135 comments

[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 161 ms ] thread
"Made with <3 while procrastinating on actually dealing with email."
I think my next project, I'm going to say "Made with little sleep, frustration, and no social life".
Off topic, but who started this "Made with <3" thing?
Not sure, but it needs to go away along with all the other feel good nonsense. Like every startup looking for "ninjas, gurus, and rock stars".
"Made with VCs breathing down our necks"
What's the emoticon for mortal terror, though?
I'll admit I spent a couple of minutes trying to establish a link between paired programming and the 'less than 3' before my teenage daughter helped dad out.
I'm beginning to categorically distrust these "Made with Love" people. Obsessive, made-with-love types seem to be these hard-charging, work-at-all-hours nerds that need to get out more
Unnecessarily harsh. Some people love coding more. :)
Which is great, until it results a implicit-but-really-mandatory 10+ hour workday for everyone (namely, we post-obsessive geeks)
No kidding. Too close to home there. It sucks extra hard when it comes out of a need to do better work.
Their 4 actions are also known as

Delete (done, or archive) Label Forward

....

So, this looks interesting, but what does the "Tinder for email" analogy have to do with it?
People need to stop treating the 'X for Y' analogy construct like it's the Uber for analogies.
'X for Y' analogies are older than technology... good luck...
What, any time someone wants an analogy they can simply summon one to their location with their mobile phone?
I tried to explain that you have to decide what to do with the currently viewed email (you can see only one) without skipping
Looks great, but agree w the Tinder part not resonating. Isn't this more "Getting Things Done - by David Allen" for email? [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_Things_Done

Surprisingly a Tinder analogy is failing to resonate on hackernews. Who would have thought
The post has been at number 1 for an hour. It's resonating and also generating hate.
Well it does mention GTD a couple times on the landing page.
I assume he means the "swipe left or right" aspect of Tinder. That is, responding to an email is just a matter of taking one action.
That's really odd, because Tinder is not known for the "swipe left or right" aspects of their app, more for their reputation as a sex hook-up app.

My confused impression when I read the title was "A sex hook-up app that uses e-mail?"

To kids my age (lower 20s) swiping is absolutely linked with tinder.
To kids my age (~40) it's the only thing I know about it as the [UK] media regularly references "Tinder" and "swipe left" [dismiss?].
Bwa ha ha ha ha. I guess the perception is different depending on where you're from. I immediately thought of the swipe left/right aspect - though I'm in a community that is more chaste than most though. For example, I know a couple who met through tinder without any sex before marriage. That's probably why I thought different - I just really haven't known enough people who use tinder like you described. Or used tinder at for that matter.

edit: minor spelling corrections.

So I’m meeting people over emil now? My emails can hook up with other emails? I don’t understand...
Meet other hot HTML5/CSS3 emails in your neighborhood!

On a serious note I was confused too. I guess it's the swiping left/right to read/answer that resembles Tinder

(comment deleted)
This is awesome. Are you planning on open sourcing the prototype?
Google Inbox kinda does the same thing

Looks cool though

Why is "defer" different from "snooze"? Both indicate picking a time to deal with the email.
"defer" is more corporate-speaky
Defer forces you to book a time in your calendar instead of "snoozing" the message just so that it reappears later. Actually, snoozing was one of the most exciting features I saw in Mailbox, but after using it heavily I realised I get plenty of messages on Monday morning back to inbox and I just snooze them again. It turned to be a complete disappointment for me
How about making "defer" be snooze with a hard limit of 2 or 3 times max? This I think would work because you could snooze if really you cant/dont want to deal with a message immediately but eventually you would have to.

Or maybe have up to X "snooze slots" so that you cant snooze everything and you snooze things that truly dont deserve to be deleted. And you would have to empty a slot by dealing with a snoozed message to be able to snooze a new one.

Defer seems to ambiguously capture both snooze and delegate.
Defer only means to put off until later. There's no delegate meaning.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/defer

2nd definition further down has this:

verb (used without object), deferred, deferring. 1. to yield respectfully in judgment or opinion (usually followed by to): We all defer to him in these matters.

OK I agree that's closer to delegate, while not the same. You couldn't substitute 'delegate' into that sentence, for example.
"Snooze" to me implies delaying for a unit of time that you may choose to repeat. From their description of "Defer" it seems you pick a specific date/time and add it to your calendar.
Inbox has essentially these features. What are the advantages here?
Containing features does not a well designed product make. Matter of taste, but it's the removing of features that makes this concept interesting.
Inbox is pretty darn minimalistic, and it's batching 'done' action makes inbox 0 pretty easy.
Love this, hate "Tinder for Email" as a tagline. Keep us updated!
I was hoping that this was going to be about using plaintext emails. It's pretty cool, though. I have a very similar workflow with mutt and a few keybindings.
Another app built on Electron, cool to see the platform enabling web developers to make the jump to application development
Agreed, I wish they would use native toolkits though.
I've been using CEF for many years where I work, nothing new (as usual).
This assumes an inbox is a type of "project" that needs to be "completed". It's structured on the concept of removing messages from my screen until there is nothing left for me to "do".

