Certainly ties into the discussion about google making two of everything [0]. It's not clear how this product is meant to co-exist naturally with gmail.
That's exactly my first thought. The only differentiating feature mentioned in the video from what I could gather was an indicator of importance that the app determines.
I don't get more than maybe 10 emails a day on my personal account. Mailbox makes it fun to take care of them. I don't see myself needing anything more complex.
It seems to take strengths from Google's email aggregation prowess + Mailbox-like functionality + Google Now integration. A smart play but yeah it's going to look very derivative in light of how awesome Mailbox already is at tackling the majority of the issues with email maintenance.
Yeah, but it's possible many folks trust Google and don't trust Dropbox (or haven't even heard of Mailbox) so it's interesting for Google to access that untapped market.
This looks very much like the end of Mailbox. If execution is half-decent (and it's a big "if", I haven't tried it yet), GMail users from now on will have no use for Mailbox or MailPilot.
Are you serious? Are you saying Google, which has revolutionized webmail and is one of the largest and most popular email providers, doesn't "get" email?
Oddly, I agree. GMail is nice, but every time they try and remake email they completely mess up. Remember, Wave was supposed to be the next email, as well. Heck, they even had some odd push to get me to "plus" messages to people instead of emailing them.
And really, I can't remember any feature that pulled me to gmail other than a) free, b) lots of space, and c) google's name. The non-threaded messages was actually something I disliked at the beginning. I put up with it now.
So they try new things... if those things fail, it doesn't mean they don't "get" email, it means the idea was not the right one. It's not like they turned gmail into Wave, much less Inbox. I'm glad someone out there in the big providers is trying new things.
If anything, to me, it shows they get email more than anyone else: They realize that it's deeply flawed for a lot of today's workflows and that a solution, in order to have a chance, needs to be built on top of the open standards of email and be backwards compatible with them.
I don't see how these statements aren't compatible. The claim is that every "new email" product google has made hasn't been as good as when they just made an email product.
And, I don't think anyone really wants them to quit trying. It is scary that they may eventually kill what they have though. They explicitly did this with reader, after all. (Maybe I'm projecting, of course.)
> And really, I can't remember any feature that pulled me to gmail other than a) free, b) lots of space, and c) google's name
Originally? Lots of space, yes, but search and speed were big ones, as were threaded conversations, labels instead of folders, built-in gchat (that might have been later), amazing spam filtering, POP3 and eventually IMAP access.
Since then, priority inbox has been a huge win for me, and I don't use the tabbed inbox, but some people seem to like it. I'm sure there are a bunch of little things I don't notice as well that would make the 2004 interface feel ancient.
Oh, I realize things have grown. And I am in no way saying that I am unhappy with gmail. Just that I can't really remember what drew me to it. Spam filtering isn't something I remember it being much better at. (Well, it was better than other free options, but I had a paid email back then.)
The rest was really just permission to not use folders. Did they even have labels at the outset? I recall there was a big cry over not having hierarchies of data. Maybe it was just labels were simpler... Honestly, I've stopped using labels, even.
I do think it made it apparent that archiving was more than plenty for most people. (And they eventually caved and added deletion.) Anything else you could just search for. Though, again, I don't recall them being that much better at search than other options at the time.
All of that is to say that I don't feel google revolutionized email so much as the just implemented the subset that people actually needed. And made it free for lots of storage so that you no longer had to perform any maintenance. (Seriously, I was paying for email that had a scant 100 megs at the time.)
I think they understand the needs of normal consumers and made a better product than hotmail/yahoo. But I don't think they have a serious offering for business. A well administered Outlook setup works brilliantly and does not sacrifice speed or features just so it can be a web app.
I'm interested but I keep seeing that this sort of stuff never takes into accounts things such as mailing lists (a la mailman and such). I hope I'm wrong.
This looks great. It seems like the extension of what they've been doing with Now for a while - all the information you need in easily actionable cards.
Looks interesting; is this coming to iOS and Android or just Android? Also curious if this will make an appearance in web form as the Gmail and its suite of apps are woefully outdated (Gmail, Contacts, Tasks and Calendar have had some bugs for years and are simply behind on the good UX front).
I'm not sure what this 'inbox' does, but from judging from the video it's about a bunch of twenty-something hipsters from California high-fiving each other.
Serious question: Did you read the article, or did you just watch the video? Reading the article along with watching the video made it perfectly clear to me what this product is doing, despite the fluff in the video.
I read the original link, and watched the video on that page, and had pretty much the same reaction as the parent commenter. If this service is perfectly clear to you, then please elaborate for the rest of us.
It appears to be sorting and arranging various bits of data. The examples shown include messages, and a flight reservation. What all kinds of data bits DO integrate? Does this read my email (or replace it)? Does this read (or replace) the news feeds of my social networking accounts? Where did it get that flight itinerary? Why is everyone in this video talking a selfie every two seconds, is Inbox sharing or managing photos for you?
I think this supposed to be an improved version of Google Keep, perhaps with some hooks into Gmail and your phone's camera. But all I have to go by is a few paragraph of fluff, and a 60-second video of young people staring down at their phones. Feel free to fill in the blanks, if you picked up some more solid information that we're missing.
The landing page for inbox.google.com, if you scroll down slowly as you read it, seemed to explain it very well, and showcased example workflows. The video didn't convert me, but the website did.
Are you kidding, or are you seeing a different page than me? Literally all the page has for me is an "Inbox by Gmail" logo on top and some text below for "Already have an invitation?" and "Need an invitation?". No information whatsoever.
You could sum up the post dot-com startup craze with "a bunch of twenty-something hipsters from California high-fiving each other". Nothing more than an unparalleled amount of resources thrown at solving first world problems that millenials have.
That's who you target first, to spread it toward people who aren't so technically inclined. iPhone wasn't for moms at first, and now many don't know what they'd do without it
Your absolutely right. The last 14 years of iPhones, Google Search, Gmail, Maps, Facebook, Social Networking, the very site you are using right now... can all be summed up by "a bunch of twenty-something hipsters from California high-fiving each other."
Same here. It seems that GMail wants now to "friendfeed" my mailbox.
I don't know what that whole "overwhelmed by email" issue is all about. If you are getting 100+ emails a day and believe these are all relevant for you, you either work as some sort of a customers service rep or there is something wrong with your life/priorities.
Relevant doesn't necessarily mean requires actions. I average around 100-150 relevant work emails on a typical day (can also be 20), and plenty of them are ones that I only need to glance at for 5 seconds - some that I don't even need to read but need in my inbox for potentially looking up later.
I work in marketing for PC hardware, so very different sort of workflow to coding.
This is exactly what they want to do. Ads embedded in streams/feeds have proven to be the most profitable monetization strategy on mobile, and Google's missing the party on that one. It's an attempt to take one of their powerful, existing products and turn it into a mobile feed.
I think we just witnessed the first corporate pseudo-cool advertisement from Google. You know, when BigCorp tries to cater to the young and hip, thats the kind of video they produce. Crank it up a notch, and you're in the uncanny Samsung Valley.
I, for one, am looking forward to the Poochie rap!
I get the impression that this is more the next generation of Google Now than it is the next generation of Gmail. (Google Now is all about plucking out information from larger sources of data and bringing the most important stuff to the front as it's needed.)
I suppose I could see how this would be useful if you're using your smart watch or your phone and only want the most important facts, boiled down to their essence. (But then, doesn't Google Now already do that?)
Outside of that context, it doesn't seem like you'll ordinarily have both Inbox and Gmail open at the same time, because (as far as I can see) Inbox is just a way of better organizing and presenting the underlying data, whereas Gmail is more like the raw feed.
Side question: am I the only person fully satisfied by my email workflow? I practice inbox 0- if an email is in my inbox, it means something needs to be done about it (whether it's replying, filing a bug report, writing a patch, etc). Once it's done, it gets archived. I star the stuff that I'll need to refer to later, like tickets for a flight or concert. I then have a few server side rules to do things like mark certain classes of emails as read (eg build logs, mailing lists), so as to not flood my phone with notifications. And... that's it.
(edit: oh and yes, I am also very diligent about unsubscribing from the stuff I know will never be relevant, rather than just archiving it and forgetting about it until another email from the same source comes up a week later. After a few weeks of consistently practicing this, your inbox gets much better)
I get probably a few hundred emails a day at most (work+personal), and this system works great for me. I know people like Paul Graham think email is utterly broken, but when you're at their level I'm not sure ~any~ tool will be satisfying - they're absolutely outliers.
So HNers, do you really have a problem with your email workflow, or is everyone just repeating "email is broken" because some smart people with an ungodly amount of email said so?
I'm with you. Inbox never should have more than 15 items. Everything else is unlikely to be looked at again and gets thrown into an archive folder (Business/Orders/Correspondence). If I get mail I don't want, then I unsubscribe.
