Google Introduces Gmail Paper

SlashRating©
56
slashdottit! tm

nacturation writes "Everyone loves Gmail. But not everyone loves email, or the digital era. What ever happened to stamps, filing cabinets, and the mailman? Now with Gmail Paper, you can request a physical copy of any message with the click of a button, and it'll be sent to you in the mail. Photo attachments are printed on high-quality, glossy photo paper, and secured to your Gmail Paper with a paper clip. And it's totally free: the cost of postage is offset with the help of relevant, targeted, unobtrusive advertisements printed on the back of every print."

weird quotes

[Takichi]

"It's paper, plain and easy. I sometimes find myself wondering: what will Google think of next? Cardboard?" Bill K., Armchair Futurist

This must be an April fool's.

Hint

[Anonymous Coward]

Watch the calendar: April 1st...

April Fool's Modding?

[zaguar]

Can I get an insightful mod for nothing? Come on...

Re:Photos could almost be useful

[Aladrin]

Seriously. I -have- a photo printer, and with dealing with low-ink, misprints, misalignments, streaks, etc, I'd -gladly- let them put advertisements on the back of the photo. I'd even promise to look at them. Most of the time, I simply don't print any more, because it's just too much hassle. If a family-member asks me to print a picture, I just glare them down until they give up.

It's too bad this is a joke, because I think it might actually work. -sigh-

Re:Photos could almost be useful

[Shawn is an Asshole]

Photo printers, like all inkjets, are a scam. The companies gouge you for the ink. The quality is piss poor compared to real photos. The photo paper is seriously over priced. The very expensive ink runs and smears when it encounters any moisture. Etc.

I fell for this once, but never again. What I do now is have my digital photos printed. Snapfish does it for $0.15/photo. Walmart does it for $0.12/photo and you can upload it online and pick it up at a local store. What you get is a photo that looks exactly like what you'd get with film. Only you get to do some GIMPing to it first.

It's significantly cheaper doing it this way rather than printing it with a photo printer. I mean, not counting the paper, with $60 worth of ink I was about to print maybe 30 photos. And they looked like ass, plus often the ink would smear before it dried. That's compared to the $27 (shipping was $8 or something) I paid Snapfish for the 180 photos I took on my vacation last summer, all of which look great.