G
Guest
Compare Outlook to OE. The ONLY advantage that OE has is the newsreader.
Outlook should be able to log to a newsgroup without the assistance of OE.
Outlook should be able to log to a newsgroup without the assistance of OE.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
G
George Hester
I agree. The only thing I can think of why it has not been done is because of either the close association
Outlook needs with Exchange or the fact that Outlook is an Extended MAPI based application. OEX is
not. So having MAPI functionality may result in this lack of news protocol recognition in Outlook. It would
be nice if someone more knowledgable could give their educated guess why Outlook has never had news
protocol functionality. Technical or otherwise.
Outlook needs with Exchange or the fact that Outlook is an Extended MAPI based application. OEX is
not. So having MAPI functionality may result in this lack of news protocol recognition in Outlook. It would
be nice if someone more knowledgable could give their educated guess why Outlook has never had news
protocol functionality. Technical or otherwise.
E
Erronius
I agree. The only thing I can think of why it has not been done is because
of either the close association
Outlook needs with Exchange or the fact that Outlook is an Extended MAPI
based application. OEX is
not. So having MAPI functionality may result in this lack of news protocol
recognition in Outlook. It would
be nice if someone more knowledgable could give their educated guess why
Outlook has never had news
protocol functionality. Technical or otherwise.
Certainly a good part of the reason is OL is designed for enterprise and
managers don't want their employees sitting around reading newsgroup
messages all day.
of either the close association
Outlook needs with Exchange or the fact that Outlook is an Extended MAPI
based application. OEX is
not. So having MAPI functionality may result in this lack of news protocol
recognition in Outlook. It would
be nice if someone more knowledgable could give their educated guess why
Outlook has never had news
protocol functionality. Technical or otherwise.
Certainly a good part of the reason is OL is designed for enterprise and
managers don't want their employees sitting around reading newsgroup
messages all day.
G
George Hester
And so Microsoft is obliging? Mmmm...
D
Don Caton
Compare Outlook to OE. The ONLY advantage that OE has is the newsreader.
Outlook should be able to log to a newsgroup without the assistance of OE.
From time to time there is speculation in this group as well as others
as to why Outlook doesn't have newsreading capabilities. The truth is
nobody really knows except those at MS who make those decisions.
There's no technical reason why it can't be done; it already has by
myself and a couple of other 3rd party vendors.
You can check out ours at the url below. You can find a complete list
of all of them at: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/olexpr.htm
B
Brian Tillman
George Hester said:And so Microsoft is obliging? Mmmm...
Since this newsgroup isn't a Microsoft support channel, it's unlikely
requests made here will ever be implemented.
G
Guest
Hmmm...
1. I agree with George that Outlook and OE are two different products, one
designed for Exchange Servers and the other for basic Internet use....
However....
Adding a newsreader capabilities to what is basically and enterprise e-mail
client should still be a no-brainer. You don't mix the code... they stay
separate - different protocols, file storage (also different format), etc.
You just add the facility for the newsreader.
2. Many technical enterprises, (engineering, medical) USE news groups.
News groups started out with folk with pocket protectors and horn-rimmed
glasses. (brings a tear to my eye...)
1. I agree with George that Outlook and OE are two different products, one
designed for Exchange Servers and the other for basic Internet use....
However....
Adding a newsreader capabilities to what is basically and enterprise e-mail
client should still be a no-brainer. You don't mix the code... they stay
separate - different protocols, file storage (also different format), etc.
You just add the facility for the newsreader.
2. Many technical enterprises, (engineering, medical) USE news groups.
News groups started out with folk with pocket protectors and horn-rimmed
glasses. (brings a tear to my eye...)
J
Jeff Stephenson [MSFT]
From time to time there is speculation in this group as well as others
as to why Outlook doesn't have newsreading capabilities. The truth is
nobody really knows except those at MS who make those decisions.
Well, I don't make those decisions and I'm not speaking for Microsoft, but
I'll offer my *personal* viewpoint from someone that's been in Outlook
through three release cycles:
Before every release cycle, a whole pile of really cool or useful features
are proposed. During every release cycle the majority of those proposals
are cut because there aren't sufficient resources to implement them.
