Talk:Comparison of webmail providers

This article may not last long

According to the policy at WP:DIRECTORY, wikipedia is not a yellow pages. As such, there is a user (Barek) who is keen to destroy pages that catalog services, as he did on the Online_post_office comparison article. Folks might want to consider moving this content to another wiki before he gets to it. Jgombos (talk) 16:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

GMX

someone please research GMX mail thanskMrahman1991 (talk) 02:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

GMX actually adds ads in outgoing messages 88.117.82.249 (talk) 13:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Does it? I have never seen that.90.210.24.124 (talk) 12:39, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

It does in the unpaid versions.

AOL Mail

It's cited to allow attachments up to 5GB! A lie as far I can tell.

Ref. AOL Mail Help: The largest piece of e-mail that you can send or accept from the Internet is 16 megabytes (MB). This includes the message text, headers and the attachment combined. If the file you are trying to transfer exceeds 16 MB, you will need to either compress the file or split it into smaller parts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.19.99.233 (talk) 12:35, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Any language?

Some services are reported to support any languages... not too many? There are more than 7,000 languages in the world! Ale85 (talk) 20:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

The confusion appears to be caused by the loosely defined column header, "Languages supported". It seems that the original intent was to track the number of user interface language localizations. However, some people have interpreted the meaning to describe how many character sets a web interface supports, which can very well be considered (most) "any" if the UI supports Unicode. --Brian T. Nakamoto (talk) 21:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Signatures

Maybe a mention or category in the table about which providers include a signature advertising the service at the bottom of the email (a la Hotmail and Yahoo) vs those who don't (gmail, aol maybe?)?

Prod Discussion

As is my understanding from Wikipedia:Proposed deletion: If anyone removes Template:Prod from an article for whatever reason, don't place it back. If the template was removed and replaced, the article will not be deleted. If you still believe the article needs to be deleted, list it on AfD. --Cumbiagermen 20:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

Now then, what is the community's concerns with this article's messiness? Personally, I think it's well-divided into sections, i.e. there are not too many columns, everything is color-coded, links are relevant and placed in appropriate places.

Secondly, why would it be incomplete? From what I can see, and especially with the good edits done this morning by kind editors, almost all of the columns are accounted for. Is this an issue about not having enough providers compared? Please, throw me with your acumen. --Cumbiagermen 20:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Importance

Given that a majority of Internet users have a webmail account and that these services play a large role in the Internet on a worldwide basis, why would a comparison of the major webmail services not be of importance? --Cumbiagermen 20:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I'm removing the tags until someone provdes an explanation for why they were placed on the article. -- JJay 20:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The issue isn't whether webmail is important, but whether these four providers in particular warrant a comparison to the exclusion of the literally hundreds of other webmail providers that exist. —donhalcon^╤ 21:14, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Are you serious? I don't know about AIM, but Hotmail, Yahoo and Gmail are obviously the big three. There is no reason to list every webmail provider, however if there are some you want to add then go ahead. -- JJay 21:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I am serious. If we don't care about other providers, how can we even pretend to be NPOV? This article basically amounts to free advertising for the services that don't need it. (I'm a GMail user, but I still don't see the point of a four-service comparison except in a product view, which Wikipedia is not.) —donhalcon^╤ 21:45, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

• You may claim to be serious, it looks to me like you are just trying to raise problems where there are none. You provided the link to webmail, I suggest you read the article, particularly the section about market share. Notice exactly which companies are named. Then compare to the list. If you still find POV issues start by working them out on the webmail page. We are also not "advertising" anything. We are comparing the leading services.-- JJay 22:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

No, really. I am totally serious. I did read the article. If Google has only a 4% share, why is it listed? If that statistic is accurate, it seems likely that there are more people who use webmail via Comcast, Verizon, and other large ISPs than GMail. So why aren't they listed here, too? There are more than four webmail providers listed in the webmail article, even, and I'm not going to claim that that article doesn't also need work. I don't think this list can ever achieve a neutral point of view, at least not without a much more specific title. —donhalcon^╤ 22:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

The point is to compare the leading providers. Not every provider. The name could be changed to reflect that. While your questions are good, the answers require more research. That is a time consuming process. But I don't see anyone trying to delete the webmail article becaue it mentions Gmail or Hotmail and not every other provider. Whatever Gmail's current share, it should be there because it's owned by Google. And because this is wikipedia, anyone can add other services or at least make a case for them here. You are not convincing me with the POV argument though. If you were right, logically, we would have to have articles on every player in a given industry. For example, we have Hotmail and Gmail and Yahoo! Mail. We don't have articles on every other player. I for one would like to see articles on every webmail service. Considering that you spent most of the day nominating articles for deletion, I tend to doubt you would agree. -- JJay 23:20, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I second that. I think it would be wise and informative to have either a "Market Share" or "Number of users worldwide" column in the General section. I'll put the column up right now and we can start filling it in...--Cumbiagermen 06:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I think that this article should not compare only the leading webmail providers - Gmail, AIM Mail, Yahoo! Mail and Hotmail. It should also count the major webmail providers outside the Big Four. I was the user who added the list of less notable webmail providers to the webmail article, and I think they should be listed here. The Comparison of web browsers article, for example, does not cover just IE, Netscape, Mozilla, Firefox, Opera and Safari. Adding information about market share or number of users is a good idea. --J.L.W.S. The Special One 11:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Agreed! I support. --Domthedude001 22:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

---

Inclusion criteria

Right now this list only includes the mail services offered by AOL, Microsoft, Yahoo!, and Google. Attempts to add other services have been reverted. I understand the desire not to include every non-notable webmail provider, but in my view it's a violation of neutrality to arbitrarily exclude all but the most famous ones.

