| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Tech legend takes on Outlook | |
|
||
| Time: 11:56 EST/16:56 GMT | News Source: MSNBC | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
Thanks James: Mitch Kapor, the software pioneer who introduced such trailblazing products as Lotus’ Notes, Agenda and 1-2-3 spreadsheet, is back for another battle with mighty Microsoft Corp. Kapor’s latest effort, an open-source “interpersonal” information manager, has been under development for more than a year but doesn’t yet exist. Yet already there are expectations it could challenge Outlook, the industry heavyweight. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 173 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:34:48 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 11/7/2002 12:47:07 PM |
| Good :) |
| #2 By 1845 (12.254.162.111) at 11/7/2002 12:49:43 PM |
| Didn't Mitch say that this was not even intended to compete with Outlook? If what we've seen from th OSS folks in the past is any indication of the future, it'll be five or so years before this product begins to approach the quality of the current version of Outlook. |
| #3 By 2960 (156.80.64.132) at 11/7/2002 1:48:12 PM |
|
Well, it is obvious to anyone who has taken a trip through Outlook's Options panes that Microsoft doesn't have a clue about user friendliness or good interface design yet.
Preferences don't get much uglier or difficult than Outlooks, though Office gives it a run for the money. The Grand-Poobah of bad preferences design is still, IMHO, Agent (Newsreader). IMHO. TL |
| #4 By 3653 (63.162.177.140) at 11/7/2002 2:39:46 PM |
| BobSmith, yes thats what Mitch indicated. |
| #5 By 135 (209.180.28.6) at 11/7/2002 2:55:17 PM |
|
James - I'm not sure that even younger generations will get used to options.
Making an apt customizable is both a boon and a bane. People ask why computers are so hard, and it's the customization that causes this. But that also makes the computer friendlier to some users. The key has got to be to make this easier to get to, and more explanable. One of outlooks problems is many of the options are not explained well. |
| #6 By 2960 (156.80.64.132) at 11/7/2002 3:07:27 PM |
|
#7,
Well, to find really good UI development, you have to look at software designed for the Mac. In _most_ cases, it not only makes sense, and is easy to utilize, but it's consistent amongst applications. However, to _me_, on the PC side I've always been quite fond of the interface used in Lavasoft's AdAware. Not sure why, it just feel's right. TL |
| #7 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 11/7/2002 3:55:37 PM |
|
Tech: Outlook settings are consistant with every version.
Not to say that Outlook's UI is perfect, there are parts that have check boxes that should be radio buttons, and some of the options/preferences are spread out throught the app.... but the basic UI of Outlook is great (especially Outlook 11... but I won't go into details about that). Eyecandy does not a good UI make. |
| #8 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/7/2002 4:21:53 PM |
|
CPU, "consistent with every version"? Are you kidding? Just a quick examples: upgraded to XP last week, I don't use sigs always so I prefer to insert them: last week I could go to Insert or insert through the paperclip/attach icon. Now in XP... where have insert signatures gone? I can't find them... I've created sigs but I have to set them either as a send default or a reply/forward default. Where did the insert go? And doesn't it make sense to offer this under "Insert"?
Not only is it inconsistent, it just doesn't make sense. |
| #9 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 11/7/2002 4:24:01 PM |
| Insert>Auto Text>Signiture |
| #10 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/7/2002 4:34:55 PM |
|
I was hoping you would answer that, because why is it that under autotext, it doesn't display my sigs. Under options... Email Signatures, I have 4 sigs that don't display in the Autotext menu; and under Email Sigs it doesn't display my AutoText Sigs. What I get for my sig is my Windows Login Name! For Real? Who the hell would want to use the network username as a signature? What I want are my "Email Signatures." I don't want to have to duplicate these in two disparate locations. I don't want two confusing maethods of doing the same thing but differently. Nevermind getting into the issue of how poorly AutoText is designed as an interface. How do I create new AutoText and specify them as Signatures? (nevermind the computer I'm on is unable to activate the "Add..." button--do you need local admin rights or something?...) And AutoText? Give me a freaking break! I'm talking about sigs which should be stored as email preferences... not bits of text stored in either a workgroup or local word template. That's a lousy, lousy feature change. And clearly they are being inconsistent, pushing AutoText functionlaity where it wasn't before--so why leave the old sigs around? What's their purpose? Why can't I insert them? 98% of the AutoText entries are useless to me... so why can't I have a separate Insert entry for Sigs which shouldn't be treated as AutoText in the first place?
