> I totally disagree with your and Microsoft's opinion on automating via the client.
How do you know what my opinion is? Did you read my mind? I don't recall stating any opinions.
> The Office clients provide a rich OM for manipulating the server back end.
For Word and Excel 2003 using VSTO 2005, that's definitely true. There are great server applications to be built with those tools.
Outlook is totally different story. The article at
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/237913/ explains some of the pitfalls, including the issue that only one instance of Outlook can be running at a time. So, whose Outlook data will the server access and what will happen to requests to access other data while that process is running?
--
Sue Mosher, Outlook MVP
Author of Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
http://www.turtleflock.com/olconfig/index.htm
and Microsoft Outlook Programming - Jumpstart for
Administrators, Power Users, and Developers
http://www.outlookcode.com/jumpstart.aspx
"John A. Bailo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Sue Mosher [MVP-Outlook] wrote:
>> See http://www.outlookcode.com/d/sec.htm for your options with regard to the "object model guard" security in Outlook 2000 SP2 and later versions.
>>
>> Have you set up Outlook 2003 to always start with the same profile? Are you performing a Namespace.Logon in your code?
>>
>> In general, Outlook is not suitable for unattended automation like your scenario.
>>
>
> I found a solution:
>
> http://www.mapilab.com/outlook/security/
>
> This free component lets me manually assign permissions to third party
> software for accessing Outlook. It worked great for my c# program.
>
> I totally disagree with your and Microsoft's opinion on automating via
> the client. This is entirely in line with the entire .NET smart client
> scenario. The Office clients provide a rich OM for manipulating the
> server back end. I find that it's much easier to design, build, debug
> around them than fighting direct connections to the server back end.
>
>