I'm also on the lighter side of email load/work, but I don't see how a simple/efficient/clean workflow like this could be improved.
You're definitely not the only one. I think these 'email is broken' changes are aimed at people who use smartphones and tablets that didn't use PCs before, trying to make it more chat client like. I think this might be a market force, but it definitely tramples traditional email, which is long form, non-instant, textual (not visual) communication medium.
Yeah. And with a few (well, 119) filters, it's actually pretty rare that an e-mail hits my inbox. Rare enough to have notifications on my phone enabled.
>> "The fact that you had to configure and maintain 119 filters is the indication that email is broken IMO."
Maybe it's not broken, maybe it's just being used by people in a way it wasn't meant to be. I bet a lot of people's email 'conversations' would work better in a chat app (i.e. they don't need an easily searchable record and they aren't typing long messages).
I have 63 filters right now for my personal mail, somewhat less (17) for my work email where I am a bit more diligent about sorting (and where filters can be more complex).
Of course its sane. I also have over a hundred. But if your system requires that I manually build and maintain hundreds of filters I still think something is broken. Its just an awful user experience.
"So HNers, do you really have a problem with your email workflow, or is everyone just repeating "email is broken" because some smart people with an ungodly amount of email said so?"
I did :)
I found my personal email a mess. I have a lot of mailing lists i need to "semi" pay attention to, and get about 1000+ emails a day all told.
This was pretty messy to manage, even with foldering/labeling/etc and such.
Inbox is pretty nice for my workflow (i'm sure there are some it is good for, and some it is bad for). I have it figure out the importance of various mailing list messages, and then show them to me once a day per mailing list. I mark the ones i care about with pins or reminders, and it takes care of reminding me.
On the work side, i get even more email, and i don't have a great workflow there. But i'm completely an outlier. I essentially have two distinct jobs I do for the company.
Practicing inbox zero in either case is unlikely to work for various reasons (among other things, most of my job is not predicated on making quick decisions but on thoughtful ones I could just move everything to task lists, but it would just create another place with the same info and often a worse interface)
I'm with you, we use gmail on our work email now and I just use the google app sync so I can keep using outlook. I think regular old email from the 90's works fantastic.
I too practice "inbox 0," and making sure I am very diligent about unsubscribing from mailing lists and creating the occasional filter. I am completely content with email, and I feel like this is more for people who never hit the "archive" button. This is why I use stock gmail over Dropbox's Mailbox. And I am afraid that if I start using Google's Inbox, my inbox will just get cluttered and I won't be able to go back.
can you explain to me the advantage of archiving a message over just letting it rest in a read state in your inbox? I've never been able to see an added value to it.
The value can be small (or nonexistent), but I like to know that everything in my inbox needs to be acted on/processed, rather than having to determine whether I've already done it or not. You can do this while leaving everything in the inbox by toggling the read/unread tags, but I'd rather not.
Similarly, I've never seen the advantage of leaving old emails in my inbox rather than just archiving everything without labeling it.
The problem I have when I've used that strategy is that then I need to skim all of the emails and recall the state of each one. I find it to be both distracting and stressful—I'm reminded of every task I need to accomplish (or, at least, the most recent 20) whenever I check my email.
For my work email, I try to practice inbox-0. Every message either gets an immediate action, or it's filed away as a task on my todo list (including the URL for the message in Gmail), and then archived.
I have two groups of emails: "professional" and "online" ones. I'll "inbox 0" my "professional" emails, archiving, deleting, and snoozing emails. For my "online" emails, I don't do any management, it's just a giant inbox of every email I've received.
The advantage I find to archiving messages is just a slight psychological boost. When the inbox is empty, I know I have nothing to do. If I have <20 emails (I always try to keep these inboxes under 20), I can see everything I have to do. As I work my way through the list, it's obvious visual feedback that I'm making progress. Just little things that I feel slightly improve my experience.
Although this only works because I have my other massive "online" inbox :D
What do you do about long-duration TODO items, like "Fix XYZ bug", which are a lower priority than your current tasks? I tend to Star those in Gmail, and leave them read but not-archived.
Some of these threads (for me) are good explanations/resources about a particular problem, but which I can't act on yet as $OtherTask is higher priority. I have Jira tickets for most of these, but even so the inbox helps remind me (roughly monthly) that things are still Not Fixed, whereas a TODO label would end up being unread.
Maybe it's just that I've been depending on that and have NOT been using a TODO or similar label for things, and thus am not in the habit of checking for New Things in my filtered labels. I'll have to think about this more. Thanks in advance for your insight. :)
You've elucidated the reason I just bought OmniFocus. I need a system outside of all other systems to keep track of it all. I have 4 separate email systems to keep track of. Google's tool won't help me with 2 of them (or a ticketing system, or whatever). I used a web-based TODO manager for years, but I finally spent the money to get a native application. The integration of highlighting something -- in any app, or an email, or a web page -- and then hitting a keystroke to capture it, and give it a to-do, has proven pretty effective to me. THAT'S my inbox, and THAT'S the one place I check when I need to find something to do.
Read state shouldn't be overloaded with "still to ToDo", otherwise you don't really know how many ToDo items you have vs those you haven't triaged yet.
It's completely mental (not as in crazy, as in it's a mental issue).
I like to keep things tidy, if something is in my inbox then it's something that needs to be dealt with.
Same goes for "starring for to-do" vs "unread as to-do". The latter does mix in requires-action with yet-to-read, but maybe a lot of us class a yet-to-read email as requiring an action anyway?
It's just a third state. I use unread for "not started", read-but-in-inbox for "in progress" and archived for "done". If you don't need that distinction between not started and in progress then sure, just leave it all read in your inbox.
I set aside time every Monday for getting to "inbox zero." That's when I go through every email in my inbox -- including those I've let linger for the past week -- and do one of the following:
- If it requires a task and I can do it within 2 minutes, then I just do it.
- If it requires a task that'll take more than 2 minutes, I schedule the task on my calendar and archive the email.
- If it's just for future reference (eg, flight confirmation), I add an appropriate label ("Travel") and archive it.
- If it's none of the above, then it either gets archived or just deleted.
So I don't have the problem that Inbox is trying to solve. What I'm wondering is will this eventually be forced onto all users, whether we need it or not?
I have tried all kinds of intelligent note taking apps, GMail workflows, and so on. At the moment I think that the Unix philosophy works here as well: I use simple but working tools and I build my workflow on/with them instead of using a complex, big app/infrastructure that tries to find out what I'm interested in. So I'm stuck with an email provider that follows standards, and I feel good about being able to move to another provider, etc. in case I want to do so.
In most cases, I know what I want, and I am OK with opening the app that can do the job for me. However, I want that app work properly and always. That's why I don't find Google Now too appealing: I don't want a personal assistant who tries to figure out what I want. I want a personal assistant that can do what I want when I ask for it. I don't need an app that scrapes my email for airline tickets -- I need an app that makes me easy to look up delays and departure times. I don't want an app that sets an alarm clock automatically when I have a meeting because there are two cases: 1) I need an alarm, but then I need to be 100% sure that it's set (and I don't want to double check whether magical AI figured it out properly) 2) I don't need an alarm (so I don't want my personal assistant to set up one). I cannot risk missing somethink: if it's not important, I'll try to unsubscribe.
But that's only my use case.
Ah, and +1: I don't want to keep emails. If I don't want to retain some information, then I just delete it -- there's no search algorithm in sight thats accuracy is independent of the search space. More emails, items -> less effective search.
I too consider email to be a perfectly working system and I have achieved "inbox 0" since I started using email in 1994. IBM drilled it into me that my inbox wasn't meant to be a 'pending' queue, and as such I should action items or clear them out.
That and some general common sense has added up to me being bewildered when people discuss how difficult email is.
I really hope that doesn't come off as snarky, because it's not meant to be! :-)
I wouldn't say I have a problem with email as it is today, but I am the exact opposite of you; I never archive or organize any of my email (besides rules for labeling email lists and groups so they directly bypass my inbox). I appear to have 11,600+ emails in my Gmail inbox.
If I need something, I just search for it. As the Gmail search is really, really, good, I can pretty much instantly bring up any thread. I therefore don't see any value in spending even a second of time in trying to organize a piece of email. I also really like the "Social" and "Promotions" tabs Gmail added, it's like a smart filter for "unimportant stuff" that I don't even need to bother looking at but can search for if needed. I look forward to Inbox automating and highlighting actionable items even more (check in for flight etc, should just be a button press without even opening the email).
I would rather apply a label, or mark a message as unread (this is what I typically do), if it is something I need to return to later. Most emails can either be directly acted upon, or don't require a followup at a later time, so optimizing the common case down to "do nothing" makes sense for me.
