Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Google Businesses Data Storage The Internet IT

Google Vows to Increase Gmail Limit 309

An anonymous reader writes "Google claims that people are devouring capacity with photos and other attachments on its Gmail e-mail service faster than the company can add to it at its current pace. So Google said on Friday that it would increase the rate at which it is adding capacity to its web-based service. There's only one problem, Google's main competitors — Windows Live Hotmail and Yahoo Mail — far surpassed Gmail this year with their own capacity."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Vows to Increase Gmail Limit

Comments Filter:
  • hands up (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wwmedia ( 950346 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:08AM (#20965233)
    hands up who here uses gmail to the max?

    myself after 2 years im only using ~500MB
    • Re:hands up (Score:5, Funny)

      by Enderandrew ( 866215 ) <[enderandrew] [at] []> on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:10AM (#20965243) Homepage Journal
      I haven't filled my inbox, but I use GMail to the Maxx!!!
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        You, sir, are totally awesome.

        I've been using Gmail since the early days, but I've only used ~300MB. If someone sends me a photo I want to keep, I put it in my photo library. If someone sends a video, it goes into the video library. Documents go into one of a number of document folders. If I didn't do this, I think I'd probably be near, if not over, the limit.

        Just keep things neat and organized, and use email to store email, and the current limits shouldn't be a real problem. At least that's my exp
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by AndroidCat ( 229562 )
        I use my Gmail accounts more as filters than as storage areas.
        • I'm the same way. I consider gMail to be a spam filter before it gets to my desktop mail app which has its own spam filter. I see maybe one piece of spam a day.
    • I won't be using it in the foreseeable future.
    • Re:hands up (Score:5, Insightful)

      by konekoniku ( 793686 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:21AM (#20965297)
      I've actually hit the limit twice now, and had to spend a few hours searching and deleting emails with attachments to free up space (am now back down to 96% of capacity). What causes this is primarily convenience (or laziness, depending on how you see it) -- I have a habit of never deleting emails. If an email is useless (e.g., random emails from university mailing lists that don't concern me), I never even bother to open it, much less delete it (the way gmail lets you preview the first dozen or so words in your email without ever opening it is very useful for this).
      • Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)

        by yincrash ( 854885 )
        There is no way random university mailing lists are filling up your inbox unless you're getting mailing lists with regular attachments of 1MB.
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by c_forq ( 924234 )
          At least at my university, a lot of the events sent out through the mailing list have PDFs or Word documents attached. Many others are heavily formatted with HTML, using images in order to do word art. It adds up quickly, and I am happy to see Google increase their space as I noticed my free space percentage has been steadily decreasing.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by budgenator ( 254554 )
        yeah right let's be honest, its a porn not a uni mailing list, don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with a little porn in your gmail account, I've got more than a little myself, but hiding, hording, and lying are signs of addiction. If you can't bring yourself to delete it, get professional help
    • hands up who here uses gmail to the max?

      I am currently using 1424 MB (46%) of your 3069 MB.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      Just over three years now (oldest email in the inbox is from August 2004), I'm at 430 MB. I never actively delete emails except spam, but I did accidentally remove several months worth of emails when I accidentally had the wrong IMAP settings.

      I'm guessing they'd have to be under a LOT of pressure to make storage "unlimited" because of all the people that would very quickly devour that using gmail-drive programs. Personally, I think I would just install Ubuntu on gmail-drive and never worry about space aga
    • Re:hands up (Score:4, Funny)

      by SkyDude ( 919251 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @10:13AM (#20965573)
      hands up who here uses gmail to the max?
      myself after 2 years im only using ~500MB

      Well, maybe it's because you don't have friends or relatives that send you stupid videos and pictures.

      I regret the day I trained my mother-in-law how to attach things to emails. I may have to show her how to find things on Youtube or how to upload and link to them on Youtube.

      Or maybe just break her PC and tell her it can't be fixed........

    • by Sancho ( 17056 )
      I'm pretty far from the limit, but I only use Gmail as my throwaway address. I'm thinking about forwarding PGP encrypted copies of my real mail over to Gmail for backup/archival purposes, but my 3 year old archives only weigh in at 1.3 gigabytes, and that's including listserv mail that I don't really need to archive (it's archived all over the place on the web.)

      I don't do a lot of attachments, so I guess that's how I manage to weigh in so low.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by rucs_hack ( 784150 )
      I use it as a rolling backup of important documents. One to the working folder, one to a backup drive on another machine, and one to Gmail. With the integration of gmail with google docs, thats actually incredibly handy. I have several utility spreadsheets sat in google docs that I use quite often.

