19038585) Homepage
    As long as they keep the 'deliver all mail to the trash' feature they can style it however they like.
  • spin city (Score:5, Funny)

    by Speare ( 84249 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:47PM (#19038605) Homepage Journal

    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

    More than 20 million users provided feedback to the new-look Hotmail...
  • Kudos to MS (Score:2, Interesting)

    Despite the long development time (and I've been using the new Hotmail for as long as it's been tested), it definitely is an improvement. Outlook itself is a fantastic e-mail client, and moving Hotmail to that kind of look and feel is definitely a bonus. I wouldn't mind being able to customize it a bit more but in terms of just being able to access my email in a quick and easy fashion, it's definitely ranking quite high in my books.

    Dragging and dropping emails
    Quick Preview of Emails
    Equaling Google's mail st
    • by cHALiTO ( 101461 ) <> on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:58PM (#19038757) Homepage

      It's like there's a party in my mailbox and everyone's invited!

      Okay.. how much did they pay you for this?
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        Even the opportunity to use such a fantastic product is payment enough! Hell, I should be paying them for some of these innovative and web-definitive systems.
    • by grcumb ( 781340 )

      Outlook itself is a fantastic e-mail client....

      Outlook is an e-mail client? I thought it was a rootkit!

  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) * on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:53PM (#19038685)
    I havent seen a hotmail account in ages. They seem more rare then emails. The bulk of emails I have seen are either or
    • by Itninja ( 937614 )
      I do use it, but only as a junk mail collection bin. When I register for something that I am pretty sure will generate spam for me, I give them my hotmail account. I check it about once a month and look for any legitimate email; and delete the rest.
      • by treeves ( 963993 )
        I get more spam in my Gmail account than in my Hotmail account. Of course, it's neatly stored in a spam folder so I can delete it en masse without selecting as opposed to picking it out, then deleting it en masse in Hotmail.
        • I was forced to "whitelist" my hotmail account.

          Now it works like it should with regard to spam.

          I've not had to whitelist my yahoo account yet.

    • by chthon ( 580889 )

      Likewise. The only hotmail accounts I see are from spammers and phishers.

    • Maybe it's just the crowd you hang with/get emails from. Certainly, the non-techie users I see around here are mostly using Hotmail, and if not that then Yahoo. GMail doesn't even come into the equation.
      • by LocoMan ( 744414 )
        Agree there. The bulk of my clients, at least (video production) use hotmail, and also most of the people on my trillian list are MSN users, and most of them use hotmail as their main email. Most of what I receive on hotmail (that I check about one a week or less) are chain "cute powerpoint" emails, though.

        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
  • pocket msn (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BewireNomali ( 618969 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:55PM (#19038699)
    i was part of the beta. seamless integration with windows mobile is the killer feature for me. i've had my motorola Q for about 8 months and i've needed to log into pocket msn twice (because I switched from original battery to extended life). mail is pushed to my phone and I get IMs etc. - as well as Live Search/Maps etc out of the box. I can honestly say that - having both a gmail account and live hotmail account - that gmail is down way more - which - coupled with the fact that I do most of my emailing and IMing from my mobile unit - have caused me to migrate back to being a dual user from being a gmail user exclusively for a while. i can imagine some of gmails problems are because of scale - so it'll be interesting to see how hotmail reacts when the service is sufficiently wide to test infrastructure.
  • Hotmail is Awesome (Score:3, Interesting)

    by milsoRgen ( 1016505 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:56PM (#19038723) Homepage
    This is just more Hotmail Awesomeness IMO, I remember a few weeks ago the account I use for important communications was brought done due to inactivity, they somehow didn't notice I log into Windows Messenger every day... But the icing on the cake was when I logged into an account I rarely if ever use (it's primarily for junk mail, web registrations, etc) was working fine. Hadn't logged into that account in months and it was all there. My main account however lost all archived e-mails and contacts. Awesome. I use gmail now. Don't much care for it's interface, but it's by far more responsive then the new hotmail.
    • Use your gmail address for MSN Live messanger service. That way people can reach you from either service via IM's.

      Now if only someone would come up with a universal client that allows voice and video.
  • by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:58PM (#19038753) Homepage Journal

    the new interface, which was designed to look like Microsoft's Outlook e-mail and calendaring desktop application
    Do these desktop application have the microsoft useless celebrity gossip as the main page when you load them?

