Who can suggest an ethical SMTP provider for low volume transactional mail? I’m willing to pay up to 2€/month for a few hundred mails per month.

  • FlightyPenguin@lemmy.worldEnglish
    8·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know what you mean by “ethical”, but I use Sendgrid. They have a free tier that can send up to 100 emails a day.

      • tofubl@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
        3·
        2 months ago

        EU servers might be worth something to some people, depending on where they are in the world. And while 190% is indeed “way more expensive”, relatively speaking, it’s still “well under” your goal of EUR 2 per month.

        • callcc@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          2·
          2 months ago

          That’s actually a good point. Will need to think about server location and GDPR compliance.

    • gramie@lemmy.caEnglish
      2·
      2 months ago

      I use Brevo as well. Free tier: 300 emails per day.

      Very happy with them.

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      Amazing! Now this is something I haven’t heard of. I think we might have a winner here! Best thing, I could use it for transactional mail on all my websites for 10€/yr. Including as many inboxes as needed. Nice!

  • hendrik@palaver.p3x.deEnglish
    4·
    2 months ago

    You could use some containerized mail server like Mailcow. They’re pretty alright to set up and should work fine for low volume. At least in my experience. Unless you don’t want to deal with mail yourself, then you should maybe consider a paid service. But I don’t have any experience with those.

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      6·
      2 months ago

      I specifically want to not deal with deliverability beyond the content and volume of my mails.

    • wraith@lemm.eeEnglish
      3·
      2 months ago

      I’ll second PurelyMail. Easy to set up and they have explainers for all the various settings. I pay $10 a year for “unlimited” domains and mailboxes (some caveats but for minimal mail we won’t hit any limits).

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      2·
      2 months ago

      Agreed, and well-articulated. I think you (OP) need to ask yourself whether you’re willing to pay the appropriate market rate for the service or not. I don’t know what that is, but I expect it’s higher than you’ve expressed.

      • callcc@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        Have a look at purelymail mentioned by others. It’s almost exactly what I’m looking for.

        • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
          1·
          2 months ago

          Also, we’re in beta

          That means there might be a few hiccups along the way. If you run across any problems you can always let us know, and we’ll do our best to fix them.

          I would have thought this is a disqualifier in terms of quality of the service, but if that’s acceptable to you then I’m glad you got something that works.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.worldEnglish
    17·
    2 months ago

    “Low volume” vs. “A few hundred mails per month”

    OK, what of the above?

    • kevincox@lemmy.mlEnglish
      5·
      2 months ago

      A few hundred a month is just a few per day. That is pretty low volume by most standards.

      I would say in general if the SMTP server could be replaced by a single human writing and mailing snail-mail letters by hand it qualifies as low volume.

    • callcc@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      2·
      2 months ago

      This is something you used to be able to do for free, no problem. It’s only a few of the big mail accepting companies being extra shitty about accepting mail making this tough. Looking at you Microsoft. So a few hundred mails per month is ridiculous both on storage, bandwidth and CPU consumption.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        2 months ago

        I know. I was there, before Sanford Wallace invented the email spam and forced any sane SMTP server into password protections and whitelists.