14 Feb 2005 | John Kopanas said...

Amen... why is that programmers, unlike most other professions, constantly like to re-invent the wheel?

14 Feb 2005 | Tom Dolan said...

It's called page views and ad revenue.

14 Feb 2005 | Brian Drum said...

What about communications with security implications? Citibank uses an online mailbox to help reduce potential customer confusion and thwart phishers ( http://www.citi.com/domain/spoof/spot2.htm). Until we have widespread signed and encrypted email, this use of site-specific inboxes seems like a good idea.

14 Feb 2005 | John Kopanas said...

It is always easy to find an exception where you have to have a "inbox" but I think overall most services don't need one.

It's called page views and ad revenue.

Personally if your product is good then you will never have a problem with page views because people will keep on coming back.

It is much cheaper to keep a user then to find a new one to replace a lost one due to a service that he got annoyed with! :-)

Think long-term... not short if you want to survive.

14 Feb 2005 | Colin Scroggins said...

I got to this point several months ago and just quit using any sites that required me to maintain a separate "in-box" to stay up-to-date. If these sites would just tie into your current email, they could spend the time and resources they are using to replicate your email to expand the core services or make them more intuitive!

14 Feb 2005 | Brian said...

eBay just added a similar "feature." Under the guise of an eBay-specific inbox, it's really just a way for them to send you "helpful" suggestions that you need to spend more money on eBay. All real buying/selling business is still done through regular email.

I've taken to ignoring it, although the "You have 10 unread messages!" message every time I login eats my nerves. And watch, one day they'll send something important through there. Fuckin' bastards...

14 Feb 2005 | Michael Moncur said...

Sadly I've seen more and more companies (eBay, etc.) try and use this option as a solution to phishing scams. It's really only a solution in the same sense as "don't use email anymore" is.

Secure, encrypted email already exists, and if big players like eBay and Citibank would embrace it it would quickly become ubiquitous.

14 Feb 2005 | Scott Cropper said...

I think the best way these sort of messages could be handled is if companies like eBay, PayPal, 'Online Banks' etc. would use an internal message system for _urgent_ account specific issues _only_. When an urgent message needs your attention they would send you a basic email asking you to login to your account to view the message, no tricky links...just ask you to open your browser and go to the site. This sort of policy would help render other emails pretending to be from them useless. As RSS becomes more popular they could use that as a method to announce new features, tips or advertisements which should not be a part of the internal message system.

A related action that annoys me is when you login to PayPal to handle a specific task and you are showed messages about something new etc. This happens quite often and I wish they would have an option in your preferences that basically allowed you to just go to your account when you login and not be 'interrupted' with advertising or other messages.

14 Feb 2005 | David Schontzler said...

Agreed. I hate having to learn new systems for that sort of crap.

14 Feb 2005 | Mark Wubben said...

I can envision the scam where they give you a link to your online inbox...

14 Feb 2005 | Philip Fierlinger said...

And what about Basecamp? Doesn't Basecamp fall into this same trap?

To me, this is one of the fatal flaws (sorry don't beat me up) of Basecamp - forcing me to use a messaging system in place of my standard email.

14 Feb 2005 | JF said...

To me, this is one of the fatal flaws (sorry don't beat me up) of Basecamp - forcing me to use a messaging system in place of my standard email.

Basecamp isn't about private web-based inboxes, it's about centralized group communication with accountability. When everyone is talking in the same place everyone can be part of the conversastion, unlike desktop email boxes where everything is scattered, some people have this, some people have that, some don't have access to something at all, etc. Completely different animals.

14 Feb 2005 | ML said...

To add to JF's point above, Basecamp does allow posters to notify others of new messages via email (and now you can also email notifications on to-do lists too). Nonetheless, Basecamp is intended as a tool to gather & archive client/firm feedback in a single location so it's not feasible to expect it to rely solely on email communication.

14 Feb 2005 | Mike Piontek said...

I couldn't agree more.

I think the reason sites like eBay and Amazon do this is so they can spam people without actually spamming them. You see "3 new messages!" and think, "oh, what if it's something important?" but really they're just ads. So I ignore them. If they're pushed in my face, I delete them immediately. If they actually have something important, I know they'll email me.

I think there are some legitimate uses, but not many.

Scott Cropper said "When an urgent message needs your attention they would send you a basic email asking you to login to your account to view the message..." That's a fair idea, but I'd rather receive the message in full, with a footnote telling me I can log into the site to verify its authenticity if I wish to. That saves me time, because personally I have no trouble telling the legit stuff from the scams.

14 Feb 2005 | Jason Lotito said...

For the very reasons Basecamp doesn't use email is a reason not use use email for helpdesk system, and that is where I use messaging systems. Email is less secure, and prone to loss. At least with a messaging system things can be secure and everyone is accountable. With email, all it takes is the customer saying "Oh, I never got your email" and it makes you look bad. Even if you sent them an email.

While I agree that not every site needs it, a messaging system is has benefits over email.