My inbox is often more of a conversation that I fade in and out of. Sometimes it resembles a facebook feed. Granted, I'm not a type A personality, but not all email is has to be "done" anymore than all reading books need to be "done". They can be continuous reference or contemplation for a time.

I guess it depends on if we are talking about work email or personal email. Perhaps even more, it's just about perception.

I really like emptying my inbox now, but at the same time I sort of agree with you. Inbox's views can give you both, though: You can snooze messages you don't want to deal with right now and space them out based on how soon you think you might want to pay attention to them. Yet you can also at any time go in and look at the full list of messages.

It's nice as one more way of figuring out what to prioritise.

That assumption is the premise of "Inbox 0" which the author uses for inspiration. It considers email to be a ToDo list that any contact can post to.
Then don't use it. It's clearly designed for a specific use case and there's no reason to expect that use case to apply to every user of email.
It also highly depends on your office culture around email, and how it affects your personal workflow.

At one job, it was like writing letters to fellow warriors across continents. You'd try to be thoughtful, taking a day or more to write really concrete and informational pieces. At another job it was basically the office instant messenger, replies were expected within 10 minutes of almost all email. Having direct reports changes a lot of how you're communicated with as well.

Right now I've been using notmuch+org-mode (to do list management that can link to emails, files, websites, etc), and so now I file tasks called "Read X" if it doesn't need immediate response, or archive/mark as read if I don't need to read it. Things that take less than a few minutes I do right away.

Once you take things as merely inputs to your personal management system, you no longer have to worry about how an app pushes it's workflow on you, you have an external one. This is why text files/physical papers are amazing - it's the lack of an interface that lets you organize things in whatever fashion makes sense.

----

Empirically, the way to do really big things seems to be to start with deceptively small things. Want to dominate microcomputer software? Start by writing a Basic interpreter for a machine with a few thousand users. Want to make the universal web site? Start by building a site for Harvard undergrads to stalk one another.

...

I think the way to use these big ideas is not to try to identify a precise point in the future and then ask yourself how to get from here to there, like the popular image of a visionary. You'll be better off if you operate like Columbus and just head in a general westerly direction. Don't try to construct the future like a building, because your current blueprint is almost certainly mistaken. Start with something you know works, and when you expand, expand westward.

The popular image of the visionary is someone with a clear view of the future, but empirically it may be better to have a blurry one.

----

Paul Graham, on Frighteningly Ambitious Start-up Ideas.

http://www.paulgraham.com/ambitious.html

Do you think no one has fixed email because the problem is too hard, or because there is a lack of creative/ambitious founders?
The main reason is that you need to be backward compatible with 30 years of terrible hacks. That's why there's a ton of vaporware email clients --- there's a huge amount of work that most of your users don't suspect.

Full-disclosure: I work at a company building an open source email client (https://nylas.com/N1) and an API to simplify email (https://nylas.com/docs)

Well, it's from some time that I've been looking for a modern and open source email client, but N1 looks very promising.

Little question: do you plan to support PGP?

Maybe because, despite all the noise, e-mail doesn't need fixing? It works, and pretty well too.
This isn't about fixing email, it's about building big things off small ideas.

Microsoft didn't just turn into the biggest BASIC software company.

The point is that the outcome can often be unrecognizable from the origin, and not to worry to much about the endpoint, but focus on doing one thing well at the start.

I have a project I was at first very excited about but then later paused working on as I discovered more about the email ecosystem. The reason I was excited about it at first was because email is--in theory--decentralized, this part was very attractive to me because I thought this was one potential way to disrupt all existing content silos. However the more I worked on it the more I found out how "centralized" it is when it comes to consumer email. If you take a look around there are only a handful of popular email providers (gmail, yahoo mail, microsoft, etc.) Rest of them are indies. I felt like building a consumer email client (or anything that utilizes consumer email) is as limited as building a twitter client, you're essentially tapping into a big platform. This is why I ran out of steam and put the idea on shelf until I come up with a compelling reason to start working on it again. I wasn't motivated enough.
No-one's "fixed" email because of the network effect. You think trying to break into the social networking space is bad? Consider that everyone who does use social networking has an email address, along with almost everyone who doesn't.
I actually like that since I've always thought like that, it's nice to see in reading (and better explained). However it has its downside, it's easy to fall into pitfalls where you can't decide which path to take. As opposite of having a vision, basically means you know where to go and what to do. I am constantly suffering from making decisions that seem important and of similar value.
Like Columbus, right.

Isn't that funny that even the metaphor we use for such kind of stuff is some yahoo that got the radius of Earth wrong and survived just by accident?

That's not a flaw in the metaphor. The whole point is that your plans are likely wrong and that the riches go to the ones who execute rather than the ones that spend all of their time on a perfect plan.
This is how I've come to use email, but the issue is the lack/limit of easy ways to make sure things don't get lost in the feed. It is easy for stuff to pile up, and that's been a real struggle for me to manage. I've given up on having inbox zero.
Good stuff.

