Outlook 2003 Improvements?

[MS]

For anyone reading who has tried Outlook 2003 yet, any comments on it? Much
improved?

I read in an article something to the effect that, although for the most
part there are not many improvements in the Microsoft Office 2003
applications that would make much difference to most users, not much
different from the last version, there are more improvements in Outlook than
the other applications.

Have people who tried it found that to be the case? Any further explanation
of what you like better?

I don't have many complaints with Outlook 2002, except for problems with
e-mail. I started using Outlook just as a PIM, and continued using Outlook
Express for my e-mail. Then I decided to try doing e-mail with Outlook
instead. Some of the e-mail features of Outlook I like better than OE, so I
have continued to use Outlook for e-mail. (Still using OE for newsgroups
though. I wonder if Outlook will add that capability.) However, I have also
had some problems with Outlook e-mail. (I don't have time to go into detail
now.) Some aspects of the Outlook e-mail capability just don't work as good
as in OE (although the latter is a free program).

I wonder if the e-mail functions of Outlook have been significantly improved
in version 2003? Please explain if you think so.

Also, of course, tell us about any way in which you find Outlook 2003 better
or worse than previous versions. (Just that I have found problems with the
e-mail implementation in versions 2002 and earlier, so I'm wondering if that
has been significantly improved in 2003.)

Thank you.

 

[Kip Kniskern]

First, Outlook 2003 is "prettier", and includes a new vertical reading pane
that really grows on you. Most of the work went into "spam capturing", with
junk mail folders that are pretty easy to empty, and better abilities to
search, organize and display email. Outlook 2003 does not handle newsgroups
at all (which is too bad), so even as MS talks of dropping OE, they've made
it more indispensible.
Here's a link to some company line on Outlook 2003:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/outlook/prodinfo/default.mspx

I've been using it for a few months now and am really coming to like it, but
I don't push it that hard, nor do I have a lot of experience with other
pims, so for what it's worth......

kip

 

[Sue Mosher [MVP]]

For a list of what's new, see http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2003/newfeatures.htm. I'd find it pretty hard to go back to Outlook 2002 now.
--
Sue Mosher, Outlook MVP
Outlook and Exchange solutions at http://www.slipstick.com
Author of
Microsoft Outlook Programming: Jumpstart
for Administrators, Power Users, and Developers

 

[David Jameson]

It's not bad but I still think it misses a couple of important features that
are in other programs. I just gave up on Eudora which I had been using for
15 years because it finally crashed once too often and so decided to bite
the bullet and try Outlook 2003.

It's definitely pretty (MS seems to think that eye candy is a critical
feature requirement) but it misses some mechanisms for managing a large
number of nested folders properly.

For example, if you have message rules that automatically moves new mail
into a folder associated with the recipient, it's hard to manage the new
mail, even with the new (10 years late!) "unread mail" folder. For example,
the unread message count that is displayed beside a folder does not appear
to include unread messages in nested folders. So unless you expand the tree
completely, you can't see where there's new unread mail. Expanding and
reviewing an entire deeply nested tree everytime new mail arrives is
completely impractical.

And once you have looked at an "unread" message, it disappears from the
"unread mail" folder".


Eudora opens a separate window for each mailbox (folder in Outlook-speak)
into which new mail has arrived so you just CAN'T miss any new important
messages. I haven't found any other mail program that does this. In
particular, since you close those windows yourself, even if you've read a
message, you can leave the window open so you can see it again later. I know
OL has all sorts of things in it for "marking" messages for further action
but somehow that seems like extra work.

I haven't looked deeply at the rule system but it looks like there's no rule
that you can use that would simply put incoming mail into a folder with the
same name as the FROM address (or if there's a contact for the address,
then the NAME associated with the FROM address). That means you have to
create a rule for every single recipient for which you might get more than
one message unless you want to move them manually everytime you get mail
from them (Ugg).

