Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Internet Tools, Blogs
Michael Arrington: "Why The New .Mac Webmail Is Important"
Techcrunch's Michael Arrington has penned an interesting piece on why the upcoming .Mac webmail revamp is so important. Be sure to check it out, but in summary: Michael believes the combination of a killer AJAX-infused webmail service that both allows users to manage multiple accounts and syncs with a desktop client will give Apple a significant advantage and appeal over competing email services. Now, putting aside the fact that Gmail allows you to transparently send and receive email from non-Gmail addresses, I agree with Michael and I'm pretty darn excited about the first .Mac webmail revamp since the stone ages. However, I think he's missing a major point that many others overlook when discussing, praising or damning .Mac: it isn't webmail.
Or to be more specific: it isn't just webmail. Michael compares .Mac webmail to competing offerings from Google and Yahoo! - individual and free webmail services that can integrate with other offerings from their respective providers - or not. Google has their news, RSS reader (which just had a killer overhaul, by the way) and countless other sister products, just like Yahoo! has their own tool belt of web services. But the crucial fact here is that .Mac webmail is an unconditional component of a suite of products for which users have to pay a hefty yearly fee. You can't get .Mac webmail by itself, let alone for free, and while everyone is excited about the UI revamp (well, almost everyone), the mounting orchestra of criticism against .Mac still stands. The service overall, especially webmail, is sorely missing fundamental features that competing services have had for years, and our own Dave Caolo nailed one of the most significant on the head in his eulogy for .Mac: server side spam filtering. .Mac doesn't feature it, but it's become a standard (as in: four-wheels-on-a-car standard) with virtually any other service, webmail, POP or otherwise.
[Update: A reader named 'random' pointed out that .Mac apparently does feature server-side spam filtering, courtesy of Brightmail, as outlined in this support doc. While this is nice, it doesn't seem to work well (especially compared to the likes of Gmail and Yahoo!), and it doesn't allow users to adjust its sensitivity or peruse server-specified messages as spam in case some legitimate messages are being inaccurately marked. In other words: it's terrible.]
Stepping back from fundamentals and specifics, however, I think Michael is placing a little too much hope in this .Mac webmail upgrade. I highly doubt it will rake in the new users, even with the unique abilities Michael hails. At best, I think it will serve as a very welcomed upgrade that could convince a good portion of existing users to go the 'eh, ok fine I'll renew' route for just one more year. Don't get me wrong: as a member myself, I'm welcoming the upgrade and I was planning on renewing in a month before I knew about the webmail refresh. I just don't believe an update to one (admittedly major) part of .Mac will hold that much weight with those who aren't interested in the entire retail package, especially when competing services can stack up pretty well for the general user, and keep $99 their pocket to boot.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Gyve Safavi said 8:26AM on 9-30-2006
Couldn't agree more. .Mac has nothing amazing to offer for it's $99 price tag. Wake up Apple.
Reply
Steve said 8:48AM on 9-30-2006
Perhaps, just perhaps, there is more to this upgrade than just the webmail interface. I can't imagine them doing something so drastic to one portion of .mac and leaving the rest exactly as it is. Perhaps we should be patient and see what else might lie in store
Reply
Shalin Jian said 9:04AM on 9-30-2006
WebMail is the start. Probably one of the most used service in .Mac suite and hence the first to receive a nice revamp. I cannot agree less to David's take. While a large majority of people feel .Mac is not worth the price - http://www.tezaa.com/view/do_you_think_mac_account_is_worth_the_money - there is a whole new growing macintosh community and with a 60 day trail it looks like a very exciting package to mac users.
With (Leopard) TimeMachine it would have even more value to it. Can't wait for early 2007!
Reply
Fraser Drew said 9:15AM on 9-30-2006
This overhaul wouldn't make me buy .mac . A Disk Space upgrade would.
.Mac's current problem is that it is behind the times, so i hope this interface brings more, bringing it right up to date.
Reply
bas said 9:27AM on 9-30-2006
It is too damn slow... If you have your iDisk mounted it slows down OSX when a open/save windows popsup or while printing. Unbearable.
Reply
Jay said 9:33AM on 9-30-2006
With things like GMail around for free - they are going to have to beef up more than Mail to get my subscription fee :)
Reply
mosey levy said 9:35AM on 9-30-2006
i like imap.
Reply
HS said 9:58AM on 9-30-2006
"Hello, my name is David C.
I hate everything Apple does, and really wish I didn't have to hear anything about Macs or iPods and stuff, but I seem to be addicted, so I'd rather stay here and spew out shit about it until I finally either realize that I hate it enough to not care and then leave, or start liking it wnough to try to look for small stuff again.
Thank you."
