[HN Gopher] No more "check mail from other accounts" in Gmail web
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       No more "check mail from other accounts" in Gmail web
        
       Author : sumanep
       Score  : 141 points
       Date   : 2025-10-01 16:25 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (support.google.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (support.google.com)
        
       | satisfice wrote:
       | goddamn it
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | The linked page says that Gmail is discontinuing support for the
       | old Post Office Protocol in favor of IMAP. Nobody has used POP
       | much in years. Decades, maybe.
       | 
       | IMAP can check for mail without downloading. But apparently Gmail
       | doesn't support that.
       | 
       | You can do this the other way round. Use a local email client
       | such as Thunderbird on desktop or FastMail on Android to check
       | Gmail and any other email accounts you have.
        
         | belst wrote:
         | only the phone app supports imap. the web app does not, it used
         | to support pop
        
         | OJFord wrote:
         | No, they're discontinuing POP 'import' (so mail ends up stored
         | in Gmail) configured in the web app and available everywhere,
         | in favour of IMAP client access from the mobile clients only.
         | 
         | Fine for some people, not at all equivalent for others. (I'm
         | disinterested, fwiw, haven't used Gmail other than an alumni
         | forwarding address for years.) It's not just a protocol change.
        
         | lhamil64 wrote:
         | Huh, apparently I still have a POP3 email setup in Gmail, my
         | old ISP provided email. Mildly annoying that it's going away,
         | but I never use that email anyway so I guess it's not a big
         | deal for me.
        
         | gausswho wrote:
         | TIL what POP meant after three decades. Thanks!
        
         | cosinetau wrote:
         | > Nobody has used POP much in years
         | 
         | Writing in as a current POP user. I use it to import email
         | every day.
        
         | cosmotic wrote:
         | I use POP to maintain control over my data.
        
           | mrbluecoat wrote:
           | This.
           | 
           | I use POP and Thunderbird to download all my email and erase
           | it from their servers so they can't later use it for AI
           | training, ad personalization, persona tracking, etc.
        
             | jasonfarnon wrote:
             | Unfortunately deleting your email probably doesn't "erase
             | it from their servers". This was the substance of one of
             | the old google location history lawsuits, where "erase my
             | history" only erased your device's access to it. They
             | retain a possibly transformed copy for training etc.
        
             | cortesoft wrote:
             | You don't have an ability to "erase it from their servers".
             | There is no way to be sure they actually delete anything
             | when you erase it, they could just be hiding the access.
        
         | cortesoft wrote:
         | The deprecation is about the webmail version of Gmail. You
         | can't check other accounts while using the web version of
         | Gmail.
        
         | casenmgreen wrote:
         | > Nobody has used POP much in years. Decades, maybe.
         | 
         | I use it in preference to IMAP, to reduce attack surface; to
         | get my emails off the server and down onto my laptop as quickly
         | as possible.
         | 
         | I don't like the idea of leaving all my email on a server.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | I thought they would _want_ us sucking down our external mail
       | into their system to keep us inside the wall with scannable data.
       | What the heck.
        
         | righthand wrote:
         | There's probably a security issue and the product owner can't
         | figure out how to vibe code their way out.
        
       | jeffbee wrote:
       | I guess they couldn't find anyone qualified to maintain the
       | mailfetcher.
        
         | mxuribe wrote:
         | I wonder if this is a little about storage costs? I mean, at
         | their scale, i imagine the core cost of the actual storage by
         | itself is pretty negligible...but maybe combined with other
         | infra. (beyond storage) that needs to be considered in the
         | total costs related to storing and managing POP pulls...maybe
         | their data shows that it simply wasn't worth it to them to keep
         | said functionality around? But, your comment did make me
         | chuckle a little! :-)
        
           | jjcob wrote:
           | Maybe it causes too many issues? POP is pretty unpredictable
           | when multiple clients access the same server.
        
             | mxuribe wrote:
             | Yeah, that would be a good point...like, maybe its not just
             | about cost, but more trouble than its worth. On another
             | comment i made here, i wondered if its not just storage
             | costs, but costs or *annoyance* of running infra. that
             | oversees the fetching, the storage, yada, yada...al for
             | POP, whose users leveraging said functionality are crazy
             | low.
        
           | jimrandomh wrote:
           | They already have a quota and billing framework in place for
           | email storage. If it was about storage costs, I'd expect them
           | to address it through that.
        
             | mxuribe wrote:
             | Makes sense.
        
           | jeffbee wrote:
           | The number of people who actually use this feature to fetch
           | mail into their Gmail account in the year 2025 has got to be
           | pretty damn near zero.
        