      I've been doing this for two years, and I'm up to 66Mb. I delete obsolete backups after six months.

      I don't have a large set of old mail either, with few exceptions I delete it.
    • Re:hands up (Score:5, Insightful)

      by CODiNE ( 27417 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @10:49AM (#20965827) Homepage
      I hate to say it but I think we've reached a point where "normal people" use their tech more than the geeks do. At least in the email area. I too would be using a small chunk of my GMail space except for mom emailing me sunsets, uncle John sending pictures of his farm and all those stupid HTML emails they send. Sure its a waste of bandwidth to us, but they're generally more social and tend to fill our mailboxes faster.
    • "You are currently using 328 MB (10%) of your 3005 MB."

      Don't know if Spam is counted, but there's just over 4500 spam emails in the spam folder.
  • by stonecypher ( 118140 ) <> on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:10AM (#20965239) Homepage Journal
    Yahoo! Mail went to unlimited like six months ago. Anyone still watching their mail space should focus their time fending off mastodon with their obsidian knives.
    • Or why does it say 1GB once you want to sign up?
      • by vidarh ( 309115 )
        Sounds like someone forgot to remove some text somewhere, or possibly they may still have limits for some of the international versions (I used to work at Yahoo - many of the international subsidiaries at least used to get to set different policies for core products like mail depending on competitive pressures, cost and whether or not they have premium products that would be affected).
    • by Sleepy ( 4551 )
      Yahoo NEEDS to increase Inbox sizes... to hold all the spam Yahoo places there.
      Yahoo's not my main account, but after a few years I can say that GMail is WAY better at blocking spam.
      I must get 200 spams in my Yahoo inbox each month.
      With GMail, I get about 12 spams a month, and once in a while (rarely) a false positive such as a newsletter landing in the spam folder.
      With Yahoo, I never bother to check my Spam folder because the spam filters are so weak, why bother?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:12AM (#20965251)
    I find it astounding that people would so willing store so much personal information on the servers of these companies. I don't care if we're talking about Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, or some other company. It's just damn scary to think that so many people would just give out all that data. Is it because they're ignorant of the risks? Or maybe they know, but it's convenient, and they're willing to take the chance that the naked photos of themselves that they're storing in their hosted email account could be publically released?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Some of us use gmail for most of our email and use something less risky for the "naked photos of ourselves."
    • by Sancho ( 17056 )
      I don't take naked photos of myself, but if I did, I wouldn't e-mail them to myself, either.

      Regardless, the answer to your question is that most people are simply that trusting. If it's a company, they think that they're going to do the Right Thing. They also don't understand that these services are constantly under attack by people either seeking thrills or trying to get valuable information.

      Finally, people usually end up sending naked pictures of themselves to other people. In that case, you're always
      • Finally, people usually end up sending naked pictures of themselves to other people. In that case, you're always trusting third-parties that the pictures won't show up somewhere.
        That's what this guy thought too, but if you happen to recognize Vico [] Interpol would like to talk to him about what he likes to do to little boys.
    • Unless you run your own mail server, the email has to be stored *somewhere*. Email (SMTP) isn't designed so that it works well on dynamic ip addresses , and with all the spam problems most ISP's have blocked port 25 for home users. you probably have to get another business line to run the server. Besides, you'll need a (sub)domain too, and not a lot of people have the knowledge to set up that either.

      It would be nice if the Internet were much more "P2P" instead of relying on dedicated servers to relay conten
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ScrewMaster ( 602015 )
        Well, I do run my own server and there are many ways to get around a port 25 block. At the moment, I use No-IP's alternate-port mail service for SMTP. The server tries to send the message directly to the destination server if it can, but since many ISPs won't accept mail from a non-static IP, if that fails it falls back and sends the message out through No-IP's server on a different port. Works extremely well, and I haven't had an outgoing message go through my ISP's mail server in years.

        For incoming mai
    • It's a trade-off, really. I could run my own e-mail server, but as I don't have a lot of redundancy at home this isn't likely to work out well. I could use my organization's e-mail system, but the quota is relatively small, and at some point I'm going to leave, and making e-mail archives has rarely worked out for me in the past. I could pay for e-mail service somewhere, but then I have to think about what I'm going to do when I want to stop paying or they go out of business. I use GMail because it's relativ
    • It's just damn scary to think that so many people would just give out all that data.

