Dedicated mail clients have existed for a lot longer than GMail has, work with any service using the POP3 or IMAP protocol, and don't run inside a web browser.
binaryturtle 3 hours ago [-]
I recall we could dial up a super slow connection over telephone lines, get all our mails into such client in less than 4 minutes over said slow line, just to dial off again.¹ Afterwards we would read all our mails offline with all the time in the world, carefully crafting replies and put those into an "Outgoing" folder for the next time we could dial up a connection again (usually the next day). :)
¹) back then you paid Internet by the minute, or in case of the Deutsche Telekom it was a 4 minute tact in the evening, so you had to wait until after 21:00 to get the cheaper prices.
jeffbee 3 hours ago [-]
That worked because while the link may have been slow, it was circuit-switched and generally provided the 2400 bits. "Bad wifi" is unbelievably bad compared to an old dial-up link. It's so much worse than you're imagining.
throawayonthe 3 hours ago [-]
but i'm assuming this is a client for their webmail
jsbsbdbd 3 hours ago [-]
I don't get it, why not use _any_ client with IMAP instead?
jeffbee 3 hours ago [-]
Because IMAP sucks on bad network links. It involves a huge number of round trips to synchronize the state, and re-establishing the shared state when the connection is interrupted takes forever.
A lot of online commenters refuse to believe this but the standard Gmail interface is highly optimized to cope with bad network connections, hide latency, and recover from interruptions. If you have the code assets and initial state cached in your browser, it behaves very well under bad network conditions.
Virgo_matt 2 hours ago [-]
yea it's fair that you can just use IMAP and sync before your trip then send after.
but I was on a flight, didn't have Gmail or Superhuman cached and could not get either to even load. I do suspect that if it were already loaded, Gmail probably would have functioned decently well.
still Gmail and Superhuman just seem...bloated. kinda cool to just have a simple, open source interface for the Gmail REST API.
boplicity 3 hours ago [-]
I really want a fast multi-email client that can easily show full contact history in a sidebar. Any options out there? Em Client does this, but it is buggy and/or slow. No such Thunderbird plugins exist, either.
isaachinman 2 hours ago [-]
Yes, Marco does this (disclaimer, I'm the solo founder):
Contacts populate alongside email threads in search results. If you click on a contact, it will take you to a dedicated contact screen with every thread you've ever had with that contact, as well as every attachment they've ever sent you.
mzajc 2 hours ago [-]
Not sure if that's intentional, but the entire landing page gets replaced with an error if WebGL is not available:
> Something went wrong!
> Error creating WebGL context.
Virgo_matt 2 hours ago [-]
Marco looks really nice! would you consider open sourcing it?
tombelieber 1 hours ago [-]
This is the kind of app idea that immediately makes sense if you’ve ever had to do email on trash internet. Optimizing for bad Wi-Fi is way more useful than chasing another layer of polish.
Virgo_matt 1 hours ago [-]
thank you! honestly gmail, superhuman, etc. should all just have "bad wifi mode" but until they do, might as well vibe code an open source alternative!
ghost-of-dmr 3 hours ago [-]
You can't just configure mutt (or alpine, et al.) to use Gmail?
cadamsdotcom 2 hours ago [-]
If you’re in a position of considering alternatives, I find Fastmail to be fully featured, support saving the key stuff offline, and most importantly FAST!
No ”try our AI for free!” nudges or “smart features” that you need to go through and decide whether to disable.. which is a feature these days.
Virgo_matt 2 hours ago [-]
appreciate the suggestion, but I like my gmail account! I just want a fast, stripped down interface. and BAREmail is free, doesn't need a backend, and open source. looks like Fastmail is paid only?
sixtyj 3 hours ago [-]
You can use thunderbird or any other desktop mail software for connecting to gmail.
And then just use gmail as smtp for outgoing mails and imap or pop3 for incoming mails.
shhsshs 4 hours ago [-]
I would love one of these for Google Chat. It feels like it's been getting slower and slower these past few years.
kevin_thibedeau 4 hours ago [-]
In a better world we'd still be using a common protocol to interact with mail submission/delivery agents.
ambicapter 3 hours ago [-]
Email is not a common protocol?
