Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Google The Internet Technology

Google Makes Emails More Dynamic With AMP For Email (techcrunch.com) 114

Google today officially launched AMP for Email, its effort to turn emails from static documents into dynamic, web page-like experiences. From a report: AMP for Email is coming to Gmail, but other major email providers like Yahoo Mail, Outlook and Mail.ru will also support AMP emails. It's been more than a year since Google first announced this initiative. Even by Google standards, that's a long incubation phase, though there's also plenty of backend work necessary to make this feature work.

The promise of AMP for Email is that it'll turn basic messages into a surface for actually getting things done. "Over the past decade, our web experiences have changed enormously -- evolving from static flat content to interactive apps -- yet email has largely stayed the same with static messages that eventually go out of date or are merely a springboard to accomplishing a more complex task," Gmail product manager Aakash Sahney writes. "If you want to take action, you usually have to click on a link, open a new tab, and visit another website." With AMP for Email, those messages become interactive. That means you'll be able to RSVP to an event right from the message, fill out a questionnaire, browse through a store's inventory or respond to a comment -- all without leaving your web-based email client.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Makes Emails More Dynamic With AMP For Email

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I remember the old fantasy that the Web would be the next operating system. Nobody really thought all that much about who would end up in control of that operating system.

    • by Frobnicator ( 565869 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:21PM (#58337474) Journal

      I remember the old fantasy that the Web would be the next operating system. Nobody really thought all that much about who would end up in control of that operating system.

      "Nobody really thought about it" really means you didn't think about it.

      Lots of people thought about it. During the Browser Wars of Netscape v Microsoft starting in late 1995, control over who owns the future was discussed all the time. Companies spent untold billion dollars fighting for that control. Microsoft spent several billion dollars trying to embed their browser into the operating systems. The Netscape/AOL deal was $4.2 billion with companies desperate to be in control. Various players have entered and exited the field, but the war is still going strong.

      Across all the companies, there have been several trillion dollars spent over the decades fighting for that control, and many companies were (and are) fighting to the death.

    • by XXongo ( 3986865 )
      This seems to be in the nature of promotional material for Google than news.
  • by cathector ( 972646 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @01:57PM (#58337328)
    so many ways this is not a good idea.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Google has never been about what people want. Google is about controlling people.

      Which day is assault-a-google-developer-day again?

    • by cayenne8 ( 626475 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:12PM (#58337416) Homepage Journal
      Yeah....it actually is NICE, IMHO to have one thing left that is simple text and really doesn't even truly need anything more, that being email.

      I pretty much still have all my email client set to be plain text at least for my outgoing emails.

    • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:16PM (#58337460)

      I second this. #DoNotWant

      ... yet email has largely stayed the same with static messages that eventually go out of date or are merely a springboard to accomplishing a more complex task.

      Ya. Emails are messages. I get them, process them, and delete them.

      This means you'll be able to RSVP to an event right from the message, fill out a questionnaire, browse through a store's inventory or respond to a comment -- all without leaving your web-based email client.

      My goal is to spend less time in my email client, not more. I see how this might be good for Google, with people using their web interface, but it's a solution in search of a problem (or opportunity -- for Google).

      Thankfully, I POP all my mail using Thunderbird and display all my mail as plain text (which is safer). Unfortunately, there are still some email messages that can only be displayed as HTML -- grrr.... Hopefully, I can avoid this AMP crap for a while.

      • My goal is to spend less time in my email client, not more.

        Seems like their goal with this is to have you spend less time (per-message) clicking around the browser altogether?

        • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:36PM (#58337548)

          My goal is to spend less time in my email client, not more.

          Seems like their goal with this is to have you spend less time (per-message) clicking around the browser altogether?

          Their goal is to allow them to track you more. As AMP pages are served from Google AMP servers, this seems like it will help them a lot, regardless of the browser you use...

