The information from those articles isn't the problem. Just the writing style.

They often want to tell you "We're switching from X to Y, because our use-cases aren't that of X (anymore)"

But they write it like "We're switching from X to Y and you should too, because X is really bad for everyone!"

If you ignore the holier-than-you writing style, and try to read these articles like the first example, they have some useful information :)

This might be the flip side of a certain project presentation style.

How often do you see:

"If you have use case X, SoftGood will help you solve problem Y without triggering problem Z. If you have use case K, SoftGood may not be the best fit for you."

vs

"You should use SoftPanacea -- it's design-driven, big-scale, cloud-fronked, makes your life easier, and is awesome!"

I still like them better than the "X is dead" followed by "long live X" that was a fad for a while.

I vote we focus on eliminating the most annoying of all title formats, the "gate" suffix.

No I'm not. My user data is a form of currency that I spend in the manner of my choosing. If I choose to spend it at google, it may cost more than, say, fastmail, but it's still my choice.

FastMail doesn't do free accounts for new signups any more, just 60 day trials.

:)

the points is referring to why gmail is free.

I considering switching back anyway. Fastmail search is just awful.