             | mxuribe wrote:
             | Yeah, i agree...which adds to my guess that its not *just*
             | about storage...but something else above/beyond storage. In
             | other words, maybe whatever infra is in place to do the
             | fetching, storing, etc...is way more costly than the
             | storage and way too costly to justify for the crazy low
             | numbers that i would agree would still be using POP in this
             | day and age and via gmail.
        
               | xp84 wrote:
               | You might be onto something here. Perhaps other mail
               | services have a habit of banning the Google mailfetcher
               | and it takes effort to get it unbanned.
        
               | mxuribe wrote:
               | > Perhaps other mail services have a habit of banning the
               | Google mailfetcher and it takes effort to get it
               | unbanned.
               | 
               | Yeah, that's a perfectly reasonable theory right there!
        
       | mustaphah wrote:
       | A quick hack: forward @yourdomain.com emails to your Gmail (e.g,
       | Cloudflare Email Routing).
       | 
       | Outbound emails sent via "Send mail as:" using SMTP remain
       | unaffected.
        
         | flakeoil wrote:
         | Or forward your gmail to another proper email domain.
        
           | mustaphah wrote:
           | I just can't live without the Gmail spamfilter. It's just the
           | best. Industry-leading; no question.
        
             | nulbyte wrote:
             | Gmail regularly lets through spam, including backscatter
             | spam from mail sent to the google.com domain spoofing Gmail
             | users. Industry-leading is not the term I would use to
             | describe their spam heuristics.
             | 
             | Grey listing has been far more effective at stopping spam
             | than some half-baked AI garbage from Google.
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | Not ideal - can't disagree. Still, it's the industry
               | leader. I'm not aware of a better spamfilter.
               | 
               | Grey listing doesn't scale; not for me.
        
               | akkartik wrote:
               | I forward everything including spam to Fastmail. Their
               | spam filter is absolutely fine. This way I don't need to
               | check for false positives in 2 places. You're probably
               | losing one genuine message a year if you don't check your
               | Gmail spam folder.
        
             | xandrius wrote:
             | Have you tried other things? And not saying just Microsoft.
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | Proton Mail is good (just not as good), but you can't
               | integrate external SMTP for outbound emails; you have to
               | pay to send from @yourdomain.com.
               | 
               | With Gmail, you can configure an external SMTP server
               | using "Send mail as" setting. Super convenient. Tons of
               | mail services offer a generous free tier for personal use
               | (e.g., Mailgun 100 emails/day).
               | 
               | It's not really worth paying just to send a few personal
               | emails from @yourdomain.com each month.
        
             | jp191919 wrote:
             | I control spam by using email aliases. And it makes it easy
             | to track exactly who leaked/sold my email address. But I
             | don't use gmail, as I value my privacy.
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | I do aliases as well. Never enough. A battle-tested
               | spammer would run s/+[^@]*// on the address before
               | sending.
        
               | lentil_soup wrote:
               | I have my own domain and just do <website-
               | name>@mydomain.com and redirect everything to the same
               | inbox sorted in folders.
               | 
               | Works pretty well, if any of those addresses gets into
               | some spam list I just block it (hasn't happened yet,
               | though)
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | Catch-all (*) setup is the best, until a spammer hits a
               | gibberish localpart (on purpose) and your domain
               | cheerfully accepts it.
               | 
               | Don't get me wrong, I use catch-all too (don't tell
               | spammers).
        
               | zamadatix wrote:
               | Subaddressing != aliasing.
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | Aliasing !== masked email
        
               | zamadatix wrote:
               | You don't need to mask an email to control spam. How you
               | proceed in using the aliases to combat spam has several
               | possible paths, but none are blocked by the regex you
               | specified for catching subaddressing.
        
               | jp191919 wrote:
               | Using passmail aliases through protonmail has worked well
               | for me, that way my domain isn't exposed. And everything
               | forwards to one inbox.
        
             | andrewshadura wrote:
             | That's what I thought too until I moved to Fastmail. It
             | certainly isn't worse.
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | Fastmail is great. It's just that I'm not willing to pay
               | 5$ each month to send 5 emails from @mydomain.com. 1$ per
               | email is too much, right?
        
             | alextingle wrote:
             | Gmail is absolutely terrible for false positives. I'm sure
             | they do it deliberately to discourage people from using
             | other e-mail services.
        
               | mustaphah wrote:
               | What's your setup? If you're forwarding, an SPF-only
               | aligned email will fail DMARC, and it's the sender's
               | fault: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45441243
               | 
               | Next time a legit email ends up in your spam folder, use
               | this tool to figure out why:
               | https://mxtoolbox.com/EmailHeaders.aspx
               | 
               | I've had a few cases myself, and it's always been the
               | sender's fault.
        
