- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
Can I ask why people still use dedicated email software? I’m sure there’s a reason. Maybe just familiarity, but I’ve never once opened my email inbox from anything other than a browser. It seems like a royal PITA.
Thunderbird is pretty neat tho
I don’t disagree, but I don’t use it either.
Familiarity, better integration in the desktop, generally many more options (including extensions) than web versions, UI better adapted to a desktop computer, better at managing multiple accounts, are my reasons. I like Betterbird personally.
I can see the use case for gmail at least. I tried to access web interface from India and it loaded like for 2 solid minutes before showing up completely unresponsive. I could have had it 10 times faster with a dedicated IMAP client.
deleted by creator
Ultimately Email is old technology, all the web frontends just get in the way more or less.
I use an email host that has roadmapped switching their frontend to one I don’t really like, so figured I’d get ahead of the curve and switch to a client that was open source and compatible with the typical standards — so I could learn it and never have to deal with another client again.
Ended up using Thunderbird, even for my old inboxes at the typical web companies
One client, all my emails in one spot, don’t have to deal with stupid UX changes being forced on users.
One of them is Outlook from MS Office, the other is New Outlook (what used to be Outlook Express). The latter is a royal pain to fully disable, and once you’ve launched it, it takes over everything.
So what’s happening is they’re supposed to be using MS Office Outlook, but New Outlook is in the way. Hence the “neither one works” bit. I know how to solve this, have them give me a call.
Its funny I’ve run into this same issue at work in addition to Microsoft asking for my SSO but then giving me some Outlook code as a two-factor verification that I’ve never once had work properly (the code never shows up in outlook on my work phone or PC and I always have to go to the “use other options” and do the SMS code.
They now call it Outlook Classic and it will disappear, only shitty New Outlook will stay. And yes, it’s a royal pain.
I don’t understand why isn’t it talked about more that the new outlook uploads your email account login passwords to microsoft, and accesses your emails through microsoft servers. a gaping violation of privacy and security
Imagine training your entire life to become an astronaut, and then you finally get to leave earth’s orbit on a historic mission…
But you still have to deal with Microsoft bullshit.*Microslop
It’s an accurate name. The company has explicitly told us that they are a slop-first cloud company.
They are way more than a cloud company: Outlook, both of them, left the could stage yesterday.
Microstiff
I’ll probably attract downvotes for this, but I find ‘Microslop’ as cringeworthy as old staples like Micro$haft or Crapple.
Like, yeah, they’re shitty companies. But calling them childish names just comes across as petty and insecure, kind of like when Trump gives someone a dumb nickname.
Nah, microslop is a great name, especially because they throw tantrums about the name. It’s very descriptive of what they have become.
The difference between MicroSlop and Micro$haft or Crapple is that Microsoft is actively slopifying their product. And this isn’t just some PC vs Mac slapfight where people are coming up with insulting names, Microsoft actively bragged about pooping out 30% of code with AI and we have MONTHS of news articles about them fucking up their updates even more than usual (and I’ve been supporting MS products for close to 2 decades).
There’s a reason MicroSlop responded to that and not Micro$haft. Because every big company gives their customers the shaft, but not many are actively sabotaging their product to quite the same extent as they are, so the (accurate) name really hurts the company’s brand because it’s an accurate description of their current output.
I can see that argument, sure. The fact that they asked people not to use it suggests it is having some effect on their brand.
Or that they’re just very insecure and shortsighted and think that any negative effects on their current numbers are because of something as banal and petty as name calling instead of anti-consumer practices that drive customers away.
I’ve always hated that kind of thing. There’s a presumption in it that “you think so, too” and fuck you don’t tell me what I think.
Windows in a shuttle computer is the most disappointingly dumbass thing NASA has done yet. I say yet because if they’ll do something that dumb it clearly needs to have a glass ceiling.
It’s a personal device. Nothing related to the mission.
I guess that’s a little better, except that it’s still in there. Old NASA would have never let it on board in any capacity.
Doesn’t seem to be what this article says
To some readers, even choosing Outlook as a part of a spacecraft’s communications portfolio would seem to be an anomaly. However, it is a standard part of the “Commercial Off-The-Shelf” (COTS) software astronauts use for their day-to-day operations.
To be clear, the spacecraft and primary flight systems will run on specialized radiation-hardened hardware and rigorously maintained software. COTS just complements this with a friendly layer, like Windows and Outlook, so astronauts can check schedules, indulge in personal communications, and so on, in a familiar way.
Sounds like Microsoft products are running on the same hardware as critical systems are
If you intentionally misinterpret it like you are trying to lawyer some cracks in the story, then yeah it does.
Seems pretty clear to me from the “…primary flight systems will run on specialized radiation-hardened hardware and rigorously maintained software” that they’re separate systems.
That’s because the article left it out intentionally. It was on a personal surface pro.
I’m sure it was nothing mission critical.
I hope.
Begging for a blue screen of literal death.
It’s probably not as bad as failing to check you’re operating within the range of component’s proven environmental test limits.
That said, I’d love to see the system test scenarios they use to determine how it performs during an unexpected attack from their own OS provider.
nasa is about to remote into the computer
I’ve dealt with slow RDP sessions while fixing servers in the past, but the lag on this connection must really suck.
At least while they’re in orbit you’d be looking at a few hundred ms of latency (due to satellite to ground station bounces). If they need to RDP while at the moon, it’s going to be a couple of seconds latency
“Houston, we have a Windows problem”
“Outlook is looking bleak, I’m seeing double.”
“Cannot open Windows in space.”
“Disk space issues.”
