OK, just admit that Outlook's lame--and fix it, already
Smart e-mail may be a contradiction in terms, but let's get a show of hands: how many of you believe Microsoft is going to supply the answer?
I didn't think so.
When the company brain trust repairs to the Ballmer Bunker to chew over its next big idea, post-Yahoo, I've got a suggestion: how about doing something to deal with e-mail and its discontents? Something grand--like bringing Microsoft Outlook into the 21st century. I don't mean a tweak here and there; I'm talking about a top-to-bottom overhaul.
The product debuted in 1997 and has improved very little since. Given the absence of real competition for most of the last decade, you shouldn't be surprised at the glacial pace of improvement. We saw the same thing in the browser market after Microsoft disposed of Netscape (though perhaps the nascent rivalry with Google's Gmail is a harbinger of change.)
I was talking earlier with Rafe Needleman, who runs our sister site Webware, about Outlook and its discontents. Rafe noted that while Outlook is the most important application in the business world, the product still remains flawed in any number of ways. At one time, Microsoft had ambitions to build Outlook into a platform. Unfortunately, developers found the APIs difficult to use and nothing much happened.
But it's best to forget about waiting for incremental improvements. Rafe correctly observed that Microsoft can't fix Outlook without a complete rewrite. His conclusion is that you can't patch and make it better. (Listen to our conversation at the tail end of today's News.com daily podcast. For a deeper dive, check out this compendium of "Tech Nightmares" that CNET put together four years ago. The shame is that it remains as relevant today.)
The answers more likely will come from start-ups like Xobni and others investigating ways to add more intelligence to the program. Good luck to any third party that can manage that trick. What with a growing backlog of unread e-mails in my in-box--not to mention the daily dose of spam--users deserve a smarter Outlook that better prioritized and understood the tapestry of shared relationships between people.
Xobni, which came out of beta testing today, has received a bounty of attention because its backers include Vinod Khosla and Niklas Zennstrom. (Getting a freebee compliment from Bill Gates hasn't hurt.)
The challenge for Xobni and the rest is how to build a business that can scale. In the end, Microsoft will wind up spending some of the newly freed $42 billion in its coffers to buy Xobni or some other lucky third-party developers. Then we have to cross our fingers and pray that corporate infighting at the mother ship doesn't make a hash of it all. (I know. That's little help in the near-term. In the meantime, CNET's Josh Lowensohn has a great piece on favorite in-box work-arounds used by some of the folks at Microsoft.)
Charles Cooper has covered technology and business for more than 25 years. Before joining CNET News, he worked at the Associated Press, Computer & Software News, Computer Shopper, PC Week, and ZDNet. E-mail Charlie. 
Have you used Outlook recently? IMHO, the 2007 version is excellent. Search works well, the group by date view is a lifesaver and side-by-side calendar views are great. Also, I'm a big fan of displaying two time zones in my calendar. I just don't see it. In my view, Outlook is the second best product that Microsoft makes besides Excel.
So i just don't get it i guess. Whats the problem? I love outlook, I use it daily on two computers and a PDA, both for multiple email accounts and calender / contact use.
If you are going to call for a complete re-write of outlook, AT LEAST write about problems you have with it, or features that you would like to see added. All in all this article is worthless. If you are going to write, at least say something.
So i just don't get it i guess. Whats the problem? I love outlook, I use it daily on two computers and a PDA, both for multiple email accounts and calender / contact use.
If you are going to call for a complete re-write of outlook, AT LEAST write about problems you have with it, or features that you would like to see added. All in all this article is worthless. If you are going to write, at least say something.
Be careful what you wish for.
I will have to say I think Outlook Web Access (OWA) needs some more improvement, but the Exchange 2007 version is really nice. It would be nice if they could throw all of the Outlook Desktop Features into the Web Client.
With a handle like "Unbuntuboy," I'm supposed to take you seriously talking about Windows? Puh-lease.
Always come back to Outlook.
Next moronic statement?
I can not say Outlook 2007 is perfect but still, in my oppinion, is the best out there.
I've NEVER had Thunderbird crash, though I am using the 3.0prealpha1 version right now, that is loads better than the 2.0 version.
As to the multi-lingual problems...... that is a problem with Windows PERIOD. Some programs I run that were made in Japan and China.... the language and text in them doesn't display correctly in non-Japanese mode, and when I switch to Japanese mode..... a lot of programs have problems because they are locked to the non-Unicode settings.
I don't know whether to blame Microsoft for that, or blame the makers of those programs for that problem.
As far as Jack's comment is concerned, I'm not a developer but Outlook's functionality is integrated entirely throughout our organization. Reserving an InFocus or a laptop on our intranet adds the event to your calendar. Opening a trouble ticket sends an Outlook task to a technician, and when the task is marked as completed an email survey is automatically sent back to the user. Scheduling a meeting puts your phone in "Meeting" mode when the meeting begins and takes it out of meeting mode when it ends. I'm not sure what you're expecting Outlook to do for you but it's more than adequate for our organization. Just my two cents...
Microsoft wants to bludgeon its loyal customers and former allies like Yahoo instead of fixing products like Outlook and Outlook express to attract a willing partner instead.
What worries me about this product is that the privacy policy doesn't make it clear if they collect information from the body of your e-mail and if not, if they plan to do so in the future. I have confidential communications with my clients that I don't want some cubicle jockey reading over as they sell it to some ads database like Google.
I think people are giving up privacy too easily for a few little gizmos. I am willing to go back to a paper calendar and address book if these jerks take this even one step further. It's already getting way out of hand.
I think people should stop using credit and debit cards to buy anything and should avoid surfing the net without using someone else's unlocked WiFi network. The combinations of these marketing databases is just too disturbing. The average marketer will have a more intimate understanding of a person's habits soon than the person himself. A marketer will be able to look back five or ten years and run reports on everything a person has bought during that time, vacations, drinking, prescriptions, what sort of food a person eats, where you drive and when from gas purchases, toll and parking receipts, etc. I don't want anyone to be able to "offer me great products and services targeted specifically to my needs!"
That's a lot of crap. It's targeted to your vulnerabilities and insecurities. Some of them you don't even know about and the marketers already know. The most intimate relationship a person will have pretty soon is with the marketing algorithm that generates call and talk scripts for salespeople to use when talking to you. Reject it before it's too late.
If these folks promised in their privacy policy to never ever data mine your e-mail for search terms, catalog your e-mail lists, contacts lists and other information for marketing purposes, I might consider it, but Courts are so light on privacy policy violations because they've held in the past that the person suing couldn't prove any harm or damages. The court reasoned that a mere violation of one's privacy wasn't a real harm in the post modern world.
We can't rely on the Congress or courts to fix this. The only way is to reject all of it.
Sorry, but if you aren't encrypting your messages nothing is confidential. The admins of both your server and your clients can easily read your messages as well as anyone on any Internet segment between you and your client.
Email is more public than a postcard so don't let privacy issues influence your thoughts about this software.
- by rmva May 5, 2008 7:26 PM PDT
- "When the company brain trust repairs to the Ballmer Bunker to chew over its next big idea, post-Yahoo, I've got a suggestion: how about doing something to deal with e-mail and its discontents? Something grand--like bringing Microsoft __________ into the 21st century. I don't mean a tweak here and there; I'm talking about a top-to-bottom overhaul."
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 3 pages (66 Comments)Just fill in the blank. No documentation necessary. We'll call it Coop's Club. Everyone is welcome to join.