By way of comparison, Comparison of web browsers and Comparison of instant messaging protocols don't exclude less well known entries.

I think the other providers noteworthy enough to have Wikipedia articles should be included here: for example, FastMail, mail.com, and Hushmail. Wmahan. 16:58, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Since no one has objected after a month, I have restored the links. If anyone knows of other providers with Wikipedia articles, I think it would be a good idea to add those too. Wmahan. 16:10, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, go for it! It should be open to almost anything besides really unknown ones. The ones you mentioned are okay. 70.111.224.252 15:42, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

posted by JCDenton: Why not add example E-Mail? Example: Yahoo: name@yahoo.com , name@yahoo.de , ...

Would be very nice

Yahoo Mail Beta

The yahoo mail beta information should be added to the comparison. It is easily attainable now. 70.111.224.252 15:43, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Security Issues

Things like secure sign-on or ability to send secure e-mails should be included as comparison criteria. --MatthewKarlsen

I think so, too. Have you noticed, that Hotmail's SSL certificate isn't valid and also outdated? -- mms 12:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Hotmail's login system is SSL, but unfortunately the displayed and sent email is not. Once you log on the SSL certificate no longer applies. Some other webmail systems don't have this limitation. I would like to see this data included in the chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.11.239.226 (talk) 05:07, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

"forwarding"

in the bottom table, one of the categories is "forwarding". does this mean the ability to forward a message to another address? yahoo mail beta is indicated as needing a plus account, but I forwarded a message with a free account. --Philo 22:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

How?

Any web mail provider will let you manually forward individual emails to another address. The table column refers to the ability to automatically forward all (or possibly subsets of all) emails automatically. The column header could be changed to e.g. "Automatic forwarding". --58.96.71.120 01:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

http://thinkpost.net/

http://thinkpost.net/ isnt offering free email anymore. (it says clearly on the front page of their site if you just visit it). anyone want to update the chart?

--Hno3 02:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I updated it --David 15:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

nerim.fr and free.fr

Webmail of nerim.fr and free.fr does not appear in the list! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.41.137.29 (talk) 17:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

+ UTF-8

This page does not explain which webmail is UTF8 compatible, and which is not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.41.137.29 (talk) 17:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

Gmail, Live Mail, and Yahoo! Mail (Beta) support Unicode. A-giau 17:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yahoo! Mail access Mistake

There is a mistake for Yahoo! Mail; free members can check their e-mail with other clients. Yahoo! users can see this by going to Settings > POP Access and Forwarding > Web & POP Access. Can anyone change the square to green?Digitalapocalypse 16:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Wait, I'm confused - [1] source says that POP In for Yahoo! Mail is free, but POP Out is for Plus users. Can anyone clear all this up?

Access through your desktop client is free in some countries while paid in others. Whereas fetching other POP3 mails in your Yahoo account is free for all.

MSN Hotmail

Shouldn't the section on MSN Hotmail be deleted now that it is officially replaced by Windows Live Hotmail? Stephenchou0722 02:32, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The dates for hotmail going live on this page and the hotmail page are different I assume that only one can be correct? Lawbringer (talk) 15:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

(Assuming this part talks about Windows Live Hotmail as well as the MSN one) Hotmail DOES NOT offer POP3 to all users. Only paid ones. Proof: Click [2], search for "POP3" (without quotation marks) and click on "How do I add my e-mail account to Microsoft Outlook Express?". In the first paragraph it says "If you have a Windows Live Hotmail Plus subscription, you can use a POP3 server" - Zimbico (talk) 07:58, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Providers with unlimited capacity

Two e-mail providers (Rediffmail and AOL Mail (India)) provide unlimited storage space, but do not find mention in the table. Is there a reason for exclusion? Also, can anyone tell if it is possible to find out the first public release date of these services without contacting them directly. — Ambuj Saxena (talk) 05:51, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

Gmail and in-mail ads

I think that Gmail has only ads in user interface. If someone can verify it, please fix it...

not unlimited

No email service, free or otherwise, offers unlimited storage. Unlimited storage is impossible. It does not exist. The term is a blatant marketing scam. A fantasy, to cover up TOS fine print, throttling, and other flim-flam. The term should never be used in WP articles about email services, except in quotes, in a marketing context. And it cannot be assumed that someone offering "unlimited" storage is actually offering more storage than someone else who actually states what the limits and rules are. (If you doubt this, please store 1000GB in your "unlimited" email account, for starters, and report back to us on your success.) -69.87.204.122 01:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

retention period

The tables should list how often you have to check your free email to keep it from getting deleted. Hotmail/MSN deletes all your email very quickly. It actually matters more than the amount of space that is offered -- who cares how much space you get, when ten years of email are erased at the drop of a hat, with no way to get them back, even though they only took up 10MB! -69.87.204.122 01:14, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Inbox.com

should be listed for inclusion —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atomic1fire (talk • contribs) 22:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

"Client E-mail for other server" column

"Client E-mail for other server" should be separeted by sending and receiving features, because gmail supports only the sending feature.