    • by cathector ( 972646 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:38PM (#58337560)
      in addition to seeming like a bad UX on the surface, we'll get:

      * remote execution exploits, due to increased content complexity in the inbox.
      * data leak exploits.
      * buggy emails!
      * heaven for phishers.
    • by msauve ( 701917 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @03:53PM (#58338110)
      Not surprising from Google, who insists on encoding even plain text messages as (would have been) shown above, base64. Hell, even /. won't let me post what Google would send -

      Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Filter error: That's an awful long string of letters there.

      And, /. is right. Google is full of clueless Internet noob lameness.

      Even plain old HTML is wrong in email. [old.efn.no]

    • >"so many ways this is not a good idea."

      +10000

      I couldn't agree with you more. I detest HTML Email. So I will detest this even more. ESPECIALLY since it will be even MORE annoying and proprietary (not working with all Email systems) and introduce even more compatibility, security, privacy, and performance issues.

      I hope it fails.

  • by ctilsie242 ( 4841247 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @01:57PM (#58337330)

    I am tired of "experiences". What is wrong with a simple, fast, low-latency interface for mail? Good examples of this are Thunderbird, Roundcube, or even Mutt. Mail doesn't need to be "edgy". It needs to be quick, and support the usual features, so I can read whatever is there, reply, have rules to send the latest message from $VENDOR to a specific E-mail box, and support PGP and S/MIME.

    Didn't we learn from the early 2000s with all the E-mail worms about "experiences" and "live content" in E-mails? Looks like Google forgot.

    • by thereddaikon ( 5795246 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @01:59PM (#58337340)
      Amen. This just sounds like another attack vector and another reason for Chrome to gobble up even more memory.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:06PM (#58337376)

      The problem is that there's a lot less money in that than something that's insecure and likely to break.

      We've already been through this with MS Office documents and PDFs getting additional functionality that just turned out to be a way of spreading malware. Documents, should have no scripting involved. They should display as consistently as possible and be basically static.

      It's amazing how arrogant and ignorant these people are in thinking that this isn't going to end badly. We've seen it work out badly from a historical point of view, and now we're getting to see it again.

      Not to mention the fact that this runs the risk of being like web standards back in the '90s where they were purposefully incompatible to force people to use a specific browser that had whatever arbitrary, pointless, bullshit feature the web dev had to use.

      • by Anonymous Coward

        You don't want to know this, but TrueType fonts use a Turing-complete VM to execute their hinting code.

        So much for documents being static.

        • by Anne Thwacks ( 531696 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @04:04PM (#58338158)
          Email should be 7-bit ASCII for security and stability. If you want to attach a pdf or word document in order to compromise your security and leak your personal info, then the capability is there for exactly that purpose.
          • Email should be 7-bit ASCII for security and stability.

            I am happy with Unicode UTF-8 encoded, there have been a few issues but not many. US-ASCII is not good enough if you want to write in German, Greek, etc, let alone Chinese or Arabic. But I could do without HTML, in-line images, colours, different fonts, etc.

            The trouble is that many just don't get it. There is someone who I have to email who's minimum size email is about 130KB as the idiots have decided that every email has got to have huge images attached. These are the sort who are going to think that AMP

    • Goes back earlier. Reminds me of "Active Desktop" in Windows 98 SE. It was so successful that the idea came back as live tiles in Windows 8/10.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      I am tired of "experiences". What is wrong with a simple, fast, low-latency interface for mail?

      I agree 100000%

      As anyone will say who has ever attempted to use Facebook (just try finding your old comment to follow up on in a big FB thread. Good luck with that.) or these crap online "discussion" forums to communicate, and still remembers the (mostly) text-only USENET discussion fora that united the world by subject, rather than splintering it by website or service, textual interfaces are so often vastly supe

      • All the kool kids are using siloed messengers like facebook, instagram, imessage, signal, .....

        When the likes of you and I drop off our perches nobody will remember what email was.

        AMP will accelerate this process. By embedding siloed message servers into the "surface" of the emails.