I do the same thing, only in Thunderbird over IMAP with around 27,000 messages. TB search is fast and accurate, and I keep track of emails that need immediate action by starring them and then un-starring them after the action is taken. Pretty straightforward.
I think you have to really consciously process your email though, in order for your system to work. I have gotten really bad at email lately and it's because of this: I leave my emails in my inbox like you. Except I archive something that I'm really, truly done with (never wanna see it again, not even for reference; archive = trash). But now my inbox is a mix of things I haven't yet read, I've read but haven't acted on, things I've read and keep in my inbox for reference, and things that I'm done with but I'm ignoring them so hard that they never actually get archived like they should. "Mark as unread" is used at a whim, usually when I read something on my phone and think "I should read this on my computer" so I flag it unread to make sure it stands out. Nothing is starred, except I have colored stars and mark a bill with a green star before I archive it (this is a remnant of a system I tried in the past but didn't fully stick).
As a result, I end up missing or not doing things, and re-reading emails I've already done, and my inbox is just a big chronologically-ordered mess.
This is my personal email anyway. My work email I'm a little more careful with, but it also piles up over time and rarely something will slip through the cracks. Outlook's flag/reminder system is decent at least, so it's manageable, but it still at times feels disorganized and just not quite how I want it to be.
I think you're still trying to do too many things at once and mixing concepts. Simplify: If an email requires a followup, label it with "todo". Don't archive email (except as an alternative to delete), don't try mark read things as unread, etc. Then, in order to check your current list of actions, have a view of only the emails labeled with "todo". I try to review this list twice a day or so. As you work off the list, remove the label from email when done! This workflow is almost identical to the Outlook flag system which I also like. In this way, the goal is only to get your todo list to zero, which is a very small subset of all items that are arriving in your inbox.
I think the key is to use one system consistently, and to have a concise view of your current open items with minimal manual effort.
I agree with the don't archive email... Who cares if all my mail is in my inbox? That's what search and labels are for, but... Why bother with a "todo" label? Emails I need to act on are simply "starred".
Yeah, I have a 10 year old GMail account with hundreds of thousands of messages. I'm simply not organized enough to stay on top of sorting things into folders on the off chance I might need to search for it one day. Search is the easiest way to find anything anyway; but people developed sorting techniques because e-mail search is awful on local clients.
Yeah I don't get the point of inbox zero either. I don't see any functional improvement so really it's just wasting time so you can pat yourself on the back.
Actually, I see inbox zero (or near zero - I try to keep it under 10) as a time saver. It means I can instantly look at my inbox and see what items I need to work on.
If you just keep everything in your inbox, it means you need to click on a button to sort by starred emails. Also you need to star any emails you need to work on. Most of my emails take a while to respond to - I like to think about them for a while before responding. With your method I wouldn't be able to do that - I have to either respond to all my emails after reading them, or else star all my emails as 'needing work' until I have time to respond.
Keeping only a few items in my inbox that I need to work on is the most efficient way of working, at least for me.
I do exactly this as well. Some things need the user to spend time organizing them because search can't operate on it well (i.e. photos), but email is not one of those things. 99.99% of the time email search gets me what I'm looking for in a mater of seconds. Spending time organizing emails is going to be a complete waste of time for the vast majority of people.
This is also the reason I've never been able to use any 3rd party email clients and rely solely on gmail in the browser. Search is so much faster/better when done directly in gmail.
I'm curious to try Inbox and see if it provides a useful added layer of aggregation of messages above and beyond the current "conversations."
I dumped the Social and Promotions tabs because they're always there to bother me. I have a "subscriptions" tag that any vaguely noisy mailing lists go into and I rarely bother to look at it, but it's there if I want to. Rarely = once a month, maybe.
I also use inbox zero, but it took me 15 years to get to that point. That's quite a learning curve, and not built into email at all--it's something you have to discover outside of Gmail or any other email client. Combine that with the fact that the most recent generation is using email less and less, and products built around email are bound to evolve in order to remain relevant.
I also do inbox 0 the exact same way you do but sometimes it's not enough. For example, if an online retailer sends me promotions I don't care about, I'd like them to be auto-archived for when I actually feel like buying something, but I don't want to miss my purchase confirmations.
Google's new categories help and Inbox sounds promising but I feel like there's too much assumption going on in parsing the emails.
Really, I'd like email addresses to be on the domain level. For example, mail@cool_username.gmail.com and flights@cool_username.gmail.com. Then, give me granular control over how "mail" or "flights" get categorized and give me nested categories.
I filter all messages with the word "unsubscribe" in the body into a "Bulk Mail" folder that I check once a week, works beautifully.
As for the per-category addressing, you can add "+flights" to your username when subscribing to flight notifications and then filter on that however you like...
I've been wanting something similar, but in the form of automated expiration after a certain amount of time (able to set "expiration" to either "Archive" or "Trash" in said rule).
For example, I'd love to be able to add a rule so that certain "deal" emails (those to which I'm purposely subscribed) to expire after say 1 day or 1 week - whatever the standard time for the sender's deals to typically last.
Then on the occasion that I end up in the woods, whether literally or figuratively, and unable to maintain my email for a couple days, I don't end up with an overwhelming and generally self-perpetuating inbox debt
I seem to be the only person in the world whose email is only broken since forced to use GMail on a work account (and Thunderbird totally fails at using the IMAP thing).
I mean, searching for "vpn" doesn't give me the mail that contains "openvpn"? Or it's that incompatible to my workflow that not even RTFM works...
Search is hilariously bad in all email clients, including gmail. Google managed to solve searching on the web by just throwing enough information in it until you kinda always got what you wanted to know. But that doesn't work for email, because there just isn't more info to throw at it than what's in your mailbox. You need to actually have decent search algorithms. And those are apparently too difficult to write, since not a single mail client out there does it right. Grep does a better job.
I bet I could find plenty of people that would consider search to be broken if searching for vpn did return openvpn results. (Or the slightly less loaded example, if searching for 'man' returned results with 'almanac'.)
I'm with you. currently i have 3 emails in my inbox. the rest are archived. Like 85% of the population, my inbox is a todo list not a social engagement.
I also do the Inbox Zero thing, and absolutely love the overview it gives me of what I need to do. With Mailbox, you'll "snooze" mails and it'll be like they get delivered to you at the later specified time.
I recently sat my parents down, installed mailbox on their devices, and instructed them how to use the app. Amazingly enough, they now constantly use it, and aim for the zero inbox (they are people that would have to write down what ctrl-c does, and didn't know about ctrl-z...).
I liked Mailbox but Dropbox own it and I'm more and more concerned about how they handle my privacy. Add to that that for Mailbox to work your emails have to be stored on their servers (AFAIK, please tell me if I'm wrong) I switched away.
Only the snoozed mails are stored until they are redelivered, as far as I can tell, but I can see your point. I personally don't care that much about privacy, if the convenience gains are high enough :)
"Mailbox stores a subset of your emails temporarily in order to redeliver snoozed emails, provide fast delivery and provide push notifications. We encrypt all communication to and from the Mailbox app, and all information cached on our servers is stored in an encrypted format." [0]
Google already has my emails (Gmail). If I use Mailbox I'm throwing another party into the mix. Google continues to get them and now Dropbox gets some of them too. It would be best to use the service of the company that gets them either way (Google). Why give your email to two companies when you can give them to one and get the same features?
Dropbox directly lied to users about privacy and stated they could not access your data. When this was pointed out, they made up excuses for lying and acted rather snotty about it (on HN). They also had that little "don't check passwords" incident, which night indicate more serious problems. I'd trust Google engineering over Dropbox, but Google is also evilly anti privacy so it's not much of a win.
To those who think inbox-0 is a waste of time, because you can just search for email, so why spend even a second organizing it: what causes you to remember to reply to an email sent to you 3 days ago, which is now the 119th email in your inbox?
I subscribe to inbox-0 because emails in my inbox need attention of some kind. I'm not advocating spending an inordinate amount of time organizing every email with labels and filters. Just "inbox == needs attention, not-inbox == I can safely forget about it".
Honestly, the workaround I always used for this is starring the e-mail or Boomerang it if it's really important. Also, mailing lists and social coupons get filtered immediately.
Boomerang is pretty similar to some features of Inbox.
I receive hundreds of useless mails everyday (not filterable spam, just thing I don't care about or have no valuable information), so dealing with each of them to empty the inbox is a waste of time.
Most mail that matters come from specific people (close family, project members, current client...) so it's easy to search, the unexpected important mails and things that needs to be done later just need to be starred.
I feel it's really efficient when the signal/noise ratio is very low.
It sounds like you're doing an adaptation of Inbox Zero anyway. It's Inbox-Starred rather than Inbox Zero, which to me sounds like what someone would do if their email didn't have an archive option. Or for people that generally don't like archival.
