%^$# Microsoft !! (changing default email client after Winupdates

[E-Double]

There were other threads made about this, but every time Windows Updates are
run it changes the default email program from OE to Outlook (assuming Outlook
is installed). Apparently some exec made a retarded decision to make this
the standard action after running Windows Updates. Is there some way to not
have WinUpdates change the default configurations that we set??? Needless to
say its very annoying, and we do not need any help from Microsoft or anybody
else when it comes to determining what our default email client should be on
any particular machine (and, with all do respect to the MS Office exec who
made this retarded decision, I would assume most other people do not either).
There are dozens and dozens of people we work with who use OE for email and
Outlook for the calendar functions, but every time they try to send a web
page or something after the updates it fails. TIA for any help on this one
....

 

[Gordon]

There were other threads made about this, but every time Windows Updates
are
run it changes the default email program from OE to Outlook (assuming
Outlook
is installed). Apparently some exec made a retarded decision to make this
the standard action after running Windows Updates. Is there some way to
not
have WinUpdates change the default configurations that we set??? Needless
to
say its very annoying, and we do not need any help from Microsoft or
anybody
else when it comes to determining what our default email client should be
on
any particular machine (and, with all do respect to the MS Office exec who
made this retarded decision, I would assume most other people do not
either).
There are dozens and dozens of people we work with who use OE for email
and
Outlook for the calendar functions, but every time they try to send a web
page or something after the updates it fails. TIA for any help on this
one
...

Why use OE for email if you have Outlook? Seems to me that's not a very
logical decision....

 

[E-Double]

Maybe for you its not a 'logical' decision, but for many office and clerical
users who just want basic email functionality OE is much easier to use.
Plus, many users who have home computers use OE at home (because many to not
have Outlook at home) so they are much more familiar with OE. That seems
pretty logical to me ...

Either way, its not a 'logical decision' to have Winupdates and Microsoft
changing existing default settings for no apparent reason. If somebody sets
OE to be the default email client then there is a pretty good chance that
they want OE to be the defaul email client (both before and after the
Winupdates) - wouldn't you think ??

e.

 

[Gordon]

Maybe for you its not a 'logical' decision, but for many office and
clerical
users who just want basic email functionality OE is much easier to use.

I would dispute that. The email function of Outlook is no more "complicated"
than any other email client, and if they are already using Outlook for
calendar and contacts, then they know how to use it. Sorry, that's a
falacious argument.

Plus, many users who have home computers use OE at home (because many to
not
have Outlook at home) so they are much more familiar with OE. That seems
pretty logical to me ...

But you are talking about people who DO have Outlook, and already USE
it!!!!!!

 

[Peter Foldes]

First of all you should be posting this rant of yours to the Outlook Express newsgroup not here in Outlook.

Since you are using that awful Web interface , I posted the link for you for the Outlook Express newsgroup where they are most likely to help you with your rant about the default changing from Outlook Express to Outlook

On the web:
http://www.microsoft.com/communitie...px?dg=microsoft.public.outlookexpress.general

Have a nice day and good luck

 

[E-Double]

Some of the people use Outlook - not all. And, as eluded to earlier, the
ones that do use it generally only use it to read other people's calendars
(i.e. they are not inputting data). So that is pretty straight forward.
All of our users can choose which email client they want to use, and we have
about a dozen that do in fact choose Outlook. But the vast majority of users
prefer to use OE for email. It is a very easy and intuitive program, and
most of the users are just clerical staff (ie not IT personnel or MIS staff),
so this should not be surprising to anybody. In fact, it is pretty 'logical'
to me that users should be able to choose the MS email client that they feel
more comfortable with - especially when its free, they often use it at home,
and it provides all of the functionality that they need. It surprises me
that somebody would not get that for some reason ...

All of the computers that we order are ordered with Outlook because it comes
with Office SBE. We do not always know who or when users will be needing to
view other user's calendars (eg for meetings, etc...), so it does not make
any sense whatsoever for us to have to go to every machine and uninstall
Outlook - and then likely have to reinstall it later b/c one person has to
view a calendar a few times - just because some exec made a retarded decision
to change users' default email client settings. It would make much more
sense if MS changed the way the Winupdates works in this regard (ie leave
existing default settings as they are before the updates are run).


e.

 

[E-Double]

p.s. Reread my original and unedited posts - I never said that they were
using Outlook for contacts, and for starters try get a non-technical person
or novice user to try and setup message rules in Outlook (eg to forward
certain emails from certain individuals to secondary accounts) and then have
them try to do it in OE and let me know which one they find easier and more
intuitive. But in my experience most novice users can set these rules up in
OE in minutes whereas many novice users need help to set these same rules up
in Outlook.

 

[Gordon]

p.s. Reread my original and unedited posts - I never said that they were
using Outlook for contacts, and for starters try get a non-technical
person
or novice user to try and setup message rules in Outlook (eg to forward
certain emails from certain individuals to secondary accounts) and then
have
them try to do it in OE and let me know which one they find easier and
more
intuitive.

Well IMHO the Rule wizard in Outlook is actually no worse then the one in
OE, and has MORE functions if needed.

