# Google brings Gmail offline



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

"Google on Tuesday rolled out a new wrinkle in its Gmail service: Offline e-mail for businesses using Google Apps and for consumer Gmail users. The move was announced in a posting to the Google Enterprise blog.

With the offline service, users will be able to load Gmail in their Web browsers even if they don't have an Internet connection, and they will be able to read, star, label, archive, and organize e-mails. Offline Gmail will also allow users to compose new e-mails and move them to the Outbox, where they will wait until the user is online again to be sent."
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/infoworld/20090128/tc_infoworld/123856_1


----------



## Elvandil (Aug 1, 2003)

Not sure how this is any different from the Thunderbird that I already use offline for Gmail, but I guess it's "Google" instead of Outlook, Outlook Express, or Windows Mail.


----------



## JohnWill (Oct 19, 2002)

I was thinking the same thing. I can already do it off-line if I so choose with Thunderbird.


----------



## daniel_b2380 (Jan 31, 2003)

"'not sure of difference....."
your emails,
the BIG difference is that with thunderbird,
IT IS YOUR PROPERTY!!
if you use google,
IT IS GOOGLE'S PROPERTY!!!
.
i got a g-mail account a LONG time ago,
after reading the eula,
have yet to send or receive my first message there,
.
in fact,
when ms and google were developing the 'cloud bs'
where your medical info was stored with them,
they BOTH disclaimed being subject to the HIPA regulations,
by trying to lean on a couple technicalities,
.
neither do i use firefox because of the little-known company alliances and such,
.
oh well,
to each his own, huh???......


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

Elvandil said:


> Not sure how this is any different from the Thunderbird that I already use offline for Gmail, but I guess it's "Google" instead of Outlook, Outlook Express, or Windows Mail.





JohnWill said:


> I was thinking the same thing. I can already do it off-line if I so choose with Thunderbird.


Here is the difference:



RootbeaR said:


> With the offline service, users will be able to load Gmail *in their Web browsers even if they don't have an Internet connection*, and they will be able to read, star, label, archive, and organize e-mails. Offline Gmail will also allow users to compose new e-mails and move them to the Outbox, where they will wait until the user is online again to be sent."
> http://tech.yahoo.com/news/infoworld/20090128/tc_infoworld/123856_1


So, disconnect from the Internet and try to load Gmail in your browser. 

People who already use a POP3 mail client won't really care about this but people who use Gmail's web interface will or can care about this a lot.

Peace...


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

daniel_b2380 said:


> "'not sure of difference....."
> your emails,
> the BIG difference is that with thunderbird,
> IT IS YOUR PROPERTY!!
> ...


Hmmmm, I'm not sure about this. I've recently skimmed Gmail's EULA and it doesn't state Google "owns" anything other than the services they provide.

Peace...


----------



## alina.wilson1 (Dec 17, 2008)

Hi, 

I agree, its all about the gears which google uses ... these gears will help in working offline(when u r not connected to internet)


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

alina.wilson1 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I agree, its all about the gears which google uses ... these gears will help in working offline(when u r not connected to internet)


"Gears is an open source application that allows users offline access to Google's documents and spreadsheets. But not entirely problem-free.

Google's online office, Google Docs, enables the creation of documents on the web, allowing access from anywhere in the world. Providing the information stored isn't too sensitive, a good idea. But most users can't be online 24/7. Now they don't have to be.

With the browser plug-in, Google Gears, users can create and modify documents offline. Changes are then updated on Google servers as soon as the user is back online. The application is available for Windows, Mac and Linux.

Currently, documents can be viewed but not modified..."
http://www.linux-magazine.com/online/news/offline_access_to_google_docs_with_gears


----------



## alina.wilson1 (Dec 17, 2008)

Thanks for sharing this piece of information with us..


----------



## amanxman (Mar 28, 2006)

Love it - don't like using POP3 / IMAP as it just means having yet another software app running all the time on PC - got web open all time, so i just use web client!

They released this offline feature for Gmail on Mobile a while back - it's great, saves alot of mobile data!!!


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

daniel_b2380 said:


> "'not sure of difference....."
> your emails,
> the BIG difference is that with thunderbird,
> IT IS YOUR PROPERTY!!
> ...


"Under the terms of service, Facebook has rights to freely use anything people add to the website even after members delete material or close accounts.

"*It is common language in every website because their cut-throat lawyer says you need to cover yourself*," said Future of Privacy Forum director Jules Polonetsky.

"This doesn't mean that Facebook can make a mini-series on your life or write a book about you, but they might be able to create a feed that lets your friends on Twitter know what you're doing. Folks should just calm down.""
http://tech.yahoo.com/news/afp/20090216/tc_afp/usitinternetfacebook_20090216233634

Something tells me you have never read a EULA from MS.