    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.
    • The MSN frontpage is my #1 reason for not using Windows Live Mail. I primarily use gmail but I've kept one account set up for Windows Live Mail using Custom Domains just to see how development went. When they threw up MSN as the frontpage I cringed. Hard. When they left it, I decided to abandon my experiment and switched the domain to Google Apps. Having MSN sleeze news flash at me every time I go to check email - it just was too painful.
  • by dzelenka ( 630044 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @12:59PM (#19038765) Journal
    I read the article (really) and it never says what servers are being used behind the curtain. They were embarrassed when they could not put Hotmail on Exchange when it was originally acquired. This would be a grand showcase for the scalability of Exchange. Why isn't it being shouted from the rooftops? Are they waiting to see if it _does_ scale?
    • Hotmail runs on BSD. I thought everybody knew it.
  • How is this news? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by arhar ( 773548 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @01:05PM (#19038843)
    First of all, how is this news? I did this about a year ago.

    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)

      What's really cute is that they arbitarily decide certain domains harbor spammers when they do not. Hotmail accounts can not be reliably mailed to from our workplace. If a Hotmail user emails one of us then we can reply but we cannot cold send mail to Hotmail. I tried to resolve it with Hotmail and the only solution they offered me was to let a whitelist provider they use to crawl around our network then we'd have to pay them to get on the whitelist. Then MAYBE we could send to Hotmail inboxes again. I
    • 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.
      Scalix []. It rocks.
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by RingDev ( 879105 )
      "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."

      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
  • And with 2 GB of storage space, it's now even better. Where's WinLiveHotmailFS?

  • action, and I've got to say, I have no idea what technologies they're using, but the thing is horrendously slow. It's ugly, cluttered with unnecessary buttons, and needlessly flashy. IMHO, quite the opposite of GMail, which has been doing a fantastic job thus far.
  • My Brief Review (Score:4, Informative)

    by ubuwalker31 ( 1009137 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @01:26PM (#19039161)
    Looks slick and professional on first glance. No ads. Nice color scheme. Mail isn't automatically saved to the sent mail folder. Attaching a file to an email requires two clicks, one to browse for the attachment, and one to upload it. The interface seems fast. I tried using the gmail hotkeys, like f, c, and it didn't work. bummer. Only 2 gigs of storage space. Overall rating: 78/100
  • apparently, Windows Live Desktop Mail is supposed to replace OE in XP and Windows Mail is supposed to do the same in Vista. But can it do newsgroups? :) And will the replacement automatically migrate the OE data to the new client, or will people wake up with a new, empty mail client after running Windows Update?


    • From what I've seen/heard, Windows Mail/Windows Live Desktop Mail is just a slight cleanup and rebranding of Outlook Express to go with the Windows rebranding of everything in Vista. (Windows Internet Explorer, Windows Addres Book, Windows DVD Maker, etc.)
  • by pedestrian crossing ( 802349 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @01:38PM (#19039375) Homepage Journal

    Sorry, but it looks like you won't be able to participate in Windows Live Hotmail at this time.

    This might be because:

    Your account is with one of our partners and has additional features that Windows Live Hotmail doesn't support yet

    Windows Live Hotmail isn't available in your area at this time

    You have a parentally controlled account

    Your Windows Live ID indicates you're under 13

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      dude, you can tell them any date for your birthdate, they won't even know. just make up a birthdate that makes you older than 13.
  • Hotmail Vs. Gmail (Score:5, Interesting)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF ( 813746 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @01:59PM (#19039669)

    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:

    • Gmail - disk space of 2.6G versus 2G
    • Hotmail - attachment size, Hotmail claims to allow 10M attachments as the maximum, whereas Gmail claims 10M for the attachment and message combined. (Can anyone confirm the marketing is true?)
    • Gmail - Free POP support
    • Tie - I know Gmail has no ads and someone is claiming Hotmail has removed them now too for the free accounts. Can anyone confirm this?
    • Gmail - Spam, last I heard Gmail was winning the spam battle without the high false positive rate that has been plaguing Hotmail.
    • ? - interface. Any interface designers with a clue taken a look at both of these?
    • Gmail - prestige. We interviewed a person with a Gmail address the other day and someone commented that she probably has a clue in technology. At an old job someone made the opposite comment with regard to an applicant with a Hotmail address.
    • Gmail - cross platform support. Gmail works the same way with Safari and Opera, while Hotmail degrades to the old interface in them.
    • Gmail - language support. Gmail claims to support 41 unique languages (not variants) versus Hotmail's 31.
    • ? address book import/export - Gmail supports CSV import and export. Hotmail is unknown?