Personally, I didn't like archival at first, but now I'm quite addicted to it
You're not satisfied with email itself, you're satisfied with your filtering software, plus your rigorous discipline, plus email. I don't think email is necessarily broken, so much as woefully incomplete for the kinds of tasks it's typically used for.
same here. there was a while ago article about usefulness of these manual organizer interfaces. they just don't work. what works is a system that can infer what you need to do from what you have done before give you maximum shortcut value. Example was presented - in facebook if you enter school you've been to you can post messages to these people - to field gets macro selector for your friends that have attended same school you did.
usually if I can't remember something - i usually don't really need to do that. I will definetly won't engage in this pseudo work.
Also how does this pass 20/80 test?
Well good on google. this sort of reminds me buzz they had. but I haven't played with this yet.
I'm also an inbox-zero practitioner and am fully satisfied with my current email workflow with one caveat -- for "waiting on" or "not relevant now" emails, I need a way to bring them back to my inbox at some estimated time in the future to be revisited.
I found Boomerang (http://www.boomeranggmail.com/) a year ago, and it's been amazing for keeping inbox-zero (and my sanity). I average about 300 emails a day and most of them aren't immediately relevant. I then label them with their context(s) and boomerang them when I think they'll be actionable.
It's an amazing workflow, and I honestly think Google could just offer some type of "resend me this email later" (maybe even with a small note to myself) and would solve 90% of people's workflow problems.
Fully agree with this. Boomerang has really been the only way my inbox has remained exclusively actionable items that are not blocked by waiting for people to reply.
I haven't seen Inbox yet, but it sounds like the "snooze" feature might solve this problem for many people.
I can provide a personal example, I work at a place where we have one and only one ticketing / bug tracking system, but it can't be used for ticketing / bug tracking because its only to be used in hyper procedural, formalized manner solely to generate numerical metrics. All actual ticket tracking / bug tracking work is organized manually by each individual in email.
Not entirely unlike how most corporations use Excel as their corporate standard database, although excel isn't technically a database. So email is not a ticketing system, but for us, it is.
A few hundred emails is not terribly unusual per day.
Filtering strategies are vital. Topic drift away from the subject line is strongly discouraged.
This is at one of the largest companies in the world.
inbox-0 or not, it is still very helpful to use the multiple inbox feature in gmail [0], I've separated mine into "inbox", "follow up", "upcoming events", "to read". this way the screen is utilized better and i can actually see agenda.. also archive them after moving so that inbox only has items that still need attention.. Most people probably don't realize the cognitive effort they waste on re-parsing the same messages in inbox over and over and over again.
I also tried to engineer a sort of self-destruction messages. The kind that are relevant for a day or few but don't need to be kept. I added the rules to mark those as "disposable" and once in a while i just nuke them from my inbox. This is still a manual step so it would be nice if something like a self destructive message label was invented in case el Goog is watching this
I love Multiple Inbox for work emails, although for home I don't. My work email tends to get a bit cluttered during a project, but I try to get back to Inbox 0 when I get a moment to go through things.
My Multiple Inboxes are: Unread Inbox, Starred, Action/WaitingOn labels, Drafts and Unread (non-inbox). I had to add the last one as I was missing emails I hadn't read but had setup filters for. This deprioritizes them, but I still see them, and I can easily just mark them as read as they generally don't require much attention.
The other tip I'd say is learning the basics of keyboard shortcuts - I can open, assess and archive/delete an email very quickly because I use e/# (archive/delete respectively). I can burn through the unimportant emails very quickly that way.
I'm an inbox-zero-er (and Googler) and I love using Inbox for that exact reason - it makes it even easier for me to deal quickly with emails I don't want to touch (e.g. promotional), and snooze emails I can't act on immediately so they'll come back next week or whenever I need to follow up on them.
That means I can have an even more focused inbox that just contains things I need to think about / respond to right now.
In comparison, I still use regular gmail for my work email and I have maybe a dozen emails sitting in there that I don't need to do anything about right now but need to follow up on soon.
IMHO, Inbox basically takes the stuff that inbox-zero folks had to learn to do manually, and makes a lot of it automated. It's particularly great on mobile.
> IMHO, Inbox basically takes the stuff that inbox-zero folks had to learn to do manually, and makes a lot of it automated. It's particularly great on mobile.
But the manual intervention is precisely what makes my zero-inbox so effective. It's also agnostic to the device/application. If I leave something unread on a device it's unread somewhere else and vice versa. If one calls it "save for later", I don't know if that also means "unread".
Why does manual intervention (per se) make your zero-inbox so effective? This isn't somehow magically processing emails for you, it's just automating how those emails are handled after you decide what to do with them.
IIRC inbox-zero says you should file all of those to a "next week" or "next month" category and then once a week go through that inbox. This effectively removes the need to do that chore, because you can just say "put this back in front of me a week/month from now."
I don't see why this is any less "device agnostic" than any other method. You can use Inbox on mobile or desktop and they stay in sync; in fact, you can use Inbox on mobile and traditional Gmail on desktop (or vice-versa) and they'll stay in sync as well. (And you do in fact konw if the email is unread or not, since that's a separate bit of status info. You can snooze an email without reading it.)
Nope you are not alone. IMAP (despite being a technical mess behind the scenes) is my favorite computer technology of all time and has benefitted my life immensely. I would rather have today's email and no modern web than the reverse.
I don't do inbox zero, I do inbox 50k. I just let mail pile up--why not? It only stresses you out if you let it (I don't). Even with a million messages, it's instantly searchable with any decent mail client--and since it is standard IMAP you can use a bunch of different clients just like you use 3-4 different web browsers at the same time.
I have automated filters for stuff like Amazon that's key to my daily life but that I don't usually want to actually see, and the only manual organization I do is annual: I have folders like 2013, 2012, etc back to 1994 (containing all mail in and out). This started because in the old days clients bogged down with more than 20,000 or so messages in one folder. That's mostly not the case these days, but I like the yearly organization, and organizing my correspondence once a year isn't really too annoying, so I continue to do it this way.
I have routed all my faxes and voicemail to my email for 15+ years, too.
And it works on every device I own. For years and years and years.
I think email is about as perfect as computer tech ever gets. Usually instant (but tolerant of a multi-day outage), completely standard and future-proof data, that works on virtually every device and platform currently in use.
Email needs to be disrupted about as much as the hammer needs to be disrupted.
Best post on the page. Email just works. It has worked for years and years and it will continue to work for years and years.
Some people use their inbox as a to-do list. Why they do this is beyond me. It's like making an alarm and flashing light inside your office and then putting the switch in a preschool.
SV is starting to look like 40 thousand really smart millenials sitting around looking for something useful to do.
Having said that, I'm sure Inbox is awesome. Google puts out good stuff. I'm just not so sure it's revolutionary or even significant. But that's for the market to decide, not a bunch of schmucks on the net.
I generally only archive the previous year's worth of email at the end of the next year. So I always have between 12 and 24 months of email in my inbox. But otherwise, much the same.
The only thing I also do is intentionally leave e-mails I still need to respond to, as unread, and keep my inbox sorted with unread e-mails at the top.
It works great. The only thing that annoys me is that most (?) e-mail clients automatically mark an e-mail as read as soon as it's opened. I'm constantly pressing "Cmd+U" in Gmail to go back to the inbox, while leaving the item as unread.
Large % of emails are newsletters, notifications, offers and promotions. This is not spam (I think we have got that under control). These are the things you intentionally subscribed to and "nice to know" but not important or urgent. Email clients are utterly oblivious to identifieng and ranking them (Gmail's Priority Inbox is rather dumb baby steps).
Replying to threads and quoting previous replies is a pain. Threads become too long with several different colored highlights all over.
There is no easy way to control your membership in email conversation. It's hard to get out and hard to get in. Creating groups is high friction. Sharing previous conversations with someone or a group is non-practical.
Most email clients rank emails using date time. You can say that 70% of the human generated content uses perhaps most naive ranking algorithm. It is mind boggling that we still don't use signals like age of conversation, length, participants, topic, embedded action items etc. Even in 2014, most email clients will happily push email sent at 9AM for your house on fire after the benign Groupon promotion sent on 10 AM.
Emails are free form and there are poorly defined standards standards to add structured data such as reminders and action items for recipients, auto-expiration, callback number etc.
You can't share your "like" or upvote/downvotes for emails sent to a group. This severally limits how much social expression can be attached to emails flowing within a group.
I had an inbox zero policy before that was a thing. It's the only sane way to deal with email.
Count today: ~100 work emails. Most take less than a second of time. Some, require <1 minute to reply. The outliers are the ones that require me to do actual work beyond email but those are luckily usually communicated otherwise.
I don't find email broken (I use gmail). I typically have multiple emails in the inbox ready to be 'worked on' if they're unread.
