On 10/11/07, Bianka McGovern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The labels that have unread email in them display in bold and have a
> > number next to them that indicates how many unread messages there are.
>
> For me that's not enough of an indication. I missed important emails
> because of that. N
On 10/11/07, Robert Hoekman, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > If you let emails skip the inbox you won't see new incoming emails.
>
> The labels that have unread email in them display in bold and have a
> number next to them that indicates how many unread messages there are.
For me that's not en
> If you let emails skip the inbox you won't see new incoming emails.
The labels that have unread email in them display in bold and have a
number next to them that indicates how many unread messages there are.
Most desktop clients do the same thing. Unless, of course, you're
physcally dragging ev
On 10/10/07, Robert Hoekman, Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > (1) allow emails to carry either one or many labels (which, we know is
> > already a gmail function);
>
> > (2) allow "labeled emails" to appear, or not appear, in your In Box.
>
> Gmail accommodates both of these things. Again, you ca
This is why the Microsofties wanted to transition to a database-driven
OS with Vista. In such an operating system, all data is under version
control as you imply (and I agree) would be desirable.
--- Phillip Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The 'paper" problem (beyond when it's used unnecessar
> I'm a huge gmail fan, but I labeled/archived things religiously from day 1
> and haven't have to deal with a massive inbox
That reminds me - my Inbox has only about, oh, 10 or so items in it at
the moment. Most incoming email is set to skip the inbox (and remains
marked as unread). The rest
Hi (below)
On 10/11/07, Phillip Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Susan,
>
> You wrote:
> > there's no reason in Outlook or elsewhere, even using the
> > paper/files/folders metaphor, not to allow content to appear in more
> than
> > one folder--in the paper-centric paradigm people made multip
Susan,
You wrote:
> there's no reason in Outlook or elsewhere, even using the
> paper/files/folders metaphor, not to allow content to appear in more than
> one folder--in the paper-centric paradigm people made multiple copies to
> store in various files/folders, so it's not even a paper-driven
Gmail has started deleting my older gtalk logs. There may be a preference
setting to change this, but it was annoying to find that my old discussions
had gone missing
On 10/11/07, Matthew Nish-Lapidus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Not to mention that if you use gtalk also you can search all your
Steven, you bring up an interesting point that nobody has mentioned yet.
Gmail's search is light years beyond any desktop email app search.
This is one of gmail's greatest assets. Search makes it so easy to
find old forgotten email based on label, sender, or just plain old
keywords.
Not to menti
Those of you who had bad experiences with gmail -- did you use labels and
such early on, or did messages tend to go unlabeled/unfiltered?
I'm a huge gmail fan, but I labeled/archived things religiously from day 1
and haven't have to deal with a massive inbox It certainly seems as
though the pr
This is one of the things that seems to work exceptionally well for me
given what things like Outlook do
I have used 5.3 GB of my gmail allowance
I have 84000 emails
30 labels
I also get an external pop3 based email into my gmail along with regular
gmail.
Its fast, it searches quickly
the e
> (1) allow emails to carry either one or many labels (which, we know is
> already a gmail function);
> (2) allow "labeled emails" to appear, or not appear, in your In Box.
Gmail accommodates both of these things. Again, you can set up filters
that keep all kinds of things out of your inbox by ch
It seems the best of all possible email worlds might be to:
(1) allow emails to carry either one or many labels (which, we know is
already a gmail function); but there's no reason in Outlook or
elsewhere, even using the paper/files/folders metaphor, not to allow
content to appear in more than one
I would like to see a dual axis method of organization that enables
general category (folders) and descriptive notations (tagging,
labeling). Gmail is relatively good at this, since it's blog-inspired
webmail software.
--- Phillip Hunter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The real-life use of folders i
it took me a few months (and making the exact same complaint about the
never empty inbox) to understand the Google model for archiving
though...
(here's a blog post from a while back where I was moaning about it
with some passion!
http://www.disambiguity.com/gmail-inbox-and-productivity-or-archive
Bianka,
You wrote: "I do miss the folders. I like archiving, getting rid of emails
in the inbox. I don't understand why the folder model is supposed to be
broken."
What is different between old-style folders and archiving labeled gmails
then clicking on the labels to see them? My inbox is as emp
17 matches
Mail list logo