Clearly, I've already shown that it is inconsistent between versions. You just helped me show that it's even more poorly designed than I had previously cared to discern... And that's just ONE feature! This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, November 07, 2002 at 16:42. |
| #11 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/7/2002 5:04:24 PM |
|
Another beef: this probably isn't Outlook's fault, maybe it is, but why is it that under XP, when you do a "Send to..." out of an Office App and presumably other apps too, and you close the draft before sending it, it appears in your Inbox as Unsent? What the hell does that mean, and what was somebody thinking? Put the freaking drafts in Drafts, morons at MS!!! No reason to change it! This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, November 07, 2002 at 17:06. |
| #12 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/7/2002 6:58:52 PM |
|
oakfed, thanks. Not sure what you mean by Word Mail, but I changed Tools.... >> Mail Format >> Use Microsoft Office to edit email messages, and that did it. Very intuitive!
As for your theories about MAPI (we'll stick to UI design and avoid the issue of that fscked protocol), this isn't the case as "Send to..." saved Drafts in Drafts with Win2000 as you would expect. |
| #13 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/7/2002 7:03:37 PM |
|
You can't reproduce it though? That's confusing, and Wordmail isn't related either as it is shut off.
All I am doing is right-clicking on a word, excel, or powerpoint doc, or even an access object and sending it as an attachment, give it a to: address and some body text, and close it, it asks you if you want to save the "DRAFT", then switch to Outlook, that Unsent Message appears in the Inbox. That's the behavior I'm getting. Any tips would be appreciated. |
| #14 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/7/2002 7:55:02 PM |
|
oakfed and CPU, but in terms of inconsistency, this worked properly with Win2000--so I don't see how it can be a MAPI or CMC issue if they were used in Win2000 as well.
"I was trying to do File, Send To from inside an office app rather than using the Send To Mail Recipient option on a file in Explorer." Works the same way both ways for me--I wasn't referring to doing it from Explorer. |
| #15 By 2960 (68.100.157.191) at 11/8/2002 7:57:51 AM |
|
#13,
Yes, you are right. They are consistent from version to version. Consistently in the same screwed up order and design. Don't get me wrong. I use Outlook every single day and I don't know of any other email program that I'd change to (though Mozilla is damned close to getting the job). But the options panes of Outlook are incredibly confusing to the average user, and it generates an awful lot of support requests. TL |
| #16 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 11/8/2002 10:35:52 AM |
|
soda: For the unsent items, go to Tools>Options>E-mail Options>Adv. E-Mail Options
On the top it has save unsent to: By default it is on Drafts, yours must have gotten changed (at least, in Office 11 it is on Drafts). |
| #17 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/8/2002 12:34:56 PM |
|
No, CPU, doesn't work. It's already set to draft. I think oakfed's theory is right and there is no control for it through the "Send to..." Command.
So, CPU, do you consider the drilldown of tools >> options >> email options > advanced email options good UI? Pretty nonsensical to me! Iguess we all need a little bit of whimsy in our corporate lives though, huh? |
| #18 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 11/8/2002 12:43:15 PM |
| Actually, I think it's good, it's broken down for ease of use. |
| #19 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/8/2002 1:12:42 PM |
| And you think this breakdown is meaningful? What makes tracking less advanced than where drafts are stored? |
| #20 By 61 (65.32.170.1) at 11/8/2002 3:59:08 PM |
|
I do think it should be in the advanced, but that's neither here nor there, the option for tracking is less available than if it was in adv. options. Or perhaps, they thought that the tracking option is used more than the other things, and thus, since more people take advantage of the feature, it isn't as advanced.
You aren't the only person that uses the application. This post was edited by CPUGuy on Friday, November 08, 2002 at 15:59. |
| #21 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/8/2002 4:57:28 PM |
|
"You aren't the only person that uses the application."
Touchy, touchy, CPU--you are the one who wanted to defend their UI. I'm not suggesting my way would be the best, but I think it's clear their breakdowns, naming, inconsistencies, etc.. are atrocious. This is UI design. What feature do I want? How do I get there? How do I use it? How does it interact with other features? I'm not even hitting on big problems with the design (but I could). The interface is simply atrocious. oakfed, thanks for testing... maybe you are right and I'm remembering it incorrectly. Still--poorly designed--how can anything that you are sending (but not to yourself) and haven't sent end up in the Inbox? I also think it's funny that Outlook's security defaults will block web pages "Send to... (as a link)" --then why offer the option? -- but will not block a link you paste in... I was really getting used to using "Send to...," now it seems like a complete joke. Thanks for the background info oakfed. This post was edited by sodajerk on Friday, November 08, 2002 at 17:39. |
| #22 By 3339 (65.198.47.10) at 11/8/2002 8:06:52 PM |
|
oakfed, we're on the same page, man.
"At least with Outlook XP you can edit the list of blocked attachment file types, and get the Send as Link to work again. See http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=KB;EN-US;290497& There's also third-party tools to edit the list of blocked file types without having to play in the registry." I know--I did this yesterday, by both methods--the little DetachXP.exe file and by editing the registry. Good enough for me... How the hell do I get the average user at my company to understand this? Not easy. And yet another minor example of poor UI/feature design. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 173 Last | Next |
The time now is
9:34:48 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