If they're read, I've done something with them (and it stops my phone flashing at me constantly). Then, at the end of every month I fetch all mail via POP3 and delete all emails from my inbox.
The same goes for my phone (I use SMSBackup+ on Android).
But I still have my "offline" archive of data on my laptop, which I then backup once a month too. (Thanks TimeMachine).
Google says "it’s a completely different type of inbox, designed to focus on what really matters."
I thought that things like having a text editor that allows me to reliably do complex things like typing and pasting without losing my place, or perhaps a compose window that can be resized, really mattered. Since Gmail doesn't have either of those, maybe Inbox will add them :)
Snoozing emails, and turning emails into tasks, is the one feature that is important to me and gmail has been missing. I have tried some hacks like "mailbox" by dropbox, and "taskforce", etc, and they worked well, but it didn't work across all platforms.
I am sad that this seems to be Gmail only. Why have developers lost touch with standard IMAP protocols so we can use these new fancy apps with any email provider...
The vast majority of my Gmail access is through IMAP, and I'm quite happy for Google to leave that alone. Their tastes are very different from mine, and change more frequently. I would not be happy to wake up one day to find that Google had shuffled my messages, created new folders, and randomly labeled my messages to look like the flag of the world cup-winning soccer team.
An unfortunate reality is that IMAP is a really bad protocol. I encourage you to try implementing a client to get a feel for how difficult and quirky the protocol is. (Be sure to try implementing IDLE)
I'd love to see a better base protocol with a clean extension mechanism and a culture of documenting and publishing such extenstions. One can dream :)
EWS (Exchange Web Services) is actually a very good and well-documented protocol built on top of HTTP/HTTPS. Unfortunately, it's Microsoft only, but it's the closest anyone's really come to a "modern" e-mail protocol.
Slightly off-topic, but can we talk about that video?
I would love it if Google could just sell me on the idea of their products for once, instead of trying to sell me on a twentysomething Brooklyn lifestyle.
When I get hit in the face with these cheap emotional ploys that feel like an early 2000s Microsoft Zune ad, I get distracted from the actual product being touted. My resistance goes up.
Does this approach work for anyone? If you really are a Williamsburg hipster, I'd expect this kind of pandering would feel off-putting. If you're not, it's alienating.
There's certainly a place for emotion in ads. But how about a bit more product, and respect for our intelligence?
I also found myself thinking about the lifestyle of the people in the video, instead of the product. I'm no marketing expert but I suspect that this is a bad thing for a successful campaign. I haven't seen anything in the video that's not already available with the combination of Google Plus, Gmail, Google Keep and Google Now - maybe that's why I feel that way. Can't tell.
Marketing like this is supposed to form a link between the context (Brooklyn hipster lifestyle) and the product. So next time you hear about Inbox you'll think of the lifestyle and subconsciously go "maybe if I have inbox my life will be more like those cool happy good looking rich Brooklyn hipsters on the ad". Their target market with this ad is people that want to be like or have this (or a subset of this).
Apple is a more inherently hipster company that (I'm guessing here) has a large hipster marketshare. It's known for being hipster, so the link is already there. No need for ads like this to form that link to try and capture the twenty something crowd that wants this lifestyle.
Hacker news is full of people that value function, results and optimised workflow, which are essentially all that matters with an email app. So this form of marketing is lost on them :)
The video actually caused me to laugh from how cliche it is: A racially diverse group of 20-somethings doing "active" things like skateboarding and running on the beach.
I think I can guarantee that none of them are using email to talk to their friends. Snapchat and FB messenger are much more popular among my friend group.
I only use email if I know someone doesn't use or check Facebook very often.
Is that what 20-somethings do (or aspire to do) these days? Skateboarding and hanging out on the beach? Most of my peers and I spent our twenties busting our ass studying and then busting ass establishing a career. I must be getting old--watching that video I couldn't help but think, "It's daylight. Shouldn't you guys be in the office?"
Ads are aspirational, not representational according to mostly everything wrote by thelastpsychiatrist. While they are bust-assing their studies they still aspire to look cool, friendly and careless. Hence the add.
I would argue this product is not made for you. It is made to grab market share of the twentysomething crowd from Twitter/Facebook as Google sees it's gmail views shrink. These types of ads appeal to twentysomethings. Yes they're vapid and contentless, but that's what works to get that market to sign up to a product.
I find it interesting that I'm not the only one turned off by that video. I thought maybe I'm just not the target demographic but now that you mention it; it looks like just about every other video marketing some tech production. Its so... cookie cutter.
I usually get annoyed by too-hip advertising. But I think it makes sense here. Inbox is designed for mobile use, on the go, for a diverse array of tasks. Young urban people fit that demographic a lot more than a suburban commuter would, since that lifestyle comes with a pretty set routine and a limited variety of schedules.
Such ads make less sense when you have too-happy hipsters dancing in a park about the latest Windows edition, admittedly. But showing ads in the context of their use and probable demographic seems reasonable.
Indeed, the video got me thinking that they've probably done a lot of user testing already and they're confident to market it past the HN-type of people.
It also looks so confident that I thought I (31 years old) wasn't in their demographics anymore, and given I'm used to a Gmail interface which was invented in 2006, it may soon be going out of the door, but that's an inner fear of me which is talking.
Is there any tech product today whose creators would say it is not "designed for mobile use, on the go, for a diverse array of tasks"?
> Young urban people fit that demographic a lot more than a suburban commuter would, since that lifestyle comes with a pretty set routine and a limited variety of schedules
Yeah, no way a person with three kids and a full-time job has a hectic schedule.
Who are the majority of people who work for tech companies? Twenty-something people who live a Brooklyn lifestyle. Guess who the products are made for?
Agreed. Disappointing to have so little technical details on something as critical as email on the blog post. Understand less technical approach in tv ads and such but the blog is the place to provide some actual details about the product.
I felt like the text of the blog post did a pretty good job of explaining the goals of the product without much fluff. If guess if you're the sort of person who watches the video instead of reading the article, you get the marketing content designed for the people who don't read.
Video often gives you a better idea of how the product will feel to use, not emotionally, but dynamically.
Take for example Google's "Material Design" in Android L, you can read all the articles you want, but the concept won't make sense until you watch a video of the animation/transitions/etc. There are a lot of products/ideas like that. They say an image is a thousand words, and this isn't a sixty thousand word article.
I think it is silly to suggest that people who prefer video content over an article are "less intelligent." Instead those people want to get an idea of how the product would actually work in reality rather than just eating up all the carefully crafted marketing language within the article.
This is why unboxing videos and amateur product demos are so damn popular on YouTube: They actually give you a true-to-life idea of how a product would be. Articles are too carefully crafted, and seeing the product without the person interacting with the product is only 1/2 the message or less.
I was also put off by the video, made me pretty much disinterested in the product as well.
After a bit of introspection, I think the turn off is the cheap emotional ploy that you will somehow gain a lifestyle from using their inbox filtering app.
You know, after finishing a shift on your kickstarted-funded peruvian food truck, you can go practice with your band and take selfies.
For me, it would be far more effective if they showed me how the product would help an average everyday person.
I don't understand why people want some algorithm to sort your email for you. IMO email should always be sorted chronologically, and if it's too much, then used rules and folders/labels. Your inbox is not the place to add reminders. With the Google strategy you will have reminders everywhere seperately: calendar, email, phone, IM, texts, etc.
> I don't understand why people want some algorithm to sort your email for you. IMO email should always be sorted chronologically, and if it's too much, then used rules and folders/labels. Your inbox is not the place to add reminders.
What the hell, what kind of inbox-policing is that? How about "I don't understand why people would ever want to use a Mac, IMO the window management buttons should always be on the right side"?
People have different tastes, different workflows and different use cases. Is that really so hard to understand that you need to call this "the facebook of email"?
> I don't understand why people want some algorithm to sort your email...if it's too much, then used rules and folders/labels.
What, really, is the difference? I see many of Gmail's changes as the automatic equivalent to rules/labels and they have a massive sample set to base it all on.
As a counterpoint, I use Gmail's "Priority Inbox", and it's basically the best thing since sliced bread for me.
I don't want to have to bother creating rules for every Kickstarter I back, mailing list I join, marketing email that's just useful enough not have me unsubscribe.
The Priority Inbox does a 99% perfect job of sorting the emails I actually care about. Occasionally (once every other month), it misses something, but a quick scan of the "everything else" box usually, which I do anyhow, has me catch that.
That's the kind of algorithmic sorting that I want more of.
This one at least is solved for me now, since most list software implemented RFC 2919 a few years ago. Lists should include a list-id header, so just write one rule "if mail is to a list named foobar, file it in lists/foobar". Or if you don't care to separate them out, even just "if mail is to a list, file it in lists".