Two sets of notes

There are two sets of notes, and therefore the links for the second set lead to the first set, which they aren't supposed to do. How can this be fixed? 170.140.183.4 (talk) 17:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Subscribers

As an encyclopedia article (as opposed to a product review site), it may be useful to add more information such as how many subscribers each site has. Has anyone got this data? 87.113.102.136 (talk) 00:03, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Interface script technique

It would be nice to arrange this information so that one could readily find out which services are accessible using a system with particular abilities. (e.g. which ones work with just plain HTML, no java/ajax/etc. e.g. for access by an older browser or over slow connection.) As it is it is unclear which technique is actually required to use the service (vs. ones that are optional and it will use them if available.) Does the listing of HTML in an item mean that an HTML only interface is available? Does the listing mean that all of these are required to use the service? It isn't clear.

Some designation of what the minimum scripting requirements are, and a way to sort on that (showing least demanding first, e.g.) would be helpful. Zodon (talk) 19:56, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Please state the policy!

I'd like to add some well known free email providers in Poland, (i.e. poczta.onet.pl - the email service of largest online portal in Poland, or poczta.gazeta.pl) but I don't want to see my work "reverted". This is not clear for me what are the rules of adding new descriotions here. Please lighten it up, or citate the Wikipedia rules.

Rafal Stanilewicz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.171.116.99 (talk) 19:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Excite Mail

Excite Mail is a webmail provider not listed here. Information about it can be found at http://www.excite.com. GO-PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 21:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Indiatimes

Why was indiatimes.com's email service removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.72.25.210 (talk) 21:59, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Client compatibility

There needs to be another table illustrating which clients each is compatible with. Yahoo! is only compatible with Zimbra, Hotmail is incompatible with Outlook but works with Windows Live Mail client, Gmail is incompatible with Windows Live Mail client, etc. Unfortunately, that's all I can contribute to that table, though. Bob the Wikipedian ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:47, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Missing from the list

Just want to mention that Zoho Mail seems to be missing from this otherwise quite helpful comparison. --95.34.19.89 (talk) 19:41, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone know if myrealbox.com is still functional at all? Ever since the takeover I've not been able to log in. If it is, it should also be included ih the list. 71.0.202.205 (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Anyone know figures/details for @ibibo.com - thought might be worth adding as seems popular. Cool wiki article otherwise, helped me find some useful sites :)

GMX browsers

GMX now works in google chrome and continually crashes in IE8 (even if it is in compatability mode)90.210.24.124 (talk) 14:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

o2 webmail

i have added into the table when an o2 webmail account is deleted. i got this information by emailing them so it is accurate. 82.3.127.54 (talk) 19:06, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

General Information overcrowded

Hi. I am the original creator of this article. Good job guys. The last 3 columns in 'General Information' are actually features though, they should be moved down to that section. --Cumbiagermen (talk) 18:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Services Size

Is there a way to check how many users are registered with each service? I think it is a very good base for comparison which is missing here, and may even surprise us that the most "famous" services we know of are not amongst the largets as I am sure some Chinese/Indian services should be substantial. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.3.210 (talk) 07:02, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

#fon_12_back target link/id missing, therefore obsolete?

Here's the blob of current 08 jan 2010 html that points to missing target: <p><cite id="fon_12"><a href="#fon_12_back">Note 12:</a></cite> Free of charge, but web-mail only.</p> i took a look at html source of old 19:34, 7 July 2008, and it is very different, suggesting that wikiware generates targets . Unfortunately, I don't know the ware enough to trust i'd edit the current problem correctly. --2z2z (talk) 21:13, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion

Comment moved from the article: --Cybercobra (talk) 17:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I would like to see comparisons of limits on daily messages sent, and number of people sent to. This is useful for small businesses as well as volunteer organizations as experience with Windows Live shows we cannot reach all users with single lists, and single messages. Multiple of both are needed. Is this the case with others as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.88.212.32 (talk • contribs)

SSL/TLS

For me the single most important question about a web mail server is whether it supports secure http throughout the session, encrypting not only login but mail transfer. Gmail does; they've recently even made it the default. Hotmail does not seem to. Others, I dunno.

I'm in China, so my concern is blocking snooping by the Great Firewall, but there are lots of other situations where this could be important. In fact I find it hard to think of a situation where it isn't, unless perhaps everything you send or receive is already PGP-encrypted anyway.

Could we please have a column for that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.111.37.183 (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)