  • This wouldn't be need if people didn't cram every fucking thing in there main pages.
    This is a Google branded solution to a problem they helped cause. They rather have another revenue stream than fix the issue.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @01:58PM (#58337338)

    Sorry, once a message arrives in my INBOX, I do NOT want it to change. I want it STATIC!

    Why do some people want to fix things that aren't broken?

    If you want a messaging platform with non-static messages, DO NOT CALL IT E-MAIL!

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Indeed, it's bad enough that people are allowed to send emails that use images as essential pieces of the message without at least being attached to the email. This is just going to make things worse.

      How many of today's emails are even going to be readable in a year's time? Or how about in 5 years? Documents are supposed to stay largely static, unless purposefully changed, and definitely not changed after being sent.

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Queue Exploits (Score:5, Insightful)

    by nuckfuts ( 690967 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @01:59PM (#58337342)

    The promise of AMP for Email is that it'll turn basic messages into a surface for actually getting things done.

    Things like increasing the attack surface of your e-mail client.

  • Um, no. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bradley13 ( 1118935 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:06PM (#58337372) Homepage

    Remember when companies jumped all over the html bandwagon for email? Outlook was especially awful at rendering, iirc, but generally the corporate design got in the way of the actual purpose, which was transmitting information.

    Thankfully, people realized this, and probably 90% of the email I see now is just text. Maybe with a logo or something,but that's all.

    Amp for email? That's just the html idiocy all over again, only now cached on Google's server for their data collection. No, thanks, please get lost.

    • Was? Outlook is still bad at rendering html.
    • by lgw ( 121541 )

      Thankfully, people realized this, and probably 90% of the email I see now is just text. Maybe with a logo or something,but that's all.

      I find it useful to have a standardized markup for email. Indenting something I'm quoting without using a bunch of ">"s is nice. Seeing a picture inline instead of as an attachment is nice. "Mostly text" is ideal.

      • Rendering is not active content. Rendering is not fillable forms. Rendering is not live interaction.
        • by lgw ( 121541 )

          Sure, but there are still "email is text only dammit" Slashdotters living in caves and trying to get the hang of fire. While it would have been better if RTF had caught on, that would require people to know HTML and something, rather than just HTML, which was never going to happen.

          HTML as the markup language for email is not the devil, is my point.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:08PM (#58337394)

    I can't read your message. Please re-send as plain text.

    I already get email messages that are HTML format with almost nothing but remote-loading images. Since I don't permit remote loaded content, those messages are unreadable. AMP sounds like a way to make this problem even more common.

  • by dysmal ( 3361085 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:09PM (#58337400)

    For those of us who don't want this feature, remember Google's life expectancy for their products.

    https://www.fastcompany.com/90... [fastcompany.com]

    • The problem here is that this sounds to be bigger than Google. The products that Google pulls other companies into partner on tend to have longer life.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Congratulations for inventing a new type of email anti-pattern!

    http://www.email-anti-patterns.com [email-anti-patterns.com]

  • by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:15PM (#58337442)

    And by the way, how will this affect one's ability to rely on emails as reliable historical, (and perhaps legal), documentation? Will this new bit of shiny render 'going back through old emails' obsolete?

    Then there's the prospect of full-on advertising in the body of an email. And will compatibility with regular email clients be maintained? I suspect not - Google and other players want us to do EVERYTHING via the browser, the better to control our 'experience'.

    And WTF is (FTA) "a surface for actually getting things done"? AFAIC that's my desk. This new scheme is a 'surface' alright - it smells like an attack surface to me.

  • by Streetlight ( 1102081 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:19PM (#58337466) Journal
    If it can't be turned off then someone needs to write code that can easily be added to gmail to do so. Google could add such an option but it would likely be buried as a obscure option in the settings.
  • by hduff ( 570443 ) <hoytduff@[ ]il.com ['gma' in gap]> on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:26PM (#58337502) Homepage Journal

    What could possibly go wrong?

  • Great (Score:4, Insightful)

    by viperidaenz ( 2515578 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:27PM (#58337504)

    just what we need, more features to support advertisers.