I've just bought a bunch of plugins (Thanks, Roady) to address some of the
drawbacks I've already encountered.

It's definitely an improvement over OL 2000, which is the last version I
looked at.

D


--


___________________________
Dr. David H. Jameson
CTO, DigiPortal Software

Block 100% of spam with ChoiceMail Enterprise
MS/Exchange, Domino, GroupWise
http://www.digiportal.com

 

[John Spear]

Without a doubt the new look is easier on the eyes. Moving the preview to
the side seems so simple a thought and who would think it makes a difference
but it does and once you go "right" you won't go back

Since we use GFI I have not played with the Spam rules in Outlook but the
default setting of not downloading images but giving me a one click to
download them if I want is a nice trick.

Exchange offline/online seems much improved. I'm still playing with this and
getting my setup tweaked for me and my typical use of being in the office
some, being VPN'd some and sometimes never connected. I'd love to be able to
figure out a way to sync all folders when in the office automatically but
not sync when connected via VPN but I guess a two clck manual sync is about
as good as I'm going to get.

Overall 2003 is what XP should have been since XP was nothing but 2000
warmed up leftovers. Now if we can get Outlook to support newsgroups
directly (no Exchange), yencoding, simple multiple calendar viewing, and
maybe it can finally get close to what Notes did for years.

 

[Guest]

Re: Unread Mail Folder: It's not a folder that holds items permanently, but is more akin to "view" or a "filter" (or a snapshot query if you're into database analogies). This is what MS calls a "search folder". Yes, they probably could have chosen a better word than "folder".

Basically, the message stays in the Inbox (or where ever it comes to rest per your In-Box rules), and appears in the "Unread Mail" search folder until (drum roll . . .) you read it. The "read" flag is then set, and the message no longer appears in the unread mail folder.

As to the message count . . . my implementation picks up all unread mesages in "child" folders below the Inbox parent. Maybe it doesn't pick them up if they are located in folders outside of the Inbox tree. Don't know for sure, haven't tried it.

-- John


----- David Jameson wrote: -----

It's not bad but I still think it misses a couple of important features that
are in other programs. I just gave up on Eudora which I had been using for
15 years because it finally crashed once too often and so decided to bite
the bullet and try Outlook 2003.

It's definitely pretty (MS seems to think that eye candy is a critical
feature requirement) but it misses some mechanisms for managing a large
number of nested folders properly.

For example, if you have message rules that automatically moves new mail
into a folder associated with the recipient, it's hard to manage the new
mail, even with the new (10 years late!) "unread mail" folder. For example,
the unread message count that is displayed beside a folder does not appear
to include unread messages in nested folders. So unless you expand the tree
completely, you can't see where there's new unread mail. Expanding and
reviewing an entire deeply nested tree everytime new mail arrives is
completely impractical.

And once you have looked at an "unread" message, it disappears from the
"unread mail" folder".


Eudora opens a separate window for each mailbox (folder in Outlook-speak)
into which new mail has arrived so you just CAN'T miss any new important
messages. I haven't found any other mail program that does this. In
particular, since you close those windows yourself, even if you've read a
message, you can leave the window open so you can see it again later. I know
OL has all sorts of things in it for "marking" messages for further action
but somehow that seems like extra work.

I haven't looked deeply at the rule system but it looks like there's no rule
that you can use that would simply put incoming mail into a folder with the
same name as the FROM address (or if there's a contact for the address,
then the NAME associated with the FROM address). That means you have to
create a rule for every single recipient for which you might get more than
one message unless you want to move them manually everytime you get mail
from them (Ugg).

I've just bought a bunch of plugins (Thanks, Roady) to address some of the
drawbacks I've already encountered.

It's definitely an improvement over OL 2000, which is the last version I
looked at.

D


--


___________________________
Dr. David H. Jameson
CTO, DigiPortal Software

Block 100% of spam with ChoiceMail Enterprise
MS/Exchange, Domino, GroupWise
http://www.digiportal.com