      If "that data" is important, it's scary that someone would e-mail it at all. The fact that it's stored on Google's servers is so minor as to be a non-issue.

      Unless you run your own SMTP server, it's at least being temporarily held for you by some company, who could also indefinitely archive it if they chose. And even if you do run your own server, don't start getting a false sense of security, because everything you send or

  • it's true! (Score:5, Funny)

    by ClippySay ( 930525 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:13AM (#20965263) Journal
    / It's true, people is attaching files of \
    | huge size! My back wire pains and my    |
    \ job insurance won't cover it!           /
           \     ____
            \   / __ \
             \  O|  |O|
                ||  | |
                ||  | |
                ||    |
  • just one new feature (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DMoylan ( 65079 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:24AM (#20965313)
    i'd be really happy if they allowed me to delete the attachments but leave the email. i believe the feature was requested yonks ago but so far has not happened. i'm currently at 50% but that would drop to less than 10% if i could delete the attachments i already have downloaded.

    other than that i cannot fault the service. i get my email at work, home and on my phone with no hassles. thanks google!
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      That sounds like a really good feature for right here, right now.
      Consider however that you are reading that same (now sanitised) mail a few months later.

      How frustrating would it be to have your red hot ex girlfriend in a mail saying "i've attached the video of me wearing my Princess Leia outfit for you" and discover you fucking deleted it.

      If you want the feature so badly, forward it to yourself and exclude the attachment or just delete the whole mail.
      • How frustrating would it be to have your red hot ex girlfriend in a mail saying "i've attached the video of me wearing my Princess Leia outfit for you" and discover you fucking deleted it.

        If she's my ex, then that means she's screwing somebody else by then
        and the absolute LAST thing I want to be reminded of is any erotic
        imagery of her, you insensitive clod!
      • while we're requesting features...

        you know how gmail threads emails together, ones with similar subjects, so that if you got 12 emails from friends replying to "all" one day, when you check it, you only have one email, with all those posts in it?

        i want to be able to connect emails together myself...sort of a manual threading ability. sometimes conversations happen over the course of several weeks, the subject gets changed, so looking for one specific email is difficult cos it may have been under the "
      • by budgenator ( 254554 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @11:56AM (#20966379) Journal
        What I've always wondered is why Google doesn't just figure out a way to delete duplicates and keep one attachment for each Email to use, just think of how much space they could save by just storing one Cutsie picture of kittens playing with yarn instead of one for everyone in Aunt Millie's Email List.
          as for your red hot ex girlfriend in a Princess Leia, check usenet.
    • by trb ( 8509 )
      i agree that deleting attachments would be useful. that, combined with a search operator to find messages based on their size. they already have has:attachment, but an operator to look for messages larger than a size would help too. if i couldn't delete just the attachments, i'd settle for deleting the whole messages, if only i could find them.
    • by bazorg ( 911295 )
      100% agreed. With all the search expertise those guys have, maybe it's possible to have all WMV and AVI attachments replaced by having the body of the message with a link to googlevideo where all crap my friends send could be stored. of course I would prefer if google asked permission before making this conversion first. maybe an alternative "archive" button for this kind of stuff would be enough.
    • by Duncan3 ( 10537 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @10:05AM (#20965521) Homepage
      It takes at least 5,001 engineers to figure out how to delete attachments, and Google only has 5,000. So it's really just beyond them to figure it out. It's not like the code to do that is just laying around in a dozen open source packages or anything.

      I've known dozens of people what "worked" at Google, and they all say it's just one big party. The only people that work are the low-paid ad sales crew - the ones responsible for 99.9% of last quarter's revenue.

      If it doesn't sell ads, noone works on it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by WillyMF1 ( 867862 )
      Forward the message to yourself, sans attachment, and delete the original. I know its more of a pain than the feature would be, but its not that tough.
    • On a similar vein, I would like to have a feature where you could download the attachments for multiple emails. Then I wouldn't have to look at each email to download my attachments.