It's mostly just a hypothetical, I don't expect anyone to have the answer (Google won't even officially acknowledge that Now integration is broken in GApps).
It is mostly annoying that Google introduces new features that they apparently don't care about making work for their paying customers.
Gmail integrations just don't work with some accounts and will never work with the primary account. Email integration will ignore some forwards/catch-all accepted emails but work fine with others. It seems awfully flakey.
I have an entire GApps domain that I can't even turn Now on for, and I have no idea why.
Edit: Ahh the standard HN, "someone said something about Google that isn't glowing" flag instinct. Sorry that my experience with Now has been negative and you don't like that, flag away. Amusingly, the video comment (id=8493719) was flagged down into the negatives rather quickly, partially recovered and is continually being flagged.
Perhaps cool. I honestly wish they'd change their approach to quality & bug reporting, though. I get the impression that all of their developers are so busy making new & shiny that the tools that we rely on everyday are just languishing. I've never had any bug that I've reported via their product forums fixed.
What I would like to see is Gmail becoming more like Zendesk/Desk.com. So I can effectively manage responses, contacts, etc, with a single click and pre-defined responses.
Hmm. I'm not sure that this is actually an email app. For the record, I think Gmail and its steady incremental improvements embody email perfection -- I can't imagine going back to life before auto-sorted tabs -- and I'm totally willing to give Google the benefit of the doubt. Still... it's tough to see how Inbox improves on Gmail.
Instead of email, I think Inbox is an effort to finally (FINALLY) improve GTasks by marrying it into Gmail and Google Now. GTasks is woefully lacking. My recent switch to Trello has absolutely revolutionized my work flow, more than I thought possible. Inbox's autotasking looks like a big improvement on the dumb list, but it still doesn't look like a real competitor to Trello's kanban system.
(One last plug for Trello, just because using it for an hour has turned me into a wild-eyed fanatic. It's AMAZING. Try it!)
471 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 290 ms ] thread[0]: http://arstechnica.com/business/2014/10/googles-product-stra...
https://support.google.com/a/answer/1689647?hl=en
https://support.google.com/a/answer/1638152?hl=en
If I had to wager on it, I'd say it's going to happen. User adoption is a powerful metric.
And really, I can't remember any feature that pulled me to gmail other than a) free, b) lots of space, and c) google's name. The non-threaded messages was actually something I disliked at the beginning. I put up with it now.
If anything, to me, it shows they get email more than anyone else: They realize that it's deeply flawed for a lot of today's workflows and that a solution, in order to have a chance, needs to be built on top of the open standards of email and be backwards compatible with them.
And, I don't think anyone really wants them to quit trying. It is scary that they may eventually kill what they have though. They explicitly did this with reader, after all. (Maybe I'm projecting, of course.)
Originally? Lots of space, yes, but search and speed were big ones, as were threaded conversations, labels instead of folders, built-in gchat (that might have been later), amazing spam filtering, POP3 and eventually IMAP access.
Since then, priority inbox has been a huge win for me, and I don't use the tabbed inbox, but some people seem to like it. I'm sure there are a bunch of little things I don't notice as well that would make the 2004 interface feel ancient.
The rest was really just permission to not use folders. Did they even have labels at the outset? I recall there was a big cry over not having hierarchies of data. Maybe it was just labels were simpler... Honestly, I've stopped using labels, even.
I do think it made it apparent that archiving was more than plenty for most people. (And they eventually caved and added deletion.) Anything else you could just search for. Though, again, I don't recall them being that much better at search than other options at the time.
All of that is to say that I don't feel google revolutionized email so much as the just implemented the subset that people actually needed. And made it free for lots of storage so that you no longer had to perform any maintenance. (Seriously, I was paying for email that had a scant 100 megs at the time.)
Labels used not to be nestable.
Their anti-spam was stunningly better than all the existing web-based providers.
Yes, everyone else has caught up. Yay less spam!
Can't wait for the invitation.
I'm interested but I keep seeing that this sort of stuff never takes into accounts things such as mailing lists (a la mailman and such). I hope I'm wrong.
http://www.google.com/work/apps/business/
Big difference.
But i'll shortcut it and just offer an existence proof, since you can find all three pieces with creative searching:
https://itunes.apple.com/app/id905060486?mt=8
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...
https://inbox.google.com
:)
It appears to be sorting and arranging various bits of data. The examples shown include messages, and a flight reservation. What all kinds of data bits DO integrate? Does this read my email (or replace it)? Does this read (or replace) the news feeds of my social networking accounts? Where did it get that flight itinerary? Why is everyone in this video talking a selfie every two seconds, is Inbox sharing or managing photos for you?
I think this supposed to be an improved version of Google Keep, perhaps with some hooks into Gmail and your phone's camera. But all I have to go by is a few paragraph of fluff, and a 60-second video of young people staring down at their phones. Feel free to fill in the blanks, if you picked up some more solid information that we're missing.
http://www.theverge.com/2014/10/22/7041227/google-inbox-hand...
I don't know what that whole "overwhelmed by email" issue is all about. If you are getting 100+ emails a day and believe these are all relevant for you, you either work as some sort of a customers service rep or there is something wrong with your life/priorities.
I work in marketing for PC hardware, so very different sort of workflow to coding.
I, for one, am looking forward to the Poochie rap!
I suppose I could see how this would be useful if you're using your smart watch or your phone and only want the most important facts, boiled down to their essence. (But then, doesn't Google Now already do that?)
Outside of that context, it doesn't seem like you'll ordinarily have both Inbox and Gmail open at the same time, because (as far as I can see) Inbox is just a way of better organizing and presenting the underlying data, whereas Gmail is more like the raw feed.
Side question: am I the only person fully satisfied by my email workflow? I practice inbox 0- if an email is in my inbox, it means something needs to be done about it (whether it's replying, filing a bug report, writing a patch, etc). Once it's done, it gets archived. I star the stuff that I'll need to refer to later, like tickets for a flight or concert. I then have a few server side rules to do things like mark certain classes of emails as read (eg build logs, mailing lists), so as to not flood my phone with notifications. And... that's it.
(edit: oh and yes, I am also very diligent about unsubscribing from the stuff I know will never be relevant, rather than just archiving it and forgetting about it until another email from the same source comes up a week later. After a few weeks of consistently practicing this, your inbox gets much better)
I get probably a few hundred emails a day at most (work+personal), and this system works great for me. I know people like Paul Graham think email is utterly broken, but when you're at their level I'm not sure ~any~ tool will be satisfying - they're absolutely outliers.
So HNers, do you really have a problem with your email workflow, or is everyone just repeating "email is broken" because some smart people with an ungodly amount of email said so?
I'm also on the lighter side of email load/work, but I don't see how a simple/efficient/clean workflow like this could be improved.
Yeah. And with a few (well, 119) filters, it's actually pretty rare that an e-mail hits my inbox. Rare enough to have notifications on my phone enabled.
Maybe it's not broken, maybe it's just being used by people in a way it wasn't meant to be. I bet a lot of people's email 'conversations' would work better in a chat app (i.e. they don't need an easily searchable record and they aren't typing long messages).
119 is completely sane.
I did :) I found my personal email a mess. I have a lot of mailing lists i need to "semi" pay attention to, and get about 1000+ emails a day all told.
This was pretty messy to manage, even with foldering/labeling/etc and such.
Inbox is pretty nice for my workflow (i'm sure there are some it is good for, and some it is bad for). I have it figure out the importance of various mailing list messages, and then show them to me once a day per mailing list. I mark the ones i care about with pins or reminders, and it takes care of reminding me.
On the work side, i get even more email, and i don't have a great workflow there. But i'm completely an outlier. I essentially have two distinct jobs I do for the company.
Practicing inbox zero in either case is unlikely to work for various reasons (among other things, most of my job is not predicated on making quick decisions but on thoughtful ones I could just move everything to task lists, but it would just create another place with the same info and often a worse interface)
Similarly, I've never seen the advantage of leaving old emails in my inbox rather than just archiving everything without labeling it.
For my work email, I try to practice inbox-0. Every message either gets an immediate action, or it's filed away as a task on my todo list (including the URL for the message in Gmail), and then archived.
The advantage I find to archiving messages is just a slight psychological boost. When the inbox is empty, I know I have nothing to do. If I have <20 emails (I always try to keep these inboxes under 20), I can see everything I have to do. As I work my way through the list, it's obvious visual feedback that I'm making progress. Just little things that I feel slightly improve my experience.
Although this only works because I have my other massive "online" inbox :D
Some of these threads (for me) are good explanations/resources about a particular problem, but which I can't act on yet as $OtherTask is higher priority. I have Jira tickets for most of these, but even so the inbox helps remind me (roughly monthly) that things are still Not Fixed, whereas a TODO label would end up being unread.
