i’m surprised Mozilla hasn’t made a proper effort in the email provider space. having a good client plus a provider (pricing comparable to Zoho or so) would be a great. use it purely to fund the...
i’m surprised Mozilla hasn’t made a proper effort in the email provider space. having a good client plus a provider (pricing comparable to Zoho or so) would be a great. use it purely to fund the client and ditch all of the seductive ad temptations.
At the moment I'd imagine they're at capacity putting out fires and maintaining Firefox given the heavy layoffs they had, so probably not much money for expansion projects like an email service....
At the moment I'd imagine they're at capacity putting out fires and maintaining Firefox given the heavy layoffs they had, so probably not much money for expansion projects like an email service.
In the past, there are a decent amount of "premium" paid email services now, so perhaps they are economically viable, but it is a fairly non-trivial product. Setting up an SMTP server is not that hard - setting up an SMTP server that doesn't get sent to the spam folder of gmail is another thing entirely.
Mozilla is a trusted enough provider that I suspect they'd have very little difficulty getting added to the "safe" list that governs most spam blocking, even as a new provider. While a lot of it...
Mozilla is a trusted enough provider that I suspect they'd have very little difficulty getting added to the "safe" list that governs most spam blocking, even as a new provider. While a lot of it is heuristic based, a good portion is still agreements between the large providers to treat one another's messages as non-spam, as long as they follow the correct DNS verification policies.
well, I figured they'd just rebrand a service from another provider and take the difference -- like $2/m to fastmail and charge $5 or whatever it costs. It could be a way for one of these email...
well, I figured they'd just rebrand a service from another provider and take the difference -- like $2/m to fastmail and charge $5 or whatever it costs. It could be a way for one of these email providers to support Mozilla without having to sign a cheque.
There wasn't any discussion (that I knew of, at least) about being an email provider while I still worked there, but in addition to what you've said, I could also see potential concern over...
There wasn't any discussion (that I knew of, at least) about being an email provider while I still worked there, but in addition to what you've said, I could also see potential concern over liability issues. Look what happened with Firefox Send.
Firefox Send was explicitly meant for file sharing, so I can totally understand why it had serious liability issues. But I would think that an email provider has a lot more privacy and private...
Firefox Send was explicitly meant for file sharing, so I can totally understand why it had serious liability issues. But I would think that an email provider has a lot more privacy and private communication laws it could rely on to reduce their liability. Is that not the case?
i’m surprised Mozilla hasn’t made a proper effort in the email provider space. having a good client plus a provider (pricing comparable to Zoho or so) would be a great. use it purely to fund the client and ditch all of the seductive ad temptations.
At the moment I'd imagine they're at capacity putting out fires and maintaining Firefox given the heavy layoffs they had, so probably not much money for expansion projects like an email service.
In the past, there are a decent amount of "premium" paid email services now, so perhaps they are economically viable, but it is a fairly non-trivial product. Setting up an SMTP server is not that hard - setting up an SMTP server that doesn't get sent to the spam folder of gmail is another thing entirely.
Mozilla is a trusted enough provider that I suspect they'd have very little difficulty getting added to the "safe" list that governs most spam blocking, even as a new provider. While a lot of it is heuristic based, a good portion is still agreements between the large providers to treat one another's messages as non-spam, as long as they follow the correct DNS verification policies.
well, I figured they'd just rebrand a service from another provider and take the difference -- like $2/m to fastmail and charge $5 or whatever it costs. It could be a way for one of these email providers to support Mozilla without having to sign a cheque.
Just speculating here, but maybe they've deemed it too hard or too costly to do right. (sufficiently secure, private, featureful, scalable)
There wasn't any discussion (that I knew of, at least) about being an email provider while I still worked there, but in addition to what you've said, I could also see potential concern over liability issues. Look what happened with Firefox Send.
Firefox Send was explicitly meant for file sharing, so I can totally understand why it had serious liability issues. But I would think that an email provider has a lot more privacy and private communication laws it could rely on to reduce their liability. Is that not the case?