Hacker News Reader

Comment by ajaygoel | Hacker News Reader

Open/click tracking doesn't add much in terms of cost. That traffic is minor. The bulk of the traffic is the transmission of the emails.

View on HN

I'm confused. In another comment you said "GMass doesn't actually send any emails through its own servers."

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19211369

It composes, personalizes, and "clicks" the send button. Google/gmail actually sends the email.

Let me clarify. GMass doesn't send any email, but we do have to transmit the email to someone that does send it, hence the bandwidth costs.

If it's client side, where does this communication happen?

He makes it sound like that is all handled client side though, no? It uses the users own gmail account to send the emails.

No it's not all client side. Just the interaction with the UI is client-side. All the heavy lifting is server-side.

I am sorry if this sounds dense: But if you are sending the emails from server side, how are you getting to the user credentials / gmail login 2 step verifications etc.?

I am assuming you mean you send from the client UI but the extension talks to your server for scheduling the future sends etc. in which case you shouldn't have that much network bandwidth.

The user logs into his Gmail account on his own and uses the GMass extension, which operates within the Gmail UI, to create/schedule campaigns. On the back-end, GMass connects to the user's account over standard Google OAuth 2 to then send the emails.

Well I should have thought of Google apps . Good stuff!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com