Well maybe not the end of email, but there has been a trend for awhile to hate email, and I've never quite understood it. A few weeks ago Wall Street Journal posted an article titled, "The End of the Email Era" with a few points declaring why "email no longer rules." I must say the article is a little bit overdramatic.
In its place, a new generation of services is starting to take hold--services like Twitter and Facebook and countless others vying for a piece of the new world. And just as email did more than a decade ago, this shift promises to profoundly rewrite the way we communicate--in ways we can only begin to imagine.
I do believe that Twitter and Facebook (or insert name of favorite social networking tool here) is changing the way we communicate, but that doesn't mean we're all going to stop using email any time soon. It's a shift in habits brought on by innovation in the tools we use. I check two things religiously and in parallel each and every day, Twitter and Email. In my world both services are of equal importance. Twitter is not always about trivial communication, but the type of information I get from Twitter I don't want in my inbox. Email is about communicating tasks, stuff I need to do or remember. And let's admit, there's some things we need to communicate in more than 140 characters, I need email just as much as I want Twitter.
A lot of this evaluation of email is coming at the heels of Google's new collaborative tool, Google Wave (which I'll comment on a little later in this post, but here's a short and clever YouTube video about Google Wave). TechCrunch's response to the WSJ article and the flurry around Google Wave described it as a "passive-aggressive" form of communication, while also quoting the WSJ article:
For many of us, email is simply not cutting it the way that it used to. It's a sedentary beast in a fast-moving web. It uses old principles for management, and this is leading to overload. I think the key statement in the WSJ is this:
"We all still use email, of course. But email was better suited to the way we used to use the Internet--logging off and on, checking our messages in bursts. Now, we are always connected, whether we are sitting at a desk or on a mobile phone."
That's absolutely true. But that also implies that we want some sort of always-on communication connection. I don't think that's the case. I think we want the option to communicate in real-time at will, but also the ability to communicate at our leisure at times. I would consider this to be a desire for a "passive-aggressive" method of communication. Perhaps it would be better stated as a "passive/active" method of communication, but passive-aggressive sounds better, so we'll go with that.
I think WSJ and TechCrunch are both missing the mark with email, but I do agree with TC that there are limits to the "always on" connection. The WSJ elaborates a little more by saying, "Why wait for a response to an email when you get a quicker answer over instant messaging? Thanks to Facebook, some questions can be answered without asking them." Well sure, but I still have to log in to Facebook to get the answer (oh and by the way, Facebook is a poor example because I get all my Facebook notifications through email anyway, I absolutely do not want Facebook to be my email client). Facebook is a closed platform, and another tab on my browser. WSJ also goes on to say that, "Email, stuck in the era of attachments, seems boring compared to services like Google Wave..." Collaboration isn't all about fun, it's also about getting things done... and Google Wave is still another open tab in my browser that I have to log in to (in other words it's not "always on" if I decide to close the tab).
I think email can be better, and several services are working to that goal. What I would like to have is less tabs, and a few services have emerged to re-invent email. Xobni is a tool that integrates Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, and others into Microsoft Outlook. It works ok and it's good for what it does, but the problem for me is that it's integrated into Outlook which is bloated and I hate to run. Outlook is not an "always on" application for me, but it may be for others.
I'm looking forward to Mozilla Raindrop, which isn't available yet but looks promising. If there's one reason I wouldn't use Raindrop it would be because it's a client. I am moving more web based. I've tried Thunderbird in the past for email, but because I have Outlook (and never use it anyway), I find downloading another email client excessive. I might be compelled to if it can bring together the filtering, communication tools, and prioritizing that I want from everything I use.
What Xobni and Raindrop are doing is integrating new tools with email, which is what I think should happen. Email is a base for me. This has not been Google's approach with Wave, however, and I'm a bit disappointed by this.
So my thoughts on Wave, maybe it's too early to tell, but I find it to be clunky and busy. Like I mentioned before, Wave is just another open tab in my browser. I still find Google's own mail service to be far superior to anything else out there. If Wave could be integrated with the email that I already use in some way then I might be more excited about it. I actually do find Wave a little boring, I normally only check it once, maybe twice a day, and I haven't got much value from the few threads that I'm on (other than learning how the tool works from a more mechanical perspective). That could change though once more innovative uses open up.
In the end we're going to use what we're comfortable with anyway. If somebody sends me a DM through Twitter I'll probably respond through Twitter, likewise with people who communicate through Facebook or email. The real issue isn't with the tool, it's about our habits with the tools that we use. Email isn't going anywhere, if anything it will get better and more intelligent over time.

