digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Offline GMail client.

techcrunch.com — A report from India ’s Hindustan Times indicates that Google is prepping an offline version of Gmail.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • razei, on 10/10/2007, -6/+85woops, wrong category
    • konspence, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Marked as inaccurate.... how can you send email to people while being offline?
    • wang1011, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3digg forgives you =)
  • jbohlinger, on 10/10/2007, -7/+35/cries with joy
    • fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -6/+29Why? Aren't there already a crapload of offline mail clients you could use?
      • darkNiGHTS, on 10/10/2007, -10/+2Not that completely sync with Gmail.
        • jeremymccurdy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Thunderbird does.
        • thatsmyaibo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Hell even my Palm does. Gmail is POP and I would be surprised if you could find a client that didn't support it.
      • lavchan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9Do you know any that support labels as well as the Gmail site does? Serious question.
        • fkr3, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Search makes labels, folders, categories, tags or whatever other word you want to use irrelevant.
    • woogley, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8I've been using Outlook for quite a while and it works great with GMail. Outlook/Thunderbird and GMail are perfect match. No matter what you do on the client side, GMail has the email archived on the server just in case you need it (GMail heavily pushes "not deleting" emails anyway)

      I'm not sure I would use an offline GMail client, seeing as Outlook is syncing many different email accounts.. but the idea is interesting. One step closer to an online desktop maybe
      • gquaglia, on 10/10/2007, -15/+3Dugg down for using Outlook and perfect in the same sentence.
      • greg9683, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is probably a first step in making their tools offline. Eventually all their google apps will likely become offline based as well. Google having their own client would then allow them to sync up their calendar and notes. Thunderbird and Outlook both offer great tools, but if Google wants to capture the business audience, they need to provide their own package.
    • secleinteer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Uhh, isn't offline access an integral part of every POP3 client? Just use KMail, Thunderbird, Evolution, Outlook, Outlook Express, Windows Mail, Apple Mail, or one of the other million clients out there, and you have offline mail access.
  • schestowitz, on 10/17/2007, -12/+101Wouldn't that beat the purpose of GMail, which is Web-based, portable, platform-neutral, and off-line-enabled (using Gears and Firefox 3.0, for example)?
    • aliguana, on 10/10/2007, -10/+5so you're running Firefox 3 then?
      • spyrochaete, on 10/10/2007, -1/+13Why not?
        http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/nightly/latest-trunk/
        • potp, on 10/10/2007, -9/+2Ohh god not the nightly build. they are seriously not for n00bs. at lest the gran paradiso releases would have been more safer.
        • PhoenixPath, on 10/10/2007, -0/+25"more safer"

          Yeah, let's talk about "n00bs" after you graduate Elementary School.
        • Evacide, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I don't get to use CustomizeGoogle with Firefox 3 though :( And lots of other extensions don't work either. I'll wait.
          • Harri448, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'm using those right now. Change the maxversion in the.rdf file.
        • wafflez, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I love you spyrochaete. I just installed alpha 8, "minefield", and even though my 4chan extension and some other themes and extensions don't work, the speed hike compensates.
    • KevenM, on 10/23/2007, -0/+40No, it would ADD to the features of GMail. It would not take anything away or beat any other purposes.
    • gadgetuk, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4I guess it explains why they haven't ever made Gmail accessible through an IMAP client. I still hope they do though, there's even an online petition asking them to...
      http://www.petitiononline.com/igmail/petition.html
    • brasso, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Nope, I can’t imagine that Google will make you choose between web access and "gmail client" access.
      So if you don’t like it, then don’t use it and you won’t notice any difference.
    • lieutenantmudd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Also, it was reported in the Hindustan Times. Internet access is not as ubiquitous in the world as it is in America and Europe. Offline email is a major feature when you only sign on once or twice a day.
    • diggimator, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I thought Gears was only available for Google Reader and RememberTheMilk atm, but gmail w/ gears might be nice. (what would they do with it, though. Download gigs of account data each time I log on?)
      • diggimator, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Why am I being dugg down? GMail is not offline enabled, nor does it support Gears. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Gears

        Also, I doubt how well Gears's cacheing feature works. If data is wiped whenever by the whim of Firefox,
        that could mean massive bandwidth cost for synching ginormous mail accounts.
        Some compromise or improvement to Gears would be necessary, at which point
        Google might be better off just creating another full blown desktop app a la Google Earth, etc. It's not like they haven't done that before... What's wrong with just using Thunderbird?
        • dbr_onix, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Chances are it wouldn't sync either attachments (like Google Reader doesn't sync embedded images), or not sync all emails (Again, like Reader, which only syncs the last 2000 RSS items)
          Being able to hit "offline" in GMail, and access your last few hundred emails would be useful, and what would be even more useful is being able to compose new messages offline, and have them saved into the Drafts or Outbox. Sure, you could write them in a text editor and send them later, but it's not as convenient.