Given that Windows already ships a free newsreader (OE), that other free
newsreaders are readily available, and that there are third-party products
like yours that can drop news posts into Outlook, why should we divert
resources to a newsreader, rather than tackling things that *aren't*
readily available?
I (personally, mind you) think there are much better uses of our
resources...
G
Guest
Since I suggested it, I'll continue the debate in the hopes that commons
sense pervails....
This issue doesn't warrant a huge effort that can be spent on other more
worthy tasks, (spam, security issues, etc.). I made the suggestion because
in fact I do not believe it is a huge effort. The code exists. It is a
matter of using the GUI to bridge mail and newreader seamlessly. Simple.
Why bother? Because there is a trend in software development that is
disturbing. The average home PC has become a battle ground where cheap
garbage software often in the guise of useful utilities, corrupts the OS.
Why do so many people download Spyware laden search bars? Because IE
natively lacks the utility of a package like Mozilla's Firefox, (which has an
RSS reader, tabbed browser, etc.). It is arguable that together with
Thunderbird, it is a better and more secure pairing than IE and Outlook.
Your solution is to download and install OE. In line with that reasoning,
Microsoft even links to third party plug-in programs for IE... so you can
download and install even more programs, some good, and some catastrophically
bad. The average person doesn't know the difference. It isn't until the
Spyware has brought his system to a grinding halt, that he realizes the mess
he is in.
But that's OK... MS is going into the "Anti-Spyware" business. Download away!
sense pervails....
This issue doesn't warrant a huge effort that can be spent on other more
worthy tasks, (spam, security issues, etc.). I made the suggestion because
in fact I do not believe it is a huge effort. The code exists. It is a
matter of using the GUI to bridge mail and newreader seamlessly. Simple.
Why bother? Because there is a trend in software development that is
disturbing. The average home PC has become a battle ground where cheap
garbage software often in the guise of useful utilities, corrupts the OS.
Why do so many people download Spyware laden search bars? Because IE
natively lacks the utility of a package like Mozilla's Firefox, (which has an
RSS reader, tabbed browser, etc.). It is arguable that together with
Thunderbird, it is a better and more secure pairing than IE and Outlook.
Your solution is to download and install OE. In line with that reasoning,
Microsoft even links to third party plug-in programs for IE... so you can
download and install even more programs, some good, and some catastrophically
bad. The average person doesn't know the difference. It isn't until the
Spyware has brought his system to a grinding halt, that he realizes the mess
he is in.
But that's OK... MS is going into the "Anti-Spyware" business. Download away!
J
Jeff Stephenson [MSFT]
This issue doesn't warrant a huge effort that can be spent on other more
worthy tasks, (spam, security issues, etc.). I made the suggestion because
in fact I do not believe it is a huge effort. The code exists. It is a
matter of using the GUI to bridge mail and newreader seamlessly. Simple.
If I've learned anything in 30 years of software development, it's that
nothing is ever even close to as simple as it seems. Just a few things
that pop to mind besides the obvious work of implementing all the NNTP
protocol stuff: work to add NNTP account types in the account management
UI, integrate them into send/receive groups, make sure rules work (add new
rule triggers/actions?). Should you be able to post a meeting request to a
newsgroup and receive it into your calendar? What about tasks? And that
doesn't even begin to get into the myriad of potential interactions with
the many other aspects of Outlook...
Your solution is to download and install OE.
Not at all. OE ships as part of Windows - you actually have to go to a bit
of effort to *remove* it from Windows, rather than effort to get it.
D
Don Caton
Given that Windows already ships a free newsreader (OE), that other free
newsreaders are readily available, and that there are third-party products
like yours that can drop news posts into Outlook, why should we divert
resources to a newsreader, rather than tackling things that *aren't*
readily available?
I (personally, mind you) think there are much better uses of our
resources...
I agree. I'd like to see you guys document the changes made to the MAPI
subsystem that were done in Outlook 2002. Bringing the Outlook object
model up to the level of the object models in other Office products
would be nice. Scrapping the antiquated and frustrating forms designer
would be nice. Or scrapping MAPI altogether. The MAPI documentation is
nearly a decade old, obsolete in many places, and is extremely
frustrating to use. But we have no alternative, if we want to do
anything non-trivial.
Any chance of these things happening?
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.