In my impression of Google products (Gmail is a notable example), the company has been more on the "stagnation" side and less on the "innovation" side already.
If anyone from Google is reading: Please disregard this comment. We like our Gmail exactly how it is. If you want to substantially "innovate" on email, please consider a new, independent product -- one that you can safely shutter after 12 months. Thanks.
On the off chance anyone from Google is reading and cares, I'm a strong vote for some regression in Gmail. The new-ish version doesn't straight up break as often as it used to, but it's still a slow ugly mess compared to the previous one.
Maybe I'm just old and grumpy, but every time I see praise for Gmail I just think there is some serious Stockholm syndrome going on. There is a reason "inbox zero" became a thing and people started complaining about mail piling up after Gmail. And I think it has everything to do with Gmail's tools of organization. Or shall I say, lack of organization. Gmail's interface is also slow and terrible compared to a quality desktop client.
Gmail is basically synonymous with email today, and no one wants to use email now. What does that really say about Gmail, then? Never mind the fact that they pretty much killed off non-Google mail servers.
This is a very reddit-culture comment. First time I've seen it here.
In my opinion, HN is better off. You have a good underlying point (that Inbox was exactly what GP wanted), but why write it that way?
It's certainly not still funny after the 1000th (or even 2nd) time reading it, and it's harder to understand for people who aren't in on the joke or speak English as a second language.
