If Yahoo goes down, I won't have email; or at best I'll maybe keep a Zoho. I hate Google's mail interface, I hate the way they make 'conversations' out of discrete emails, and I especially hate their lack of folders. I use GMail begrudgingly at work, and only when necessary, and every time, I look at it and go, "what dipshit ever thought this was a functional way to deal with email?" As a dedicated Windows user, I'm more likely to use iCloud than GMail if Yahoo goes down; but I doubt that.
I like Yahoo email as a user. Yes, they've made mistakes, and I accept that. I'd prefer their mistakes over Google's superiority complex.
GMail supports labels as folders. When you create a new label it will ask you if you want to nest the label under another label and you can do this repeatedly to make a nested folder structure.
Crucially, this will show up as nested folders via IMAP.
They should use IMAP labels. Their IMAP implementation has always been terrible and broken. Anything you label gets put into an IMAP folder and therefore you download it multiple times per label.
I agree; fuck everything about gmail usability. It was a cool trick when it came out. Now it's just overly bloated AJAX, non-standards compliant garbage.
No, no - I understand that you can think this, and that they claim it, but from a UI angle, it's wrong. I hate the implementation of labels.
They don't actually disappear when I click on inbox. When I want my inbox, I want just that folder - all filtered content goes elsewhere and disappears until I want it. That's not GMail's way.
I have a giant folder hierarchy in my gmail, so I assure you this can work.
In your case it sounds like you're taking a message with the "Inbox" label and adding the "some/folder" label, which will indeed still show it in both places. If you move the message, which removes "Inbox" and adds "some/folder" it will no longer show up in the Inbox.
Their IMAP interface is both standards compliant and fully functional. I'm not terribly fond of the Gmail web/native apps either, so I just don't use them (though I do occasionally hop on the web app when my client isn't searching the email as effectively as google does).
With 2FA it can be a bit more work adding devices, but it's not a deal breaker for me.
Their IMAP implementation is anything but compliant or functional. They implement labels as folders. Every time you use a label, it downloads that message multiple times and puts it into folders.
Also when you try to write drafts in Thunderbird for Gmail, it stores them in such a way as each saved draft turns into part of the conversation (WTF?!) It makes conversations totally unreadable.
I quite gmail years ago and do not miss their broken IMAP implementation.
Fair enough, I guess it's about differing usecases. The few labels that I do use on gmail are set up such that they are indistinguishable from folders (if they match a filter, they don't go in my inbox, and I don't have any overlapping labels). I also rarely have lingering draft emails, so I guess I've not noticed that particular issue (though I do use Mail.app, not thunderbird). Gmail's imap support has been adequate for me since they introduced it however long ago that was. YMMV
Edit: my point about standards compliance for gmail imap was purely about it actually working with third party clients, I've always known that it doesn't conceptually work the same way as a standard imap server.
I don't download my email. I have a webmail for a reason - I don't want a mail client with all its attendant files gumming up my PC. I moved off Netscape Communicator to webmail because it took up over 40% of my drive, and I've never regretted the decision.
And I don't like 2FA either. It's a hassle and never, ever, worth my time or energy. There was one gaming service (I think it was an MMO) that demanded 2FA or bust. I don't use that service and never will.
That seems to be a rather dangerous position to hold these days. I personally dislike that googles 2FA is SMS based (unless there's a way to use e.g. Authy with it that I'm unaware of), but still seems that the only way to be reasonably safe is a strong password and 2FA.
I'll add that The authy app on the Apple Watch has made 2FA for services that support it rather painless.
Google does allow other apps (I think it is still same as GAuth) SASS pass and other authenticators with good. But yes they don't allow other token provides like Yubikey or RSA fobs
Google is one of the major proponents of U2F, which is based on hardware tokens. Yubikeys support it, either the cheap U2F-only one or a Neo / 4. I use it and it works flawlessly. At the moment, only Chrome implements the required APIs as far as I know, but Mozilla is working on adding it to Firefox.
> But yes they don't allow other token provides like Yubikey or RSA fobs
I think this is incorrect, at least provided you're using Chrome. The implementation was buggy somewhere in the chain the last time I tried it, but it's there.
> If Yahoo goes down, I won't have email; or at best I'll maybe keep a Zoho.
Zoho needs a phone number verification for signup. Unless you're confident that Zoho will never get hacked like Yahoo has been (multiple times), your phone number could be one more piece of information that's exposed yet again whenever it gets hacked (this also depends on how you use email and if you include your phone number in emails).
You don't like GMail, I understand that (I don't either), but why stick with Yahoo? There are more providers with "old-fashioned, boring" web interfaces...
I like Yahoo email as a user. Yes, they've made mistakes, and I accept that. I'd prefer their mistakes over Google's superiority complex.