This doesn't mean you can't make a messaging system more friendly. For example, in our next iteration of our messaging system, we plan to allow customers to simply email us via our support email address, and it will automatically be attached to their account and added to the messaging system. Also, customer support reps will be able to respond to users, and it will provide them with certian options to either make the user log in to view the message, or allow simply send them an email with the response. This means that users could use email like they normally do for most things, and have to log in or call for things we want more security for.

Don't throw the baby out with the bath water. Messaging systems have their place, and in some cases, are better than email.

14 Feb 2005 | Zelnox said...

._.? I get FlickrMail in my inbox...

I suppose why those services have their own messenging services is because they want to ease and/or promote communication between members. Some people may not want to receive such messages in their inbox (as in their identity are distinct) Others may fear spam so much they set their filters to exclusive, so messages from strangers are blocked. Most of those services you mentioned depend greatly on their community.

Now, I only use Flickr. I receive the notifications in my inbox. Is that what you wanted? What I cannot do is e-mail another Flickr member from my inbox (at least, I don't know how if it were possible).

14 Feb 2005 | sloan said...

"Amen... why is that programmers, unlike most other professions, constantly like to re-invent the wheel?"
Um, programmers re-use code out the yin-yang, which is part of the problem in these cases, but really, it is a problem with letting marketing drive your site and its objectives.

What is silly about these "messages" is that becomes a game of crying wolf, the first couple of times the users will see it and maybe click on it, but then, they'll just tune it out like banner ads and ignore potentially important messages. My webhost company allows me to set which messages I get via email, which alert me to messages and even a don't show me messages option. This way, I get emails of important things like server changes and outages and am never bothered about great new offers or the site of the month. If you want to have clear communication, clear messages, make it be about messages, not about noise.

14 Feb 2005 | Scott Cropper said...

Mike Piontek said...
"That's a fair idea, but I'd rather receive the message in full, with a footnote telling me I can log into the site to verify its authenticity if I wish to. That saves me time, because personally I have no trouble telling the legit stuff from the scams."

I'd prefer to only have urgent messages sent that would require me to login to the site and complete a task like updating the payment method or contact information. Any other messages with news, tips etc. should not be sent unless they are requested in a correspondence profile. We have accounts with these sites and should be given the opportunity to opt out of all correspondence unless it is urgent and requires our immediate attention.

14 Feb 2005 | ikke said...

watch this if you like money:
easymoney

14 Feb 2005 | ikke said...

easymoney

15 Feb 2005 | Philip Fierlinger said...

JF said: Basecamp isn't about private web-based inboxes, it's about centralized group communication with accountability.

That's one way of looking at it. But how is that conceptually any diff to the other services you refer to?

Are you suggesting that for certain types of messages I send emails and other messages I send thru Basecamp? Or are you suggesting that I use Basecamp for ALL my client communications? Either suggestion is totally unnatural and far less flexible for me and for my clients than standard email.

However, if users were able to CC: emails to Basecamp then you and your clients can communicate normally using email, while Basecamp captures those discussions. Win win!?

15 Feb 2005 | pb said...

I wish [PayPal] would have an option ... that basically allowed you to just go to your account

https://www.paypal.com/history
https://www.paypal.com/profile

I woner if it's time for a closed email system. Only certain senders could join (banks, billers, utilities, etc.) and we could only read on reply.

15 Feb 2005 | julian scarfe said...

but really, it is a problem with letting marketing drive your site and its objectives

actually, in business, marketing should almost always drive your site and its objectives. marketing just needs to be smarter, more sensitive to customer needs, perceptions of value, etc.

it's so common these days to confuse
marketing with bad marketing
powerpoint with bad powerpoint
banner ads with bad banner ads
flash intros with...
you get the idea

15 Feb 2005 | sloan said...

"marketing should almost always drive your site and its objectives"
I guess it becomes the nuance of how it is done or the objective of marketing itself. If it is simply to sell, then it is not going to sell well over the long term. But if the marketing drive is conscious of the well being of its customer base, then it can work. My comment was based on my experience, the goals for marketing where often the opposite of what the user was interested in.

15 Feb 2005 | Don Schenck said...

... lists with bad lists ...

(Sorry ... just kidding)

Excellent point, Julian!

15 Feb 2005 | YoungHistorians said...

I don't understand why we still use CC and BCC for emails...carbon was last used when again?

16 Feb 2005 | Hayden said...

However, if users were able to CC: emails to Basecamp then you and your clients can communicate normally using email, while Basecamp captures those discussions. Win win!?

I think Philip has a point . .

Jason, have you thought about adding this feature to Basecamp? It's amazing (but not altogether surprising) how many clients ignore the "do not reply to this email" footer and simply reply to an email notification from Basecamp. I'd love to be able to forward or CC emails to Basecamp for all to share.

BTW - I'm loving the time-zone support!

16 Feb 2005 | Don Schenck said...

"CC" now means "Courtesy Copy". Kinda like New Math. :)