----------



## daniel_b2380 (Jan 31, 2003)

rootbear,
probably a few MORE than a lot of others,
OR,
I WOULDN'T MAKE THE POSTS COMMENTING AS I DO!!!!!!!
.
in today's world,
as in direct examples on this board,
no-one seems to be able to see beyond the very tip of their nose,
and then,
OH!! WOW!! WHY DID THAT HAPPEN!!
HOW COULD THAT HAVE HAPPENED!!!
DAMN, THEY SHOULD HAVE A LAW ABOUT THAT!!!
.
and i don't feel the least bit sorry for them!!!!!!!
.
prime example of what you quoted of me saying,
[the gnail part],
and then speaking of facebook in your post,
'that doesn't mean...'
why not??
point is, THEY C A N !!!!!
[YOU DON'T SEE THE CONNECTION???????]
'...should just calm...'
yeah, right!,
.
QUOTE from my post you quoted:
oh well,
to each his own, huh???.......
.
.
besides,
just because i'm paranoid,
isn't saying they AREN'T out to get me! 
.
you have a good day, sir,


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

I think you're misunderstanding the issue we, or at least I, have with your comment above. I'm NOT saying there is NO cause for any kind of concern. I'm just saying Google does NOT *own* your e-mail as you have stated above. It sounds like Facebook is similar even though I have not read Facebook's EULA at all.

If you're concerned about Google having a license to use the e-mail content you send or receive through their e-mail service, by all means don't use their e-mail service. Just don't confuse this with them having or claiming "ownership" of that e-mail.

With regard to RootbeaR's post about Facebook, I think the point is there are limits to what Facebook or possibly even Google can do with content of yours that they have a license to use.

Peace...


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

daniel_b2380 said:


> you have a good day, sir,


You too!

I was just trying to point out Google isn't alone and why they read the way they do(bold part of my last post).

I have yet to read an EULA that I liked.

There are few options though:
Yes, I accept_
No, I do not accept_

There is no Yes, but not that part about...owning my pics: My e-mails etc...

This is public internet. I expect others, along with g-mail, own some/all of my e-mails.


----------



## daniel_b2380 (Jan 31, 2003)

i don't have a problem with understanding, OR misunderstanding,
or you having issues,
[have fun with your issues,  ]
.
i have my opinion,
you have your opinion,
YOU ARE JUST AS ENTITLED TO YOUR OPION AS I AM TO MINE!!!
semantics can be bantered back and forth,
all day long for the next whatever,
.
as for gmail,
already made my comment,
i am not CONFUSED about it,
[see above statement about opinions],
.
if someone parks a vehicle in MY driveway,
THEY give me the keys,
THEY pay for the tags,
THEY pay for the insurance,
THEY pay for the gas,
THEY pay for the maintenance,
THEY pay for....
DO I REALLY CARE WHOSE NAME IS ON THE TITLE???
.
thus when someone tries,
to compare hacking a picture site,
to storage of medical records,
wasn't monster.com just hacked, AGAIN???
what can i say?
.
i never really was a big debater,
i can listen to other's opinions,
i can state mine,
IF i hear something,
that is in direct contradiction to mine,
i do at least CONSIDER it,
do a bit more investigation,
ON MY OWN from other sources,
try to consider the differing possibilities,
but then i also try to look a bit further ahead,
than the end of my nose!!!
.
actually, this thread,
probably at this point, needs moved,
debate maybe??
.
so,
at this point,
i refer you to my second paragraph,
.
you have a good day, sir,


----------



## RootbeaR (Dec 9, 2006)

daniel_b2380 said:


> actually, this thread,
> probably at this point, needs moved,
> debate maybe??


No, this is tech related news.

You can start a new thread regarding g-mail in debate if you like.

Maybe you can request a mod to move your last few related posts too if you like.

Have a great day!


----------



## tomdkat (May 6, 2006)

daniel_b2380 said:


> i have my opinion,
> you have your opinion,
> YOU ARE JUST AS ENTITLED TO YOUR OPION AS I AM TO MINE!!!
> semantics can be bantered back and forth,
> all day long for the next whatever,


Who is questioning your having an opinion? As I posted previously, if you've got a concern about the license your grant to Google by using their services, by all means don't use their services. If you feel their license is wrong or unreasonable or unfair, you're entitled to that opinion and I've got no issue with that. I DO have issue with you misrepresenting the fact of the matter in that Google "owns" something when their EULA clearly states they do not.



> as for gmail,
> already made my comment,
> i am not CONFUSED about it,
> [see above statement about opinions],


Ok, let me ask you this: if it's your opinion that Google *owns* your e-mail, then why are you directing people to read their EULA which clearly states they don't?



> if someone parks a vehicle in MY driveway,
> THEY give me the keys,
> THEY pay for the tags,
> THEY pay for the insurance,
> ...


I guess if you tried to sell the car, that might become an issue. Using your analogy, if I park MY car in YOUR driveway and I hand you the keys and pay for everything else, do I think you _then_ own the car or do I think I'm just parking it in your driveway (for some period of time)? Additionally, by virtue of my parking my car in your driveway, do you think you now own my car? What you describe sounds like a public parking lot with an attendant. I pull into the lot, pay the fee, and hand over my keys. Does the parking lot now own my car by virtue of my parking there?



> thus when someone tries,
> to compare hacking a picture site,
> to storage of medical records,
> wasn't monster.com just hacked, AGAIN???
> what can i say?


Who compared hacking a picture site to storage of medical records? Does monster.com host photos for public access?



> i never really was a big debater,
> i can listen to other's opinions,
> i can state mine,
> IF i hear something,
> ...


That's cool, I can appreciate that. 

Peace...


----------



## TechAnarchy (Feb 17, 2009)

Wwwooowww relax


----------