    • I would like to see the ability to adjust the number of days to keep stuff in the spam folder... like down to zero days. Also would like to have blacklisting and whitelisting capability on my Gmail account. Also would like to have S/IMAP connection support too.
  • Microsoft can advertise that users have a larger capacity with ease - many users have reported that attachments aren't transmitted when using Hotmail, and I've experienced this phenomena personally. Easy to add vaporous capacity to Hotmail, or would bogus be a better term? Gmail on the other hand has never done this to me.
    • And GMail doesn't allow you to transmit executables AND it scans zip files for executables. They both have unfriendly policies when it comes to attachments.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by budgenator ( 254554 )
        And GMail doesn't allow you to transmit Windows executables AND it scans zip files for windows executables but leave Linux and Mac executable alone, and doesn't check .tgz files. They both have unfriendly policies when it comes to attachments, but most Windows users need the protection eve if it is annoying for people on other OSes.
        There fixed it for you.
  • by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:37AM (#20965369)
    I can understand using these services as a backup, but as people shift more and more of their online life to web 2.0, they will find that less and less of their files/data/structured products reside on their own local PC. How many people have a full backup of their Flickr albums (with all the organization structures and metadata that they've enter into flickr?) How many people have a full backup of their GMail accounts? These systems are just one botched upgrade away from data loss (does Google or its competitors have a full backup of ALL users' mail service data and will the restore process actual work?)

    I also wonder at what point in time will internet criminals shift their attentions to online services such as Hotmail/Yahoo/GMail as a means of hosting spam/scam operations. A smart scammer could parasitize a group of GMail accounts and send out a few spams a day from each account from a million accounts at once. As long as the scammer obfuscates their emails (use Picassa to create CAPTCHA-like GIF spam) so that the Gmail doesn't notice a million identical emails being sent for a million accounts, the parasite process can survive. And if a criminal finds a way to create an internal GMail worm (one that can propagate itself from account to account without any interaction by the account holder), then they can turn the entire GMail system into a botnet.

    My point is that these massive system have some serious single-points of failure and are becoming extremely high-value targets for internet criminals.
    • by MadMorf ( 118601 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:54AM (#20965459) Homepage Journal
      These systems are just one botched upgrade away from data loss (does Google or its competitors have a full backup of ALL users' mail service data and will the restore process actual work?)

      Speaking as a storage engineer working for a vendor used by one their competitors (The Goog uses us too, but not for Gmail afaik) the answer is yes.

      A couple of months ago there was a failed raid group which housed 200,000 mailboxes, which was restored with only a loss of 15 seconds of email.

      Not bad for free, eh?

      • I did not mean to cast aspersions on the storage industry. They've worked extremely hard to create hardware-layer reliability and robust backup/restore processes because the fate of a storage company rests on reliability.

        Instead, I'd argue that the more insidious type of fault would occur in the apps layer, probably during or after a Version++ migration. Creeping corruption in Yahoo/Microsoft/Google data structures would render the data backups only incrementally less corrupted than the production copy of
    • by Oshawapilot ( 1039614 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:55AM (#20965465) Homepage
      With the exception of probably the majority of us here, most computer users are completely devoid of any regular backup schedule regardless. IMHO this makes Gmail far superior for the average (read as: hopelessly unprepared) computer user. I've lost track of how many people I've heard say "I lost your email because my computer crashed" over the years. I've yet to hear one Gmail user say the same thing. That aside, I'm sure Google, of all companies out there, make some effort to ensure there's some amount of backup or redundancy as part of the Gmail system.
    • by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:57AM (#20965479)
      Sounds like a strong argument for everybody keeping their money at home under the mattress instead of a bank.

      Compared to the atrocious data security and safeguards most home users have (which is to say, none), having the pros at google or hotmail take care of it is a huge step up. At least they don't put it all on one drive with no backup or accidentally throw it away when they get a new computer.

    • by siddesu ( 698447 )
      heh ... criminals are okay, and negligence that destroys your email, well, you could live with it. the government being able to read my conveniently indexed mails is what scares me more.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by evilviper ( 135110 )

      How many people have a full backup of their Flickr albums

      Probably every one of them.

      (with all the organization structures and metadata that they've enter into flickr?)

      If the worst problem you have from an event of major data loss, is being forced to input some metadata, you can count yourself as damn lucky.

      These systems are just one botched upgrade away from data loss

      As opposed to storing everything locally? I know lots of people that have lost lots of data when their local system was ruined thanks to viru

  • DVD service next? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pig Hogger ( 10379 ) <`moc.liamg' `ta' `reggoh.gip'> on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:42AM (#20965393) Journal
    I can see where they're coming to... A new service:

    Burn all that e-mail that's burning your account on a DVD overnighted to you for only $50!!! For an extra $20, all the e-mail that has been burned will be tagged "DVD" so you can delete it in a click!!!