Secondly, unless your users deal with very little email, Outlook is far more
robust in the storage of email, dbx files (the OE database) are notorious
for corrupting, unless a reasonable amoumt of house-keeping is performed. In
my view (as a recently-retired Systems Accountant) that far outweighs any
slight ease of use that OE may have over Outlook.

 

[Brian Tillman [MVP - Outlook]]

Maybe for you its not a 'logical' decision, but for many office and
clerical
users who just want basic email functionality OE is much easier to use.
Plus, many users who have home computers use OE at home (because many to
not
have Outlook at home) so they are much more familiar with OE. That seems
pretty logical to me ...

If that's the case, then why not remove Outlook from those PCs? No Outlook
means no changing the default mail client.

Either way, its not a 'logical decision' to have Winupdates and Microsoft
changing existing default settings for no apparent reason. If somebody
sets
OE to be the default email client then there is a pretty good chance that
they want OE to be the defaul email client (both before and after the
Winupdates) - wouldn't you think ??

While I tend to agree with you, I can't agree that the reason is because
some "MS Office exec made this retarded decision." I fully believe that if
it is possible to leave the default mail client unchanged, that it would
remain unchanged. Instead, I think that the update process needs to set it
as an integral part of applying the update correctly.

 

[E-Double]

Brian, I answered the question as to why it would not be an easy decision to
remove Outlook from the machines (ie we never know who or when any given user
may need to view a calendar and would likely have to be reinstalling it
often).

 

[E-Double]

There is no question that Outlook is a more robust email client, and the .dbx
files certainly do sometimes get corrupted (although they are easily
recovered from the recycle bin now with IE7 installed). But the point (as I
see it) is that users should be able to choose the MS email client that they
feel most comfortable with - and Winupdates should not be messing with any
existing default settings including the default email client setting.

If an organization has 150 or perhaps 500 users or more, and 90% of them are
clerical or administrative staff that prefer to use OE and have been using OE
for years, then I just do not see the point in 'forcing' them to use Outlook.
If the organization had 20 or 25 employees - then maybe. But otherwise I
just do not see the point of it ...

e.

 

[E-Double]

Brian, You may be correct in stating that the Winupdate process has to
change this setting to apply the update (I was told by another MVP previously
that a certain MS exec that she specifically named made this behavior as a
conscious decision). But we are talking about MS here (ie not a small
company). How hard is it to programmatically check to see what the default
setting is prior to installing the update, change the setting if necessary
during the update process, and then change it back to the original setting
upon reboot ??

And as I have historically seen many other threads on this topic I am pretty
sure I am not the only one who takes issue with this particular behavior of
the Winupdate process ...

e.

 

[N. Miller]

Why use OE for email if you have Outlook? Seems to me that's not a very
logical decision....

Why should Windows Update alter a user configuration? Seems to me that's not
a vey logical decision...

 

[E-Double]

"Why should Windows Update alter a user configuration? Seems to me that's not
a very logical decision... "

Yes, that is exactly the point I was trying to make ...

e.

 

[Gordon]

There is no question that Outlook is a more robust email client, and the
.dbx
files certainly do sometimes get corrupted (although they are easily
recovered from the recycle bin now with IE7 installed). But the point (as
I
see it) is that users should be able to choose the MS email client that
they
feel most comfortable with -

In most corporate environments you get what the company decides you should
use - Users don't GET a choice. And nor should they. The IT dept have
sufficient problems supporting what is used, never mind if every Tom Dick
and Harry decide off their own bat what email client they would like to
use....

 

[E-Double]

We are not allowing them to use 'any' email client they can find - we are
allowing them the choice of using either of two Microsoft email clients ...
which I would take a pretty good bet together make up over 85-90% of the
email client software used by small to medium sized businesses. And the
only issue, the single issue, we have supporting either of these clients is
with the unexpected and unexplained behavior of Winupdates changing the
default email client settings. Hence the reason for my original post. And I
would also take a pretty good bet that a forum search or an Internet search
will likely reveal that I am not the only person who is surprised or miffed
at this behavior of changing default settings.

If it was some core functionality that OE was lacking, I could understand
the argument for using Outlook instead. But OE works perfectly fine for a
very large % of small/medium sized business customers (save for the
unexpected and unexplained Winupdate behavior).


e.

 

[Jeff Johnson]

While I tend to agree with you, I can't agree that the reason is because
some "MS Office exec made this retarded decision." I fully believe that
if it is possible to leave the default mail client unchanged, that it
would remain unchanged. Instead, I think that the update process needs to
set it as an integral part of applying the update correctly.

You have GOT to be %$^&*# kidding. Why on earth would a program's status as
the default mail handler prevent or enable the updating of its files? If
that's the case, then THAT'S what's retarded. The entire purpose of Set
Program Access and Defaults was to give the users control over this very
sort of thing, because MS was really bad about changing it in the past, and
yet they still seem to be ignoring user choices.

 

[E-Double]

Yes, that is exactly my point ...

e.

You have GOT to be %$^&*# kidding. Why on earth would a program's status as
the default mail handler prevent or enable the updating of its files? If
that's the case, then THAT'S what's retarded. The entire purpose of Set
Program Access and Defaults was to give the users control over this very
sort of thing, because MS was really bad about changing it in the past, and
yet they still seem to be ignoring user choices.