0x457 3 hours ago [-]
Email isn't a protocol. SMTP, POP, IMAP, JMAP are protocols.
GMail requires you to enable IMAP/POP to use it and uses proprietary auth protocol or use unsafe application passwords.
GMail IMAP also has a bunch of IMAP extensions that are unique to GMail.
Point is - primary interface to GMail is REST API that is (again) unique to GMail.
Multicomp 2 hours ago [-]
Fastmail was developing JMAP for a while, it's not gotten a lot of uptake (mostly because Fastmails primary mail partners like Gmail, AOL, Yahoo and Hotmail are all 20 year old legacy dot com companies...did Microsoft spend all day trying to get Fairchild Semiconductor to play nice with them? No, they did a worse is better DOS and the rest is history).
But email is a least common denominator, and like how plan9 failed to take over from unix bc unix inertia, JMAP or deltachat IM over email won't take over bc of network effect inertia, I suspect.
0x457 25 minutes ago [-]
> mostly because Fastmails primary mail partners like Gmail, AOL, Yahoo and Hotmail are all 20 year old legacy dot com companies
Pretty sure it's because MS wants you to use Outlook New (New) New and Google wants you to use their web interface. Nothing to with them being old, but everything to do with owning as much of your data as possible and have as many opportunities to show you ads as possible.
3 hours ago [-]
tiberious726 3 hours ago [-]
Random web apps are not. Imap pop and smtp don't sanely support mfa, so the insurance industry is slowly killing them off
tranchms 4 hours ago [-]
Fantastic lite weight client. Perfect for travel and spotty reception/ low bandwidth. Cool interface too.
tonymet 3 hours ago [-]
Lovely app and it’s a shame that Google hasn’t created a better solution for oauth CLI apps.
Virgo_matt 2 hours ago [-]
thanks! totally agree on the the Google OAuth...it's not the end of the world, but certainly not the most user friendly to need to create a GCP project and create an OAuth client just to get your own Gmail API access!
tonymet 31 minutes ago [-]
I agree. I’ve made a few myself and I just wish they would make cli’s more user friendly.
rallypi 4 hours ago [-]
[removed]
OsrsNeedsf2P 3 hours ago [-]
I fear for all the bots that aren't as obvious as this one
3 hours ago [-]
Rendered at 19:55:18 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
¹) back then you paid Internet by the minute, or in case of the Deutsche Telekom it was a 4 minute tact in the evening, so you had to wait until after 21:00 to get the cheaper prices.
A lot of online commenters refuse to believe this but the standard Gmail interface is highly optimized to cope with bad network connections, hide latency, and recover from interruptions. If you have the code assets and initial state cached in your browser, it behaves very well under bad network conditions.
but I was on a flight, didn't have Gmail or Superhuman cached and could not get either to even load. I do suspect that if it were already loaded, Gmail probably would have functioned decently well.
still Gmail and Superhuman just seem...bloated. kinda cool to just have a simple, open source interface for the Gmail REST API.
https://marcoapp.io
Contacts populate alongside email threads in search results. If you click on a contact, it will take you to a dedicated contact screen with every thread you've ever had with that contact, as well as every attachment they've ever sent you.
> Something went wrong!
> Error creating WebGL context.
No ”try our AI for free!” nudges or “smart features” that you need to go through and decide whether to disable.. which is a feature these days.
And then just use gmail as smtp for outgoing mails and imap or pop3 for incoming mails.
GMail requires you to enable IMAP/POP to use it and uses proprietary auth protocol or use unsafe application passwords.
GMail IMAP also has a bunch of IMAP extensions that are unique to GMail.
Point is - primary interface to GMail is REST API that is (again) unique to GMail.
But email is a least common denominator, and like how plan9 failed to take over from unix bc unix inertia, JMAP or deltachat IM over email won't take over bc of network effect inertia, I suspect.
Pretty sure it's because MS wants you to use Outlook New (New) New and Google wants you to use their web interface. Nothing to with them being old, but everything to do with owning as much of your data as possible and have as many opportunities to show you ads as possible.