    Does anyone have any other comparative features or info or corrections for the above list?

    • Mostly I agree, but there are a few things you've missed or mistakened...

      Gmail - disk space of 2.6G versus 2G

      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.

      Gmail - cross platform support. Gmail works the same way with Safari and Opera, while Hotmail degrades to the old interface in them.

      While this is certainly close to true, it's not entirely accurate. GM

      • 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;

        • Gmail - disk space of 2.6+G versus 2G
        • Hotmail - attachment size, Hotmail claims to allow 10M attachments as the maximum, whereas Gmail claims 10M for the attachment and message combined. (Can anyone confirm the marketing is true?)
        • Gmail - Free
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      On the ads, Gmail certainly does have ads, they're just cleverly hidden in the news ticker and the side of your mails. I know they exist, but I don't see them unless I look for them.
      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)

      by A_Non_Moose ( 413034 )

      Does anyone have any other comparative features or info or corrections for the above list?

      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

    • One absolutely HUGE feature that puts Gmail on top IMO, is the FREE option to forward all your mail to any other email address permanently. I know Yahoo makes you pay to do this, as this gives them vendor lock-in. I believe Hotmail does the same.

      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.
      • by massysett ( 910130 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @03:24PM (#19041199) Homepage
        Yeah, they're competing on features, but I think Google realized something entirely different. Yahoo and MS were in the business of extracting cash from the user base. That's why they charged for disk space upgrades, extra filters, POP access, and so forth.

        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.
    • by doombob ( 717921 )
      works the same way with Safari and Opera, while Hotmail degrades to the old interface in them

      This is my favorite Hotmail feature while using Opera!
    • The list updated with misc additions for others who replied:

      • Gmail - disk space of 2.8+G versus 2G
      • Hotmail - attachment size, Hotmail claims to allow 10M attachments as the maximum, whereas Gmail claims 10M for the attachment and message combined. (Can anyone confirm the marketing is true?)
      • Gmail - Free POP support
      • Tie - I know Gmail has no graphic ads and some text ads and someone is claiming Hotmail has removed graphic ads now too for the free accounts. Can anyone confirm this or provide feedback on the
    • by laffer1 ( 701823 )
      Gmail: Everyone can send you email.
      Hotmail: Legit mail is blocked before you can get it.

      There's spam filtering and then there's ridiculous blocking of email.
  • Looks pretty slick after 5 seconds of using it. My hotmail account is at least 5 years old by now, and some things have changed. For starters, the "Silver" theme looks better when used on a Mac...
  • It just didn't work right in Firefox.

    I know... "duh".

    But the OLD hotmail does work correctly.

  • by vorpal22 ( 114901 ) on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @04:22PM (#19042267) Homepage Journal
    I'm just baffled at how bad the design of the new Hotmail was done. For example, say I want to read a message in my junk folder. To do so, I click on the junk folder and select the message. This brings the header information onto the screen. A yellow bar at the top of the e-mail informs me:

    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.
  • but it looks crap because of a huge block of solid colour at the top, which reduces the viewable screen by quite a lot - which makes the whole thing look rubbish. I'm assuming that this is either a linux/firefox thing; which makes me wonder why they didn't test it - it's not like Bill hasn't got a copy he could lend to Steve...
  • It's simple, I can now connect it to my own POP server and use their nice Web interface. I don't even use Evolution/Thunderbird anymore because they've just made it too easy for me not to. Much better than my ISP-provided NeoMail/Horde/Squirrelmail UIs.

    Oh and BTW I don't see any ads at all [] in my GMail.

  • Spam? (Score:3, Funny)

    by illuminatedwax ( 537131 ) <`ude.ogacihcu.inmula' `ta' `egnardts'> on Tuesday May 08, 2007 @09:54PM (#19046871) Journal
    How about they fix their Spam filter or at least allow me to block a lot more domains? A mail provider with approved spam just isn't the way to do things.

Stinginess with privileges is kindness in disguise. -- Guide to VAX/VMS Security, Sep. 1984