  • Seriously, I never understood this obsession with e-mail limits. Who really needs this much e-mail storage? Who? Sure, if you were some Internet celebrity getting a pile of e-mail, then you might need some sort of infinite storage. I think that a letter to the right people at Google, and maybe some money, could get you infinite storage if you really were a celebrity.

    Seriously though. I have been using GMail for domains for years now. I like to think I get an average amount of e-mail. I never delete anything
    • Email attachments are obsolete? Explain.
    • Re:I don't get it (Score:4, Informative)

      by Charlie Kane ( 1098491 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @11:12AM (#20966009)
      I'm a journalist. I get lots of email from publicity types, many of which include print-ready imagery (which can be as much as several megabytes in size). I get email from freelance writers, which often includes attached .DOC files of stories and/or invoices. (I know, I know -- I'm nuts to be using Microsoft Word when emacs would do the job with less overhead.) I try to regularly delete the largest, least necessary email from my box, but in truth what I really like about Gmail is the ability to keep everything. For one thing, it works as a great PR photo archive with next to no effort required on my part. For another, it's a poor man's backup system -- I actually trust it more than the one my office IT department provides, which has failed me in the not-too-distant past. Anyway, I'm at 1209 MB and growing.

      Email attachments are obsolete? Get out of town. I happily use FTP as much as possible, of course, but email attachments are, bar none, the easiest, fastest way to communicate with publicity agents and other journalists, not all of whom are Internet savvy. Yes, there are occasional issues where attachments are munged -- or legitimate attachments get snared in our corporate spam filter -- but those annoyances are far outweighed by the relative convenience of not having to teach every single person I deal with by email on a daily basis how to download and use FTP clients.
    • I'm at 70%. I imported my previous e-mail (who wants multiple accounts?), and I've got relatives who like to send photos as attachments. I get very little spam, and I don't think I get that much more e-mail than other people do.
      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by speaktruth ( 1082461 )
        I have a Gmail account through Google Apps Premier (yes I pay 50 dollars per year), but to me surprise this week my account limit went from a robust 10GB to 25Gb. I am sure the rest of Gmail is not far behind in getting some serious storage space upgrade.
  • by CNERD ( 121095 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:48AM (#20965423) Homepage
    Hotmail STILL has ads at the footer of every message sent. Neither Yahoo nor Gmail do that. Who cares how big they let your inbox be, if they make every email you send look like spam.
  • Problem? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RAMMS+EIN ( 578166 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:49AM (#20965425) Homepage Journal
    ``There's only one problem, Google's main competitors Windows Live Hotmail and Yahoo Mail far surpassed Gmail this year with their own capacity.''

    Problem? On the contrary! This is great. It's competition at work, improving things for users. Google offered lots of storage. Now it's competitors offer more. In response, Google will offer more. Whichever of these services you are using, you will get a better deal. The only problem here is how you can put all that space to good use.
  • by unity100 ( 970058 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:50AM (#20965433) Homepage Journal
    People are not utilizing their services to the fullest. Naturally, they are able to oversell their storage. As users utilize only percentages of that space you can go on allocating more to each user, because they will be only using a percentage of it anyway. Much common in the hosting world. but not advised.
  • by Iloinen Lohikrme ( 880747 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @09:56AM (#20965469)

    Who even wants to use something else than Gmail? I use Gmail as my personal email, and my company uses Gmail for domains for our email. From the day one Gmail has offered easy to use and intuitive web mail with enough free space. In about three years that I have used Gmail for my personal use, I have only succeeded in using 312Mb of it. My own company mail address has only gathered 157Mb. For those people who use web mail for email, I don't think that the space requirement has been after Gmail was launched a key part on comparing different email services. Even if Gmail still had only 1Gb limit, I still wouldn't even consider other services.

    Also if somebody from Google is reading this message, what I need and want right now, that you are not offering is J2ME mobile client for Gmail for domains. It's ridicules that Google offers mobile client for regular Gmail, but for Gmail for domains there is non. There should be no technical reason for denying the client. If you don't want to offer it free, maybe you could offer it as a part of subscription for Gmail for domains. And no, I don't want to use mobile version via mobile browser, that just doesn't work as well as pure mobile client.

    Another wish that I have is that Google besides raising email space would raise space for photos. I love Picasa and I have saved some of my personal photos to Picasa Web. The only thing why I haven't moved all my personal photos to it is that there just isn't enough space for it. Also I don't want to order subscription for it, as for me it's unclear what happens to photos if I end the subscription. Does Google just delete all photos after day 1 of non subscripted time? In example if I hurt my self or get sick, or my credit goes bad, and I can't afford to pay the subscription, I really wouldn't want all my loved photos just disappearing in bit space.