Maybe it's just that I've been depending on that and have NOT been using a TODO or similar label for things, and thus am not in the habit of checking for New Things in my filtered labels. I'll have to think about this more. Thanks in advance for your insight. :)
- If it requires a task and I can do it within 2 minutes, then I just do it. - If it requires a task that'll take more than 2 minutes, I schedule the task on my calendar and archive the email. - If it's just for future reference (eg, flight confirmation), I add an appropriate label ("Travel") and archive it. - If it's none of the above, then it either gets archived or just deleted.
So I don't have the problem that Inbox is trying to solve. What I'm wondering is will this eventually be forced onto all users, whether we need it or not?
In most cases, I know what I want, and I am OK with opening the app that can do the job for me. However, I want that app work properly and always. That's why I don't find Google Now too appealing: I don't want a personal assistant who tries to figure out what I want. I want a personal assistant that can do what I want when I ask for it. I don't need an app that scrapes my email for airline tickets -- I need an app that makes me easy to look up delays and departure times. I don't want an app that sets an alarm clock automatically when I have a meeting because there are two cases: 1) I need an alarm, but then I need to be 100% sure that it's set (and I don't want to double check whether magical AI figured it out properly) 2) I don't need an alarm (so I don't want my personal assistant to set up one). I cannot risk missing somethink: if it's not important, I'll try to unsubscribe.
But that's only my use case.
Ah, and +1: I don't want to keep emails. If I don't want to retain some information, then I just delete it -- there's no search algorithm in sight thats accuracy is independent of the search space. More emails, items -> less effective search.
That and some general common sense has added up to me being bewildered when people discuss how difficult email is.
I really hope that doesn't come off as snarky, because it's not meant to be! :-)
If I need something, I just search for it. As the Gmail search is really, really, good, I can pretty much instantly bring up any thread. I therefore don't see any value in spending even a second of time in trying to organize a piece of email. I also really like the "Social" and "Promotions" tabs Gmail added, it's like a smart filter for "unimportant stuff" that I don't even need to bother looking at but can search for if needed. I look forward to Inbox automating and highlighting actionable items even more (check in for flight etc, should just be a button press without even opening the email).
I would rather apply a label, or mark a message as unread (this is what I typically do), if it is something I need to return to later. Most emails can either be directly acted upon, or don't require a followup at a later time, so optimizing the common case down to "do nothing" makes sense for me.
As a result, I end up missing or not doing things, and re-reading emails I've already done, and my inbox is just a big chronologically-ordered mess.
This is my personal email anyway. My work email I'm a little more careful with, but it also piles up over time and rarely something will slip through the cracks. Outlook's flag/reminder system is decent at least, so it's manageable, but it still at times feels disorganized and just not quite how I want it to be.
I think the key is to use one system consistently, and to have a concise view of your current open items with minimal manual effort.
If you just keep everything in your inbox, it means you need to click on a button to sort by starred emails. Also you need to star any emails you need to work on. Most of my emails take a while to respond to - I like to think about them for a while before responding. With your method I wouldn't be able to do that - I have to either respond to all my emails after reading them, or else star all my emails as 'needing work' until I have time to respond.
Keeping only a few items in my inbox that I need to work on is the most efficient way of working, at least for me.
This is also the reason I've never been able to use any 3rd party email clients and rely solely on gmail in the browser. Search is so much faster/better when done directly in gmail.
I'm curious to try Inbox and see if it provides a useful added layer of aggregation of messages above and beyond the current "conversations."
People are working on that.
Google's new categories help and Inbox sounds promising but I feel like there's too much assumption going on in parsing the emails.
Really, I'd like email addresses to be on the domain level. For example, mail@cool_username.gmail.com and flights@cool_username.gmail.com. Then, give me granular control over how "mail" or "flights" get categorized and give me nested categories.
http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2008/03/2-hidden-ways-to-get-m...
As for the per-category addressing, you can add "+flights" to your username when subscribing to flight notifications and then filter on that however you like...
For example, I'd love to be able to add a rule so that certain "deal" emails (those to which I'm purposely subscribed) to expire after say 1 day or 1 week - whatever the standard time for the sender's deals to typically last.
Then on the occasion that I end up in the woods, whether literally or figuratively, and unable to maintain my email for a couple days, I don't end up with an overwhelming and generally self-perpetuating inbox debt
I mean, searching for "vpn" doesn't give me the mail that contains "openvpn"? Or it's that incompatible to my workflow that not even RTFM works...
http://notmuchmail.org/
I also do the Inbox Zero thing, and absolutely love the overview it gives me of what I need to do. With Mailbox, you'll "snooze" mails and it'll be like they get delivered to you at the later specified time.
I recently sat my parents down, installed mailbox on their devices, and instructed them how to use the app. Amazingly enough, they now constantly use it, and aim for the zero inbox (they are people that would have to write down what ctrl-c does, and didn't know about ctrl-z...).
[0] http://www.mailboxapp.com
EDIT: If it wasn't clear; I'm also very satisfied my with mail flow :)
"Mailbox stores a subset of your emails temporarily in order to redeliver snoozed emails, provide fast delivery and provide push notifications. We encrypt all communication to and from the Mailbox app, and all information cached on our servers is stored in an encrypted format." [0]
[0] http://www.mailboxapp.com/help/#/search?query=mailbox%20stor...
I subscribe to inbox-0 because emails in my inbox need attention of some kind. I'm not advocating spending an inordinate amount of time organizing every email with labels and filters. Just "inbox == needs attention, not-inbox == I can safely forget about it".
Boomerang is pretty similar to some features of Inbox.
Most mail that matters come from specific people (close family, project members, current client...) so it's easy to search, the unexpected important mails and things that needs to be done later just need to be starred.
I feel it's really efficient when the signal/noise ratio is very low.
Personally, I didn't like archival at first, but now I'm quite addicted to it
Full Disclosure: I'm a Inbox Zero-er.
usually if I can't remember something - i usually don't really need to do that. I will definetly won't engage in this pseudo work.
Also how does this pass 20/80 test?
Well good on google. this sort of reminds me buzz they had. but I haven't played with this yet.
I found Boomerang (http://www.boomeranggmail.com/) a year ago, and it's been amazing for keeping inbox-zero (and my sanity). I average about 300 emails a day and most of them aren't immediately relevant. I then label them with their context(s) and boomerang them when I think they'll be actionable.
It's an amazing workflow, and I honestly think Google could just offer some type of "resend me this email later" (maybe even with a small note to myself) and would solve 90% of people's workflow problems.
I haven't seen Inbox yet, but it sounds like the "snooze" feature might solve this problem for many people.
Not entirely unlike how most corporations use Excel as their corporate standard database, although excel isn't technically a database. So email is not a ticketing system, but for us, it is.
A few hundred emails is not terribly unusual per day.
Filtering strategies are vital. Topic drift away from the subject line is strongly discouraged.
This is at one of the largest companies in the world.
I also tried to engineer a sort of self-destruction messages. The kind that are relevant for a day or few but don't need to be kept. I added the rules to mark those as "disposable" and once in a while i just nuke them from my inbox. This is still a manual step so it would be nice if something like a self destructive message label was invented in case el Goog is watching this
[0] http://klinger.io/post/71640845938/dont-drown-in-email-how-t...
My Multiple Inboxes are: Unread Inbox, Starred, Action/WaitingOn labels, Drafts and Unread (non-inbox). I had to add the last one as I was missing emails I hadn't read but had setup filters for. This deprioritizes them, but I still see them, and I can easily just mark them as read as they generally don't require much attention.
The other tip I'd say is learning the basics of keyboard shortcuts - I can open, assess and archive/delete an email very quickly because I use e/# (archive/delete respectively). I can burn through the unimportant emails very quickly that way.
That means I can have an even more focused inbox that just contains things I need to think about / respond to right now.
In comparison, I still use regular gmail for my work email and I have maybe a dozen emails sitting in there that I don't need to do anything about right now but need to follow up on soon.
IMHO, Inbox basically takes the stuff that inbox-zero folks had to learn to do manually, and makes a lot of it automated. It's particularly great on mobile.
But the manual intervention is precisely what makes my zero-inbox so effective. It's also agnostic to the device/application. If I leave something unread on a device it's unread somewhere else and vice versa. If one calls it "save for later", I don't know if that also means "unread".
IIRC inbox-zero says you should file all of those to a "next week" or "next month" category and then once a week go through that inbox. This effectively removes the need to do that chore, because you can just say "put this back in front of me a week/month from now."
I don't see why this is any less "device agnostic" than any other method. You can use Inbox on mobile or desktop and they stay in sync; in fact, you can use Inbox on mobile and traditional Gmail on desktop (or vice-versa) and they'll stay in sync as well. (And you do in fact konw if the email is unread or not, since that's a separate bit of status info. You can snooze an email without reading it.)