          Most people only really need recent emails, and the ability to send new messages. In such cases, Gears-enabled GMail makes sense.
    • davidpeele, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4I love Gmail and the cool way it handles sent mail and received mail as conversations instead of having an Inbox and a Sent Mail folder.
      Is there any offline app that does this? I just don't have a constant connection to my ISP (picture, 3rd world South America, long range wireless connection and daily power outages). An offline app that works like the Gmail site would be awesome.
      I use Mail.app and it is nice but I am still stuck with circa 1993 folders for messages. I hate having to dig through my sent mail to remember what I wrote before.
    • rkettner, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2My dad travels a lot, and his one complaint about Gmail is that you can't read/respond to e-mail while in flights. This solution would allow him to download his mail... read and reply to it on the plane, and re-sync upon re-connect.
    • richardhenry, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I'm assuming you have all the Google functionality, only offline. Then when you go back online, everything syncs. That's the way I'm hoping they've done it, anyway.
    • judsond, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I'm sure this will just be a gears implementation.
  • 4fingers, on 10/22/2007, -6/+219This is Digg, who is ever off-line?
    • darkNiGHTS, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10When I'm driving?
      • JeffD, on 10/10/2007, -0/+20You're cheking email while driving?
        • simplenation, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i check diggriver.com while driving
          • vemerge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Is that what you'll tell the police when you run over a three year old girl? I was checking to see if there was any new iPhone news, so, it can't possibly be my fault!
      • jer2eydevil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Thats what a blackberry is for
  • The1DB, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5I've heard this before a number of times... Google is planning to offer most services offline
    • potp, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5I hear they are developing and offline life too for their users.
  • Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16Acutal link: http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=37957dea-7b41-465f-96eb-5a303d142fc6
    • psilanthropist, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1why does it matter if tis India's Hindustan Times ? i dont see discriptions everyday sayin this article is from america's enagadget/lifehacker/gizmodo/tuaw
  • repruhsent, on 10/10/2007, -10/+13Blogspam = bury.
    • anshuman, on 10/10/2007, -10/+1its not BLOG U F*#%%#RD blogophobe its major news paper site.
      • Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Tech Crunch is not a "major news paper site" -- it's a blog. By linking to *it*, rather than the actual Hindustan Times site (which *is* a major newspaper), this submisison is the very definition of blogspam.
        • vemerge, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, it's not. Read what codazzo says below. Just because it's on a blog does not make it blogspam.
          • Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No, the fact that it's a link to a zero-value summary of the actual article makes it blogspam.
    • codazzo, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2it's an informative summary of the lengthy hindustantimes article (have you tried reading both?), hosted on a significantly sized news site, and even if it weren't so the size wouldn't make a difference.
    • vemerge, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Do you even know what blogspam is? Just because the news is from a blog (and one of the biggest on the internet at that), does not make it blogspam.
    • rinks, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4It's TechCrunch, you idiot. It's one of the leading reporters on new tech, not some moron in his basement.

      By that rationale, nothing by Boing Boing, Lifehacker, Gizmodo, or Engadet would make it on this site.
      • Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1...and that would be a good thing, considering that many of the Boing Boing, Lifhacker, Gozmodo and Engadget posts are pointless summaries (i.e. blogspam) as well.
  • blogsper, on 10/10/2007, -9/+0Is this a link bait by HT ?
    • barret232hxc, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1no it's not link bait. it's just a site my friend made so I was trying to give it some promotion
  • blogsper, on 10/10/2007, -9/+0Is this a link bait by HT ?
  • wynd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+61I'd rather have IMAP support.
    • jlau85, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Definitely! Desktop email clients are just so much better. POP just doesn't cut it though. Even a paid account that offered IMAP would be worth it.
  • carpespasm, on 10/10/2007, -13/+1will this offline gmail have folders? seems like something they've been slow to implement....
    • dilbertmouse, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16"Actually, Gmail doesn't use folders. To help you organize your mail more effectively, Gmail uses labels instead." -- Gmail Help (search for 'folders') [ https://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=10708 ]