Why did you use "respond" instead of "reply"? It's just as descriptive, and is the canonical term. It takes mental overhead to parse new terminology.

And I see the business angle in "delegate", but forwarding isn't always for purposes of delegation.

Maybe this: Dismiss Sleep Forward Reply

I used "respond" straight from Merlin Mann's lecture. I agree that it might create some mental overhead. I'll make a note to change it
Honestly, you should change all the words except "Done". When people are using "simple" email software, they don't want to have to think about dictionary/uncommon words like "defer" and "delegate".
Comes from the 'get things done' or GTD ideology.
Why this website needs 11 javascript, 12 css & 6 font files?

Numbers from http://www.webpagetest.org

The developer was probably busy writing apps and giving them away for free, and decided not to spend time optimizing the page.
Page is pretty well put together (indicating some time was spent) - all the JS is for the "fancy" fading/sliding effects and is quite comment. Parent is being harsh, but you're also being too reactionary.
* Email software * Main design aesthetical feature is whitespace * Generic name * Monochromatic gradient * Modern typestack * Rounded buttons * Made with heart emojis

This landing page and design could have been generated by software that intentionally crafted status quo product examples, and I would not be able to tell it apart from something legitimately created.

This is a product of the times, not a product pushing the our times forward. It really is like the output of a Markov chain product generator.

Triage: http://triage.cc

Same idea. Quickly clean out your inbox, with a Tinder-like UI. It works well.

Let's try a bit of wordsmithing.

Either stick to the 4 D's of GTD: Delete, Do, Delegate, Defer; or use the commonplace terms: Archive, Reply, Forward, Snooze. When you do this, do you start to realize how similar it looks to existing email clients?

By the way you say there is no Snooze button- then what is Defer?

And one-touch, not "single-touch."

If I'm reading it right, "defer" means you actually schedule an appointment in a calendar. I much rather prefer the idea of snoozing (a fixed delay before reappearing) better. If I'm not interested in dealing with something now, then I'm also not really interested in vetting calendar space for it at that exact moment either.
In GTD parlance defer doesn't require a calendar appointment, it just means 'don't do right now'. Basically if a task takes more than 2 minutes to do but you intend to do it at some point, then it should not interrupt processing, but should be moved from an inbox to a 'trusted system' for organizing and tracking tasks.

Snoozing works ok, but strict GTD tries to build a discipline of not having items re-appear in the inbox. If it's moved to a list of things to handle, then it can be ignored or placed at a lower priority on that list.

Any suggestions for a Gmail user on how to best integrate "Snooze-like" functionality into my workflow?
Google offers Inbox which has built in snooze. I used it for 6 months or so and liked it. Lack of ICS support eventually soured me on the interface.
I just downloaded it. I like "response", "delegate", and "defer", and "unsubscribe".

I do not like that is only runs in fullscreen, but I think I get why you're doing it.

I current use Google Inbox and set my default "done" action to delete. You should support the notion of "done forever".

I maybe keep 10% of the email I receive. Having a heavy hand with deletion forces me to think about the value of the communication and to capture the important actions and details in my todo system.

FWiW, it doesn't only run in full screen, it just launches in full screen.
I believe I'll have the same problem with this app that I have with Kindle -- the lack of flipability in the name of apparent convenience and simplicity.

There is an unspoken importance in an inbox glance, in seeing a list of "undone" email and getting a gist of things. There is a similar feeling in flipping pages of an entire book.

Imagine being in a room where you only see one object at a time, you can either use it or defer it for a later time. Simple? Yes. Will I hope to stumble upon a gun to put in my mouth? Indeed.

There is a magic in looking at the world and deciding on what to do. It's much faster, efficient, and satisfying.

Ah, this concept reminds me of one of the first apps I did, years ago, called EmptyInbox - https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/emptyinbox-for-gmail/id50994... (Yay skeuomorphism!)

It only supports GMail, but still works as far as I know. Back then it was the only app I knew that had that concept, but by now there is Triage, plus most modern mail clients have the "swipe" actions for quickly getting through emails.

Would be intersting to be able to tag the email as it's being marked "Done". It's the GTD analogy of filing it away. Yes full-text search can turn up almost anything but a tag may help for smartmailboxes or further post-processing work.
"Tinder for email"? Really?
This takes actions you could perform on dozens of e-mails at once [via checkboxes] and makes it one-at-a-time. Seems inefficient.

Also, I'm not hooking up with people via e-mail, so perhaps drop the Tinder comparison.

Reading "Tinder for Email" nearly made me headbutt my screen.
Did it? Really?

Like as in you started your head toward the screen but stopped? Or perhaps it occurred to you that headbutting the screen would be desirable but you refrained from doing so out of regard for your health and the health of your equipment. Or are you simply using "headbutting your screen" as an analogy for how you felt, which would be sort of ironic.

I've edited the title from "tinder for email" as causing confusion wasn't the goal. Thanks for all the feedback!
"An email client with a Tinder-like UX" probably would have been less confusing.