I don't do inbox zero, I do inbox 50k. I just let mail pile up--why not? It only stresses you out if you let it (I don't). Even with a million messages, it's instantly searchable with any decent mail client--and since it is standard IMAP you can use a bunch of different clients just like you use 3-4 different web browsers at the same time.
I have automated filters for stuff like Amazon that's key to my daily life but that I don't usually want to actually see, and the only manual organization I do is annual: I have folders like 2013, 2012, etc back to 1994 (containing all mail in and out). This started because in the old days clients bogged down with more than 20,000 or so messages in one folder. That's mostly not the case these days, but I like the yearly organization, and organizing my correspondence once a year isn't really too annoying, so I continue to do it this way.
I have routed all my faxes and voicemail to my email for 15+ years, too.
And it works on every device I own. For years and years and years.
I think email is about as perfect as computer tech ever gets. Usually instant (but tolerant of a multi-day outage), completely standard and future-proof data, that works on virtually every device and platform currently in use.
Email needs to be disrupted about as much as the hammer needs to be disrupted.
I read my email whenever I want. I spend time manually moving/filing/archiving my email about once a year.
:)
Some people use their inbox as a to-do list. Why they do this is beyond me. It's like making an alarm and flashing light inside your office and then putting the switch in a preschool.
SV is starting to look like 40 thousand really smart millenials sitting around looking for something useful to do.
Having said that, I'm sure Inbox is awesome. Google puts out good stuff. I'm just not so sure it's revolutionary or even significant. But that's for the market to decide, not a bunch of schmucks on the net.
The only thing I also do is intentionally leave e-mails I still need to respond to, as unread, and keep my inbox sorted with unread e-mails at the top.
It works great. The only thing that annoys me is that most (?) e-mail clients automatically mark an e-mail as read as soon as it's opened. I'm constantly pressing "Cmd+U" in Gmail to go back to the inbox, while leaving the item as unread.
Large % of emails are newsletters, notifications, offers and promotions. This is not spam (I think we have got that under control). These are the things you intentionally subscribed to and "nice to know" but not important or urgent. Email clients are utterly oblivious to identifieng and ranking them (Gmail's Priority Inbox is rather dumb baby steps).
Replying to threads and quoting previous replies is a pain. Threads become too long with several different colored highlights all over.
There is no easy way to control your membership in email conversation. It's hard to get out and hard to get in. Creating groups is high friction. Sharing previous conversations with someone or a group is non-practical.
Most email clients rank emails using date time. You can say that 70% of the human generated content uses perhaps most naive ranking algorithm. It is mind boggling that we still don't use signals like age of conversation, length, participants, topic, embedded action items etc. Even in 2014, most email clients will happily push email sent at 9AM for your house on fire after the benign Groupon promotion sent on 10 AM.
Emails are free form and there are poorly defined standards standards to add structured data such as reminders and action items for recipients, auto-expiration, callback number etc.
You can't share your "like" or upvote/downvotes for emails sent to a group. This severally limits how much social expression can be attached to emails flowing within a group.
I had an inbox zero policy before that was a thing. It's the only sane way to deal with email.
Count today: ~100 work emails. Most take less than a second of time. Some, require <1 minute to reply. The outliers are the ones that require me to do actual work beyond email but those are luckily usually communicated otherwise.
But I still have my "offline" archive of data on my laptop, which I then backup once a month too. (Thanks TimeMachine).
I thought that things like having a text editor that allows me to reliably do complex things like typing and pasting without losing my place, or perhaps a compose window that can be resized, really mattered. Since Gmail doesn't have either of those, maybe Inbox will add them :)
Maybe Google Outbox will end up being amazing.
I am looking forward to trying this out.
I'd love to see a better base protocol with a clean extension mechanism and a culture of documenting and publishing such extenstions. One can dream :)
If you connect via IMAP, you get all your email as usual. It's up to the client to do things like set calendar reminders from emails or whatever.
When I get hit in the face with these cheap emotional ploys that feel like an early 2000s Microsoft Zune ad, I get distracted from the actual product being touted. My resistance goes up.
Does this approach work for anyone? If you really are a Williamsburg hipster, I'd expect this kind of pandering would feel off-putting. If you're not, it's alienating.
There's certainly a place for emotion in ads. But how about a bit more product, and respect for our intelligence?
Apple is a more inherently hipster company that (I'm guessing here) has a large hipster marketshare. It's known for being hipster, so the link is already there. No need for ads like this to form that link to try and capture the twenty something crowd that wants this lifestyle.
Hacker news is full of people that value function, results and optimised workflow, which are essentially all that matters with an email app. So this form of marketing is lost on them :)
(does email is cool, and happy?)
[1] http://www.meltingasphalt.com/ads-dont-work-that-way/
I only use email if I know someone doesn't use or check Facebook very often.
I'm sure you'll get 20 VC funds camping on your lawn for the chance to fund that one, but that says more about them really.
Such ads make less sense when you have too-happy hipsters dancing in a park about the latest Windows edition, admittedly. But showing ads in the context of their use and probable demographic seems reasonable.
It also looks so confident that I thought I (31 years old) wasn't in their demographics anymore, and given I'm used to a Gmail interface which was invented in 2006, it may soon be going out of the door, but that's an inner fear of me which is talking.
> Young urban people fit that demographic a lot more than a suburban commuter would, since that lifestyle comes with a pretty set routine and a limited variety of schedules
Yeah, no way a person with three kids and a full-time job has a hectic schedule.
Take for example Google's "Material Design" in Android L, you can read all the articles you want, but the concept won't make sense until you watch a video of the animation/transitions/etc. There are a lot of products/ideas like that. They say an image is a thousand words, and this isn't a sixty thousand word article.
I think it is silly to suggest that people who prefer video content over an article are "less intelligent." Instead those people want to get an idea of how the product would actually work in reality rather than just eating up all the carefully crafted marketing language within the article.
This is why unboxing videos and amateur product demos are so damn popular on YouTube: They actually give you a true-to-life idea of how a product would be. Articles are too carefully crafted, and seeing the product without the person interacting with the product is only 1/2 the message or less.
http://vimeo.com/14784213
After a bit of introspection, I think the turn off is the cheap emotional ploy that you will somehow gain a lifestyle from using their inbox filtering app.
You know, after finishing a shift on your kickstarted-funded peruvian food truck, you can go practice with your band and take selfies.
For me, it would be far more effective if they showed me how the product would help an average everyday person.
Inbox by Gmail: the Facebook of email.
What the hell, what kind of inbox-policing is that? How about "I don't understand why people would ever want to use a Mac, IMO the window management buttons should always be on the right side"?
People have different tastes, different workflows and different use cases. Is that really so hard to understand that you need to call this "the facebook of email"?
What, really, is the difference? I see many of Gmail's changes as the automatic equivalent to rules/labels and they have a massive sample set to base it all on.
I don't want to have to bother creating rules for every Kickstarter I back, mailing list I join, marketing email that's just useful enough not have me unsubscribe.
The Priority Inbox does a 99% perfect job of sorting the emails I actually care about. Occasionally (once every other month), it misses something, but a quick scan of the "everything else" box usually, which I do anyhow, has me catch that.
That's the kind of algorithmic sorting that I want more of.
This one at least is solved for me now, since most list software implemented RFC 2919 a few years ago. Lists should include a list-id header, so just write one rule "if mail is to a list named foobar, file it in lists/foobar". Or if you don't care to separate them out, even just "if mail is to a list, file it in lists".
Do you think a Google employee is going to come in here and answer "yes! we'll break it hard!"?
Do you think anyone here actually has the answer? Most don't even have access.
It is mostly annoying that Google introduces new features that they apparently don't care about making work for their paying customers.
In what way do you think Now is broken with GApps accounts? I use Now with GApps, and don't know what you're referring to.
I have an entire GApps domain that I can't even turn Now on for, and I have no idea why.
Edit: Ahh the standard HN, "someone said something about Google that isn't glowing" flag instinct. Sorry that my experience with Now has been negative and you don't like that, flag away. Amusingly, the video comment (id=8493719) was flagged down into the negatives rather quickly, partially recovered and is continually being flagged.
https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2839480?hl=en
Instead of email, I think Inbox is an effort to finally (FINALLY) improve GTasks by marrying it into Gmail and Google Now. GTasks is woefully lacking. My recent switch to Trello has absolutely revolutionized my work flow, more than I thought possible. Inbox's autotasking looks like a big improvement on the dumb list, but it still doesn't look like a real competitor to Trello's kanban system.
(One last plug for Trello, just because using it for an hour has turned me into a wild-eyed fanatic. It's AMAZING. Try it!)
So it has open and auditable secure end to end encryption?