      You can use labels and think of them as folders, but really they're better. Using folders, one email belongs in one folder. But with labels, one email can be in many 'folders', thus making things way easier to categorize. Not to mention that labels can be used to mark mail in your inbox, sent items, trash, or wherever they might be hiding.
      • knetworx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I don't even use the labels, except to make things stand out when they're in my inbox. If I'm looking for an email I've already read, I just search for it.
    • PhairOh, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Why do you need folders? Labels work really well for me.
    • Damienk, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3You jackass, go use Hotmail.
    • dtiziani, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3one of the dumbest requests ever!
      It's like asking for a car with square tires.
      • cyberoidx, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2You really suck at metamorph's, dont you?
        • dtiziani, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1do I?
          I guess asking for folders when you have label (When you can make them work JUST LIKE A FREAKING FOLDER) is dumb. As dumb as asking for square tires, I think that metaphor is just fine. =]
        • knetworx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3"metamorph's"...... Are you kidding me? Ahh....where to begin.......oh yes -- kindergarten!
          First off, the word you were looking for was "metaphors". Second, you took an apostrophe out of a contraction. Finally, you used an apostrophe to make something plural. You fail at life.
  • MrViklund, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3This is the web 3.0 coming. They are already talking about it.
    • crushfan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Sweet, a new term that defines nothing. It's just a polished way to say, "a new web site" .

      - Our recently released Web 2.0 application...
      - OMG, I THINK I JUST CAME!!11
      • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Web 3.0 means the same as Web 2.0. It's all pretty meaningless.
    • lcarsdeveloper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I'm still waiting for Web 2.0. The "look" of the web has changed many many times in the last 10 years. There was the plain text phase, then image maps, rollovers, flash based websites, and now the rounded edges with reflections and AJAX phase. Not enough of the Internet has changed for me to consider this Web 2.0, why didn't the version number increment with all the other changes over the last 10 years? If new technology, designs and fads are all that warrant a new version of the internet, then we should be up to Web 10.0 by now. Buzzwords like Web 2.0 are for programmers who want both extra money and the chance to get paid to play with new toys at work. Trust me, I used to be one.
      • Optimaximal, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Web 2.0 doesn't just cover the 'look' of websites. It covers more the definition of how the websites function...

        Web 1.0 can be classified as a website that is fairly static in its content - one defined set of users update it and there is little outside interaction from users. A Web 2.0 site is geared towards social interaction and dynamic content generation through user interaction. The whole social interaction movement just tended to come about at a time when AJAX and CSS became favourable, meaning Web 2.0 is just associated with nice looking bubbly Mac OSX-like websites.
        • GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Web 2.0 existed years ago by the dynamic/static definition. We had dynamic, user oriented, web pages long before abuse of javascript and xml.
          • Verdanic, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1Abuse?

            How the hell is the way JavaScript is used today for user interaction and interface streamlining abuse of the language?
      • Tippis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It has less to do with technology and designs and more to do with a mindset of how to look at data -- how it is created, collected, and accessed:
        http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
    • MrViklund, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1No, you are wrong. We are using web 2.0 right now and wen 3.0 is coming. Ask Google. Web 3.0, from what I have heard has to do with Offline Applications and more. My comment does not deserve to be dugg down only because you don't think that web 2.0 does mean something. So, welcome to web 3.0 disbelievers.
  • Dames, on 10/10/2007, -11/+5I've been using this for a while now. It's called Mail (or Outlook if you're on a Windows computer) and it runs on OS X.
    • bjtitus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Except this will be an offline version of the full Google App. So you can search, manage tags, and browse your contacts with full integration in the web app. Please, tell me if Mail imports all of your Labels and puts them into neat little folders. Oh, Wait.... I forgot... Gmail doesn't have IMAP support so this is impossible.
  • tybris, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9Is the wheel shinier this time?
  • realgoat21, on 10/10/2007, -5/+16....the hindustan times?
    ...really???
  • stupidpoo, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2This will be perfect now I can check for new mail anytime that I am not hooked up to the internet.
  • tomis, on 10/10/2007, -6/+9I already have an offline gMail client, it's called Mail.app

    Are people too stupid to configure their Mail clients or something? Perhaps Google should just update their help system. I was able to follow the directions fine. This seams like a major waste of their resources to me.
    • HUKI365, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1No because Mail.app sucks, and Outlook is a resource hog. Current offline mail clients suck, badly.
    • lcarsdeveloper, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7Thunderbird: Tools->Account Settings->Add Account->GMAIL!!!
      It's built in, you don't even need to know what the server addresses are! Even a 5 year old could probably get GMail to work in Thunderbird. And of course there are instructions for all other mail clients.
    • bjtitus, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Mail.app is NOT a good alternative for having a full featured offline Gmail app. Because Gmail doesn't have IMAP support, you can't manage labels or folders with Mail which will seamlessly connect to the web counterpart.
    • rinks, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yeah, that's what it is, everyone's too stupid to figure out Apple Mail.
      ...

