96
Australia’s internet providers are ditching email, to the disgust of older customers
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2023
96 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
38722 readers
9 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Err...
So, what's the problem, exactly? Just take the ad-based free service. Gmail, Yahoo, etc. are ad-based free services too. Nobody is forcing them to change anything.
People who use the default email their ISP gives them don't like change. The new service will probably have a different login screen and that's going to upset aunty Ethel and uncle ron. And then a different colour background. It's the worst thing that anyone could ever do to them
I can understand the pain, though. Moving accounts to a new email is not a fun process. Especially if someone has an email for years, decades even, that's a lot of stuff that could be registered with that email. And trying to save emails isn't necessarily straightforward. Migration, if it's even available, isn't foolproof or easy, either.
While I've grown up with the Internet, I think I've only changed my main email like 3 times over ~30yrs. The last time I did it was over a decade ago, to Gmail from my family's then ISP-based email. I think I'm way overdue to do it again, at least moving my important accounts like banking and government stuff to a new email address, but it's just so time consuming.
And I say all this as a tech person. I work in IT. For someone who's not particularly tech savvy, forget about it.
But they aren't getting forced to change accounts. Their service continues just under another provider.
I'm about the same. Last switch was yahoo to Gmail and now I'm in the process of switching from Gmail to Proton Mail. The most difficult part was the mental switch - which email you start giving out when you sign up. Second was migrating services. I made it a point for a while each time I logged into something knew I would switch the primary email. Its been a long process!
Visual Studio Code did this somewhat recently, but had the foresight to let you switch back to the old theme in a notification when first opening it after the update. I ended up sticking with the new theme since it was nice, but I know plenty of people who stuck with the old one.
I used to see this a lot with Facebook. Every time they altered the design people would kick up a fuss and I never understood why, the new design always looked far better.
Nowadays of course I don't use Facebook but will occasionally have to sign in to look up the details of a business or something. The design has of course changed and I can't find a damn thing on it. So I'm finally on board with the masses.
Honestly, I agree with the antiboomer sentiment.
But at the same time, it is annoying when you've had an included service for decades that will now be worse or cost money.
Sure, but the core complaint of the article -- that folks are forced to changed ALL their e-mail based authentication to a new address -- is without merit.
My GM still uses @aol.com. I have no idea how he accesses it and at this point I'm afraid to ask.
Probably at www aol.com?
Yeah, my mom has been using AOL.com since the 90s. When the dedicated client went away, I pointed her at mail.aol.com and she was fine. She's still using it today.
An older family member of mine rang yesterday asking about what to do after they read the announcement.
I have been telling them for years to change to a proper provider but they weren't interested. I told them this would eventually happen, but the change wasnt worth the hassle for them.
Now the change is forced and its just increased the stress.
Im hoping the prospect of only being a year for free then ad based means I can just get them onto fastmail or something that I can administer.
YSK: Aunty Ethel isn't with Uncle Ron anymore. She's with Herman now. They fell out over her planting sunflowers in the yard instead of begonias. Ron smashed her garden gnome in anger and that was it for them.
Yes and it's fun getting Windows Live Mail 2012 to keep working at the best of times.
Every year or so, have to add these registry entries to revive it
[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows Live Mail]
"RecreateFolderIndex"=dword:00000001
"RecreateStreamIndex"=dword:00000001
"RecreateUIDLIndex"=dword:00000001
They'd prefer Outlook Express.
For everyone's sake it might be best to refuse to support the application because of the security risks with such an outdated program.
The problem, presumably is that they will be canning IMAP/POP/SMTP and will be implementing a sucky web-only interface
Wtf, that's evil
A lot of places no longer have staff that understand email systems or routing.
Even technically-inclined Universities like Purdue have abandoned their on-campus email systems and now rely upon Office365 and GMail.
Fair enough