         | blibble wrote:
         | doesn't work very well these days with SPF + DKIM
        
           | mustaphah wrote:
           | Only if the sender's DMARC setup is broken...
           | 
           | If their DMARC alignment relies on SPF only, it will break.
           | But if it relies on DKIM (far more common) or both SPF and
           | DKIM (best practice), forwarding won't cause any issues.
           | 
           | If your email breaks when forwarded, your setup is broken.
           | Tons of people use Cloudflare Email Routing or similar
           | services; you must account for them.
           | 
           | That being said, I forward mail addressed @mydomain.com to my
           | Gmail, and I've had a couple of cases where legit messages
           | landed in spam because it was SPF-aligned only.
        
       | herczegzsolt wrote:
       | This will be a major inconvenience for migrating mail accounts. I
       | used the POP feature a lot to get mails from one account to the
       | other without requiring a client to do the dirty work.
       | 
       | A migration is still possible, but needing to keep a client up
       | and running to push up mails via IMAP will be a major painpoint.
        
         | xp84 wrote:
         | This sounds like an opportunity for a cool open source project:
         | A container which checks a given POP account every few minutes,
         | and copies the message into an IMAP server of your choice.
        
           | cortesoft wrote:
           | Someone created that project 29 years ago... fetchmail
           | 
           | https://www.fetchmail.info/
        
       | windows2020 wrote:
       | Back to the old Thunderbird days I guess.
        
         | fxtentacle wrote:
         | By now, it's new and quite neat :)
        
         | bcrl wrote:
         | Some of us are still using mutt!
        
       | jimrandomh wrote:
       | I can't tell whether I use this; the description in the article
       | sort-of matches a feature I use, but not exactly. The feature I
       | use is labelled "Check mail from other accounts" and appears in
       | the "Accounts and Import" tab in Gmail web; it causes Gmail to
       | periodically retrieve emails from an external server using POP,
       | and merge them into my main inbox. This article refers to the
       | option "Check mail from other accounts", which matches, but also
       | says "POP only works with a single device", which is false (wrt
       | this feature) and makes me think it may be talking about
       | something different.
       | 
       | I'm hearing about this for the first time from HN (not from
       | Google). I don't like having Google randomly drop IT tasks on my
       | plate, and the possibility that emails might just silently stop
       | being delivered is nighmarish. Sigh.
        
         | iLoveOncall wrote:
         | The top comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45440465
         | makes it clear that what you're referring to is exactly what is
         | being deprecated.
        
           | jimrandomh wrote:
           | No it doesn't make it clear, because it's written by a third
           | party reading the same internally-inconsistent page I am; any
           | information added beyond the Google documentation page is
           | conjecture.
        
             | znort_ wrote:
             | "Gmail will no longer support checking emails from third-
             | party accounts through POP." seems quite clear.
        
               | mschuster91 wrote:
               | Good god Google can't be bothered to _not_ wreck shit
               | that doesn 't cost them much, eh?
               | 
               | Doesn't surprise me too much though, Gmail hasn't seen
               | much maintenance and polish over the last few years.
        
               | VladVladikoff wrote:
               | Personally I'm happy about it. It's the kick in the butt
               | I needed to get my last remaining crap off Google and
               | shut down my accounts for good.
        
         | sixhobbits wrote:
         | I use exactly this on my personal (free) and work (paid
         | workspace) accounts. I got an official notification from Google
         | that one member in my workspace (me) has used the feature in
         | the last 30 days and will be affected. I didn't (yet) get a
         | notification on my personal account.
         | 
         | I also rely pretty heavily on this feature for a few very low
         | traffic domains that I need but only have super set up on super
         | clunky web mail, so I guess I'm in the market for a new mail
         | client :(
        
           | pmontra wrote:
           | Maybe you can automatically forward mails from that domain to
           | Gmail and find a way to label them.
           | 
           | At worst you can write a mail client to do that by logging
           | in, listing mails, mailing them to you and keeping track of
           | what it already sent (sqlite?) They are very well known
           | protocols with plenty of implementations, so probably a LLM
           | can write the code with not much guidance.
        
             | HumanOstrich wrote:
             | Good luck getting consistent delivery to Gmail. Even
             | Cloudflare's email forwarding keeps getting blocked /
             | marked as spam.
        
           | ahofmann wrote:
           | I switched from Google workspace to zoho.com Zoho is dirt
           | cheap and has great tools to import all my mail, contacts and
           | calendar data.
        
         | Navarr wrote:
         | I imagine the "POP only works with a single device" is in
         | reference to the Gmail App's support for POP
         | 
         | POP access of a different account on the web would be the
         | "Check mail from other accounts"
        
       | mobilene wrote:
       | Well _this_ is a pisser for sure. I've relied on POP3 email
       | transfer for years and years so that I have one mailbox to check:
       | Gmail.
        