      Personally, I like the conversation threads, the labels, the folders, etc. and don't want to reproduce them online and off.
  • bunnybash, on 10/10/2007, -6/+2buried for being stupid... what the hell do you think Gears is!?!?!?! bloody hell...
  • alpine75, on 10/10/2007, -5/+41Hindustan Times...where I get all the latest tech rumors!
  • gage006, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5Huh? I can read my gmail offline any time I want. It's called Thunderbird.
  • KevenM, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1As little as this will really affect anyone, this signifies Google being one step closer to offering more offline alternatives to other things, and hopefully, one day some sort of Google/Linux breed to not only replaces Windows, but works as well and as reliably as most Google products.
  • Joners, on 10/10/2007, -0/+8Possible client to sync the 'Gphone'?
  • astrotrain, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Offline GMail Clinet = Thunderbird with WebMail + GMail addon... nuff said (its all free and works 100%)
    • rufo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So the labels work, and sync back to gmail? You can archive messages and have that carry back to Gmail?
  • grav3k33p3r, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I'm not interested in downloading approximately 3 gigs of my mail. For me, Gmail is fine as it is...
  • DjArcadian, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0It was a given that this would eventually happen. It's good for my company which uses Google Apps for email but our field agents often encounter areas with no wireless coverage on their PC Cards. This will make life much easier for us. Can't wait until it launches. I just hope it's able to queue up sent emails and send them when it regains online connection.
  • DesuKN, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2So it's an email client. Woooo
  • squirreljam, on 10/10/2007, -5/+0Great, now I can send and receive email offline.....oh wait, *****...
    Why the hell would I want an offline email client, most retarded idea ever.
  • chubbymidget, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13What's "Offline"?
    • jkrebs1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Seriously!

      Nowadays, when my computer is offline, I spend every second trying to figure out what's wrong with my internet connection.
  • Devin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I use a beta program called Mailplane (www.mailplaneapp.com) for the Mac which is essentially a Gmail client. The main goal is simply to integrate Gmail into the operating system functions better than a browser could and it does that somewhat well. It's not as polished as it could be but most of that is due to the way Gmail is setup - something the developer has no control of. That said, I would like to see an official Google client because that would mean very good integration with the OS - which for me would be the purpose of using something like this, not just the ability to read messages offline.
  • hiro, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2Who cares, Gmail is only for giving out to places you think may spam you.

    Wait... no one actually trusts them with their regular, private email do they? Hahahahahahahahahahaha
  • bsergean, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1When are you offline today anyway ?
  • OrgasmicOrange, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0*****
  • amirjpl, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3are they gonna use Adobe Air?
  • MrViklund, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1This is the web 3.0 coming. They are already talking about it.
  • aldebaran85, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1oh, nice tool it would be i think
  • tobyadams, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0I've got a better off-line solution... IMAP for ***** sake IMAP!!!!!!!!!
  • jim1977, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Uh, yeah, click 'enable POP3...'
  • qbyte, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Fake news
  • Kericr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I have an offline client, it's called outlook.
  • maybeway36, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3I would like a Google Calendar client to run in my system tray and notify me about stuff.
  • DaleoftheUK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I already use GMail with my Mail app on my mac. The GMail filter means alot less spam in my mail inbox, so this could be cool.
  • pugsby, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1I have an offline Gmail client... It's called Outlook.
  • richardiscool, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Ah yes, The Hindustan Times - always first with the big tech news.
  • nejlepsi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2The Hindustan Times.. A really reliable source..
  • skyshock1, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1It runs on Google Gears? The browser plugin? If I have a browser open, I can open a Gmail tab pretty easily.
  • jkharris07, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0I guess that could be useful. I really don't see the point of taking your email off line though.
  • CiDaemon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thunderbird much?
  • tacotruck08, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3WHY IS GMAIL STILL IN BETA?!
  • HondaDarrell, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2What about Mozilla Thunder Bird?
  • Liv2bWild, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Secure IMAP Secure IMAP Secure IMAP Google can you hear us? Hello anybody there?
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.