Reply
Paul said 10:08AM on 9-30-2006
This maybe a deal breaker for me. I would love to bring my domains under one account but at the moment .Mac doesn't offer me this so I use Yahoo mail that let's me download and send mail from other email addresses. I have webspace with someone else so unless Apple wants people like me to stay they have to start competing with others who offer services that are either free or cost less than .Mac.
Reply
Matthew said 10:26AM on 9-30-2006
First Scoble now Arrington. Nice.
Paul: you can bring your domains (new or existing) to DotMac:
http://homepage.mac.com/cherrypop/iblog/C1900478167/E1963581976/index.html
Reply
Chris said 10:26AM on 9-30-2006
.Mac has server side spam filtering and has had it from the beginning. The problem is you have no way of viewing emails marked as spam.
Reply
mark the stone guy said 10:40AM on 9-30-2006
I have been reading this blog for well over a year now. I strikes me as odd that some of you simply don't get it. It may be the simple fact that being a TAUW junkie places you smack in the right side of the bell curve when it comes to "fuzzy" products like .mac.
I have had a .mac account since day one. I love it....I pay $99 bucks with a smile on my face. The mail is in sync with all my other macs. I host my company website on .mac ( www.stoneworks.cc ) I use iChat, iDisk and several other features. I understand the conventions and am very happy using it. Why would I want to dork around and cobble together all these features....sorry kids to some of us 99 bucks a year is a very very small price to pay (chump change) for ease of use.
I love ya man ..... but get off my .mac damnit!
I will retire to my non posting status again......
Cyas
Mark
Reply
mark the stone guy said 10:48AM on 9-30-2006
This is a quote from another site that really sums it up best
Its all about easy of use - period! Some people spend time to save money and some money to save time. Two different customers. Time our most precious resource answers the question for those with any financial IQ.
There, now I will retire to my non posting status....:-)
Reply
random said 10:52AM on 9-30-2006
.Mac has server-side filtering. They use Brightmail among other things. It says so right here:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=86748
Did you mean client-side filtering? There's a huge difference between the two. Judging by the Junk folder in the webmail preview, it appears that the new webmail might get it finally. And yeah, it's been sorely missing for a while.
Reply
J.Y. said 10:58AM on 9-30-2006
I'd really like to see a web-based iCal + address book (+new .mac mail of course) solution provided asap. Syncing using .mac can be slow and not always predictable imo. I've thought of making the leap from iCal to Google Calendar, but GC doesn't manage to-dos yet, and still not ready for the leap as I use some third party iCal plugins to view billable time. To have the full set of productivity apps in an online situation would be helpful for those on the go, or prone to using more than one or two macs. Then one could simply use a desktop iCal to subscribe to the online calendar feeds or perhaps some more sophisticated real-time syncing could take place the web-version and app...
Reply
Jon Niola said 11:01AM on 9-30-2006
Until the .Mac suite has puts some emphasis on security it is not for me. I don't like sending passwords with clear text nor do I want to sync some of my important stuff without any encryption.
Reply
David Poteet said 11:26AM on 9-30-2006
a side comment... why does everyone mention .Mac at the price of $99? I just bought it from Amazon for $79. I could have purchased it from Apple earlier this year for $69 as I recall (when I bought a new mini). If you follow Dealmac or are willing to buy it fron one of Amazon's free traders, you can pay even less than Amazon's fee. So, about 33-22% off the asking price aint bad.
Reply
David Chartier said 11:04AM on 9-30-2006
If .Mac has server side spam filtering, then I'm Elvis. In a pink bunny suit.
We aren't the only ones griping about .Mac's less-than-functional spam filtering; throw a stone with Google and you'll find plenty others who have worse spam problems on .Mac than on any Hotmail or Yahoo service which are actually known for selling your information.
#14: If they're really using Brightmail, maybe they're using version 2.0 from 2001 or something, but it is *not* working. Just check Hawk Wings for some good coverage of the latest problems and spam flooding that are waltzing right past their filters.
Again, I love my .Mac account and I was planning on renewing before I heard about the webmail upgrade, but it could still use some significant work.
Reply
Ken R said 11:25AM on 9-30-2006
.Mac is a rip-off.
I can get my own (shared) server with gigabytes of email space, hundreds of individual email accounts, and my own domain, not to mention tons of web space and bandwidth with PHP and MySQL for less then the price of .Mac. Obviously .Mac appeals to the user who doesn't want to go through the technical web setup and wants perfect integration with OS X, but I don't see why I'd get it unless it was really cheap. Like $10 or something.
Reply
mark the stone guy said 12:07PM on 9-30-2006
man....I don't even know what php or mysql or any of that other stuff is... my .mac works...seamlessly
I actually use it for business and personal.
http://www.stoneworks.cc built using iWeb...love it...easy to update easy easy easy...that is the point I guess....am I getting hooked on this blog wierdness or what?
Reply