         | leptons wrote:
         | I use Firebird and have it check my various Gmail accounts
         | using imap, as well as non-google email accounts. Everything in
         | one place.
        
       | zwieback wrote:
       | Learned from this post that Gmail web had POP! Now I'll be
       | mourning loss of a feature I never even used.
        
       | Dwedit wrote:
       | You can still use a third-party mail client to POP off the
       | server, then use IMAP to send it to Gmail.
        
       | Fire-Dragon-DoL wrote:
       | Oh damn.I need to migrate everything.
        
       | xp84 wrote:
       | Hypothesis: This feature is actually a very serviceable way for a
       | small business or individual to have a branded email address on
       | very cheap email hosting, while getting Gmail features for free.
       | Google wants such people to be paying for Google Workspace if
       | they don't want to be advertising the Gmail brand on their
       | address.
        
         | czechdeveloper wrote:
         | They did the same with free version of Google Workspace. It's
         | just no longer free.
        
         | beejiu wrote:
         | Doesn't Google Workspace start at $7 per month? I can't see a
         | business user going to those lengths to save $1 or $2 per
         | month.
        
           | ocdtrekkie wrote:
           | I know businesses that use Gmail and have all their staff
           | make username.businessname@gmail.com addresses.
           | 
           | Do not bet against how much small businesses don't want to
           | pay for stuff, you will always lose.
        
             | cj wrote:
             | The bigger cost of Google Workspace is the administrative
             | overhead.
             | 
             | The admin panel for Google Workspace is extremely powerful.
             | Hundreds/thousands of settings. Great for medium/large
             | businesses with a dedicated IT person. A huge headache for
             | small businesses.
        
               | ocdtrekkie wrote:
               | I think a minimum of being able to shut down an account
               | when you fire someone and delete the data is worth having
               | manageability, but small businesses will do anything,
               | even additional staff administrative overhead, to avoid
               | paying a subscription.
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | I always find the admin panel hugely restrictive. It's
               | missing basic features like "just let me impersonate this
               | user now".
               | 
               | The number of times our support staff have to walk
               | someone through the process of doing something when the
               | ability to impersonate a user would just let them do it
               | far quicker.
        
         | tln wrote:
         | Very cheap email hosting still generally comes with IMAP I
         | think? Which gmail is still supporting. EG Namecheap $1/mo
         | email comes with IMAP.
        
           | cracki wrote:
           | How is google mail still supporting a "fetch" via IMAP of
           | mails stored in a third party service? What are the settings
           | to poke on mail.google.com for this?
           | 
           | The announcement clearly says that "Check mail from other
           | accounts" will disappear. They say it's about POP, but if the
           | entire feature disappears, then it's not just about POP.
        
       | lxgr wrote:
       | What in the world was "Gmailify"? Was it different from adding
       | third-party accounts via POP? (Was it maybe just IMAP for third-
       | party accounts?)
        
       | bound008 wrote:
       | I'm not one to defend google, but it seems that they are only
       | ending support for POP accounts, and retaining support for
       | IMAP/SMTP. Seems like a reasonable deprecation for 2025, although
       | they could have given more than a quarter to let people handle
       | the change.
        
         | bigwheels wrote:
         | But why do they need to remove the functionality? It's been
         | working fine for around 2 decades.
         | 
         | As a user of the feature, this is supremely annoying. They
         | didn't even send me a warning message it will be discontinued.
        
       | timbre1234 wrote:
       | Fetchmail ftw
        
       | MarkusWandel wrote:
       | Aaaah, OK. So connecting _to_ Gmail via POP is still going to
       | work. I use that with a (otherwise rarely used) Thunderbird
       | instance to keep a live backup of my mail. Because I 'm old
       | enough that I don't feel I "own" my data unless it's on a storage
       | device I own.
        
       | cracki wrote:
       | There are two "Gmail" things here: the actual service with a web
       | site (mail.google.com), and an android app on your phone that is
       | called "Gmail".
       | 
       | They are axing the "pull" path of the actual service. That path
       | only supported POP for pulling those mails. There never was an
       | IMAP pull path.
       | 
       | They are telling you to read your mails of the "other" account by
       | configuring your Gmail app to access it via IMAP. That obviously
       | won't import those mails from the other account into your Gmail
       | account.
       | 
       | The solution is to push. Configure whatever system handles the
       | "other" mail address to _forward_ the mails to your Gmail
       | account.
        
       | jaykru wrote:
       | RIP gomailify :( https://www.gomailify.com
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-10-01 23:02 UTC)