    What's the use case for AMP in the context of a person sending another person an email?

  • I think Microsoft learned this lesson ages ago, it's not a bad idea by itself but people abuse the hell out of email. Hopefully times have changed a bit.

  • Give me PINE instead.

  • by FictionPimp ( 712802 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @02:31PM (#58337524) Homepage

    I only accept plain text email. Anything else is discarded. I guess email will finally die and I can't wait.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    I don't use a web browser to read email. I use an email client.

  • Proton Mail is sounding better all the time.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    .... everyone says "great!"

    Oh wow. No one said great.

    I don't think I've ever seen such solidarity in a /. thread. Everyone thinks this is a bad idea. It must truly be as bad as it sounds...

  • "fancy" spam!

  • by superdave80 ( 1226592 ) on Tuesday March 26, 2019 @04:39PM (#58338298)

    its effort to turn emails from static documents into dynamic, web page-like experiences.

    Webpages, especially 'dynamic' webpages, are crap these days. Stuff constantly loading, moving, jumping around, not working correctly, etc. Please leave email alone...

  • Static emails don't go out of date, they contain exactly what they contained when I was sent them, which is what they are supposed to do. It's server driven dynamic emails that would go dead, or replace what they told me then with whatever they want to tell me now. No thanks.
  • You know, I was speaking to my colleagues just the other day, "I wish I could do more with my emails." I've always found macros in Word documents such a liberating tool in my life and now, Google has empowered me with AMP! Now I can combine my insipid, pointless emails will all kinds of useless, dynamic crap as well.

  • microsoft has had that for years with outlook forms and infopath
  • And me, wishing all emails were plain text. Can anyone do that for us all? (please)

    The year 2096. Email, which has long been waiting an overhaul, has become simple again with Gagglezon's "Simply Mail" which uses plain text to communicate without all the waste.
  • This is precisely the opposite: a complex solution with to no problem at all.
  • "The promise of AMP for Email is that it'll turn basic messages into a surface for actually getting things done."

    Yet another 'improvement' that nobody fuckin' wants or needs. This is just more dumbass hipster-driven bullshit that will be quietly forgotten about in a year... and then Google will drop it, just like they drop everything else that doesn't make them oodles of money.

  • Emails can be secure because they don't do anything. The only thing that executes in response to an e-mail should be the receiver (human or application). The e-mail itself as dead as possible specifically to avoid remote exploits and whatnot. Otherwise just opening an e-mail becomes a severe problem.

    This is not a feature that I want!
  • Thanks, TFA. Those four words tell the rest of us everything we need to know.

    Do Not Want.

  • What exactly is the benefit? You can accept an invite with a button in the message instead of a button above the message? Fill out forms without links or attachments? Hell, that's built into Outlook and I don't think anyone uses it.

    It does offer a giant attack vector though.

    And break the simple perfection of email.

    Seriously, what's wrong with email? Nothing, that's what. Easy to implement, easy to use, and it's fast and lightweight, not bloated with unnecessary bandwidth-hogging "features".

  • ...a desktop email client (Thunderbird) and set everything to plain text; incoming & outgoing. No images, only plain text links so that I can see where they're going & what information they're carrying in the query string. I just want to read & write messages. Email's great for that. Don't spoil it.
  • See subject. I want my email to be flat, boring, and uninteresting. I guess, in a way, I am excited about all the new scams and viral outbreaks that this will precipitate, but for the most part, I think this is an absolutely terrible thing.

    Prove me wrong. (You might be able to prove me wrong in theory, but come back in two years and let's see if your proof still stands. ROFLMAO)

  • I'm so old that it was a joke on newbies that you could catch a virus by just reading an email.

    Then Bill the Gates made that real, with HTML email. Now Google wants to add scripting into the email.

    Great idea, goog... you have taken down all the "first, don't do evil" posters and shredded them, right?

    And the people who want this? "I've got nothing at all to say, but let me give you me, singing and dancing!!!"

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Working...