    • Who even wants to use something else than Gmail?

      People who don't want to worry about XSS vulnerabilities []?
      People who don't want to worry about stolen session cookies?

    • Who even wants to use something else than Gmail?

      Me. If you read Google's Privacy Policy (who does that? I know, simply shocking) they've given themselves permission to create profiles based on every single e-mail that has ever gone through your inbox (as well as information form any other services you use with your Gmail account). They can then use this to send even more ads to you or even sell it. Personally I value my privacy a bit more then that, so I'm phasing out my use of Google.

  • I'm not sure many people care anyway.

    The thing is, google started this and I loved them for it. They raised the bar to 1 gig out of nowhere and everyone rejoiced. It was long over due at the time as limits were far too low in general. Now, I'd guess they are reasonable for the vast majority. As long as google 'keeps up' at this point and accommodating its users, I'm not sure this is a bid deal.
  • by paleshadows ( 1127459 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @10:19AM (#20965611)
    • Google now sells storage [] to people that reached the space limit: 10GB for $20 per year, 40GB for $75, 150GB for $250, or 400GB for $500; the prices are specified in [], but you need to have a gmail account to access this page.
    • Google repeatedly refuses to users' requests to add to the gmail interface an option to delete attachments, which is one of the most wanted gmail features [], thereby making it hard to save space.
    • Likewise, google repeatedly refuses to let you sort email messages by size [], making it almost impossible to locate the most space-consuming emails, a functionality one really needs when one reaches the space limit.
    • Considering the above non-existent options are really trivial to add, one can only conclude that google wants you to reach the limit and pay up. And they claim they're "not evil"...
  • IMAP (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Tim_UWA ( 1015591 )
    I will use GMail when they implement IMAP. Webmail is a pile of shit, and POP is an even bigger pile.
  • by BadEvilYoda ( 935532 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @10:50AM (#20965845)
    What is limiting you to ONE GMail account, if your first one is too full? It's not like they verify anything, if you're absolutely in love with GMail, and run out of space in free account #1, sign up for free account #2, and off you go, instant DOUBLE STORAGE. Yes, it's slightly inconvenient, but with auto-forwarding of all new mail to the new account enabled, and the ability to "send as" the old account #1 from #2 ... really not much of a problem.
  • Briefcase... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by evilviper ( 135110 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @11:18AM (#20966039) Journal
    The biggest problem with online services in general, and Gmail specifically, is that companies keep trying to impose arbitrary confines on them.

    You know why GMail can't add space fast enough? Because they don't have a Yahoo Briefcase type service, with a nice interface, where people can directly store and manage their files, and more than that, directly SHARE a file with an unlimited number of other users. Instead, somebody hacks up a program, and your files get stuffed into an e-mail with all the overhead, and thousands of people have their own private copies of the same damn file.

    Such a service might not be profitable on its own, but it might just make up the difference, thanks to saving them tons of money from not having to keep upgrading their mail servers that have been picking up the slack for people that need such a service.

  • by boldie ( 1016145 )
    I often find myself wanting to keep the mail and delete the attachment. Why is it not possible to delete attached files from an email in gmail?

    The limit is getting CLOSE!
  • The "capacities" Microsoft and Yahoo and Google are providing are not comparable values. That's because they're all overcommitted quotas, calculated by assuming that the majority of users aren't going to take advantage of them and only turning up actual hardware to back them up when the window between the actually used and actually available storage gets too low.

    When you don't have that many of your users taking advantage of a facility, it's easy to provide big quotas.

    So all you're doing when you compare Ho
  • by blackwizard ( 62282 ) on Saturday October 13, 2007 @01:03PM (#20966975)
    I've been using gmail almost since launch and I've been pretty frugal with the space.

    On the other hand, we signed my grandmother up for gmail a year ago. She gets so many forwarded messages and the like that she is using up ALL of the space now. Apparently she really likes receiving them, too...

    And don't get me started on how hard it is to sort through those thousands of messages to pick out the ones that are OK to delete. GMail's "search, not sort" mentality just doesn't work for Grandma. I can't sort by size and delete the top offenders. There's no way to search for large messages that she didn't reply to so I can just get rid of the top ones of those, either. Frustrating.

If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton