Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Stops Development Of Outlook Express
Jman314 writes "According to a ZDNet story, Microsoft will cease development of their Outlook Express email client. "The technology doesn't go away, but no new work is being done. It is consumer email in an early iteration, and our investment in the consumer space is now focused around Hotmail and MSN. That's where we're putting the emphasis in terms of new investment and new development work." says Dan Leach, lead product manager for Microsoft's information worker product management group. Microsoft's alternatives include, not surprisingly, the full version of Outlook."
"The attrociously insecure program won't go away, but no new work is being done. It was our best attempt at writing a simple email client in an early iteration, and our investment in the consumer space is now focused around agents that will allow us to more effectively execute our SPAM campaign and strengthen our monopoly: Hotmail and MSN. That's where we're putting the emphasis in terms of new investment, development work, and worm targets that will give your IT guy an incredible head ache."
Cool - so now Evolution can play catch-up for the next few years....
They think webmail is going to be more popular than imap, or pop3 mail boxes. So they are going to intergrate a Hotmail mail box into the next version of windows.
keanmarine.com
What's that sound? Ahhhhh, worm and exploit writers around the world can rejoicing...
I they've got them to stop development.
Blockwars: go play.
"They do not preach that their god will rouse them, a little before the Nuts work loose." Kipling, 'The Sons of Martha'
Maybe this will cause peopel to realize that Internet Explorer and Outlook Express AREN'T the only way to use the internet. With any luck, mozilla and its ilk should be seeing a lot more customers once the EOL for Internet Explorer 6 and Outlook Express 6 hits and Microsoft either A) Requires a new version of windows for new features or B) Requires MSN subscription, both of which are alternatives that home and small business users (and probably large business users too) won't want. So let's make sure we have a very user-friendly product with plenty of advertising, eh?
My Systems
Oh, ok... so what you're saying is we no longer have outlook express... it's now part of the OS and we can't de-couple them... it's an integral part of the OS... honest your honor!
Seriously... They're doing with outlook express, what they did with Internet Explorer... except this time, they are bundling outlook functionality with their Web business, instead of their OS... Same shit different pile...
---
Programming is like sex... Make one mistake and support it the rest of your life.
Here is a nice free email client. Oh, we changed our minds. Please use hotmail from here on out. Enter your password on the dotted line and we'll even POP your other accounts for you!
Email Portals at their best.
So OE will never be able to filter by header, forcing people to live with spam. It's just like IE - leave some critical, easy to add features missing, then stop development. It's like they're trying to annoy people into upgrading to a new version of windows to get the latest email client and web browser.
Now that they're not adding new security holes err I mean features then the bugfixes might eventually leave the default windows mail reader in a halfway secure state. Those e-mail viruses will need to find a new way to propagate right?
There goes the best Hotmail client there ever was. Treat hotmail just like e-mail without paying for premium POP3 service. Oh well.
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
Does that mean they won't bundle an email client in Windows anymore? That's one good thing I see coming out of this. Hopefully a good, simple to use, secure, and free email client will be able to fill the gap.
Outlook express is a weak email client anyway, and it has no support for automation or external API's except "simple" MAPI which is anything but, and WAB - Windows Address Book - which basically forces you to write spaghetti code to use it...
MS might now bundle Hotmail and/or MSN and/or Office (including Outlook) with Windows as the "consumer email client." Possibly a far-out guess, but given MS's history, it wouldn't surprise me.
Don't start up your flamebait moderation yet. I think this is sad news. OE has been my favorite email client for a long time. It starts quick, has message rules etc, and is easy to use. Yes there are other clients, but I will miss it.
Outlook is to large and too slow to start. I have a key on my keyboard for email, and I like to hit the key and have the results within seconds as opposed to tens of seconds.
Cancelling development is obviously an attempt at moving people to either Outlook or Hotmail/MSN, either of witch would yield more profit for Microsoft.
Now techs at ISP's will have to support users trying to use another client. That will make them happy.
Of course most techs just walk people through the Setup wizard. So they will just have to find another way.
Where am I going and why am I in this handbasket?
- It's the easiest to administer and support.
- In my experience, consumer/home users prefer web mail anyway.
- It's easier to secure. Just use HTTPS, which everyone knows how to use. No need for IMAP/POP3 over SSL.
- Users can access their mail through their browser (doesn't IE == internet?
:)
I'm no fan of MS, but I have to agree with their decision on this one.Unless it is part of the EU's ruling, and they are removing the e-mail client completely from new versions of Windows. It would be intereseting to see how many people who have a copy of Windows, also have a copy of Office, and actually use Outlook as their default mail manager.
And is anyone yet to be convinced with Thunderbird yet?
The full version of Outlook is still supported
Outlook Express is no longer supported
Q.
Insert Signature Here
Who in their right mind would want all their email on MS servers?
I really liked OE, even though it had its plethora of security issues. It was not as bloated as Outlook, and believe it or not is a really good email client. Clean and simple enough so our older employees can handle it. I don't think I want to upgrade our workstations to use Outlook, should look for a good replacement. Any nice, powerful and free email clients out there?
Don't worry though, Microsoft will find new ways to make IT staffers suffer.
First there was no more new standalone Internet Explorer clients, and now there's no more Outlook Express. I see this as being a pretty good thing overall. The initial impact will be more users switching to other alternative non Microsoft software. At least that's what I'll be hoping to see.
My site
Well, guess who isn't stopping their development?
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/thunderbird/
Version 0.1 is still better than Outlook Express ever was. Anyone with any experience with the Mozilla products, especially Firebird, knows that each incremental version increase brings loads more functionality, features and options.
So while I would shed a tear over Outlook Express going away, truth is, a rat's ass I do not give.
Chr0m0Dr0m!C
What if MS attempted to turn every single one of their programs into something like the lease-this-because-you-can-no-longer-buy-it. What would many do. Just because they've announced this means little. What they should be announcing instead of waisting everyone's time, should be, that they're going to reaudit ALL versions of Windows for security holes.
That would impress me. I wonder what would MS do if everyone just got pissed and did some form of protest to the tune of "secure this now or we won't buy". It would be a sys admins nightmare to migrate machines over to other OS' but in the long run, it 'could' (note the could instead of unproven WOULD) save companies much needed dollars.
As for the outlook article, to be honest didn't read it because I don't use it, nor does anyone in my company.
MoFscker
Maybe we'll see less VBS worms getting spread around. That assumes they yank out OE from Windows.
Considering the lackluster rates of adoption for MS's newest offerings, I would say the danger will be there for a very long time to come. Just look at how many people still run 98. I have a friend who spent a lot of money on a gaming rig, lots of RAM, powerful video card. You know what he did? He tossed his old machine, popped in his Win 98SE CD and off he went.
Since most home users see 98 as pretty much everything they need (and we are almost done with 2003, so it a five year old OS) it will be a while untill it goes away.
The Mac version was last updated in.....damn, I keep on top of this stuff but it's been what...3 years since the last update? Microsoft has been slowly reducing the number of Mac apps over the past few years (it seemed to coincide with their new 'commitment' to the Mac around 2000 or so) Apple had no other choice but to put out Mail.app, to fill the gap. IE is gone, but everyone in the Mac community felt it was dead long before Safari came out - not getting an update for years at a time usually leaves that impression.
Oh well, I guess it is a strategic move to isolate themselves for blame and constant embarassment over their inability to put out a secure app. Almost everytime "new, crippling virus" is mentioned, you hear "exploits a vunerability in Outlook Express" in the same sentence.
So Outlook express will go away. I'm not going to shed many tears over it.
Still, how long will it take before the users who download Outlook Express stop hunting around on the net and installing it? I still have people reaching around in their directory (or desk drawer) of important stuff installing horribly old versions of Netscape 4.x (where x is a very small number) so they can use it's email reader.
Most of the users are bound to the one product they chose when they REALLY NEEDED it to work. During that crisis period, they put in the time and effort to get THAT product to work, and that's the extent of their software understanding. Microsoft may try to wash it's hands of Outlook Express, but I imagine a day (ten years from now)
Hey, could you look at my home computer? It seems I have an email problem.
Really? I thought that email was totally autoconfiguring on your system!
Yea, but for some reason, Outlook Express, says it can't connect to my Internet.
Arrrggghhh....
All the functionality + security features and no "click and run" worm support
Take away their free email program and they'll be FORCED to buy our commercial products! Ha!
Quick Smithers, find the Mozilla development team and kill them all!
First they're cancelling IE, and now OE.
It's like that memo making security "job #1" was real or something...
This seems a logical step given several factors:
I was an OE user for rather a long while and it had always seemed a bit nicer interface than Outlook proper. In maybe three years, I never had a data failure and it was quite reliable. Obviously the security angle was, er, non-existent (anti-secure perhaps) but it felt fast and mostly did what I told it.
But I'm an Evolution user now, so OE won't be missed. Better for all of us, if you ask me.
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
SMTP and Webmail are two different matters entirely.
SMTP has to do with how the mail is transfered between servers.
Webmail/POP3/IMAP have to do with how the end user reads mail in their inbox
Also webmail is quite capable on non-windows servers
SquirellMail (Open source imap webmail) is a much better interface than hotmail ever was
"The United States has no right, no desire, and no intention to impose our form of government on anyone else." - Bush 05
Consider: What does Outlook Express allow one to do? Well, for no more than the cost of Windows, the user gets an email client that allows them to fetch data from a POP server and store it on their hard drives.
Now think about Microsoft's "next-gen tech" initiatives. Let's see, there's three, really:
1) Blackcomb, which promises an explosion of metadata (read: data bloat) and phenomenal background cycle usage (read: mandatory hardware upgrades) for not much user benefit. (Have you looked at how much metadata is stored in the "Properties" pages of a Word XP document? Good grief, there's tons. Now how often do you use that? Roughly... never? Bingo.) Not really any connection here.
2) Trusted Computing/Palladium. Again, not much connection here. (Interesting that when MS says it's interested in protecting copyrighted works, it means media distributors' copyrighted works... not the copyrights that you own regarding the email that you write, which is open for pilferage by Outlook worm du jour.)
3) Hailstorm. DINGDINGDING! We have a winner.
An' it goes a little somethin' like dis:
Microsoft has realized that it can't easily sell many more upgrades of Windows or Office. The "more stable Windows" line has been exhausted from re-use. The Office paperclip is already in 3D and can't be improved more. So, to continue reaping monopoly profits, they want to move sofware to the rental model. They drop the initial price on their software, but bill you monthly for the rest of your life, and for the same software.
Now - how can it do that? If they give you the software, they can't prevent you from using some dirty h@x0r trick to crack it and then stop paying. So, they retain much program functionality on MS's servers. You no longer own a functional copy of Word. You just own an input/output web interface to their copy of Word.
But while they're on this track - while they're pushing you to surrender your software to MS - why not convince you to surrender your documents to MS as well? They'll store the data on their servers. It will always be accessible (so long as you pay your licensing fees like a good little serf), and you don't have to worry about hard drive crashes or data loss (disclaimer: no guarantees, understand; you waived your rights through shrink-wrap.) So now you can't switch to some dirty pirate-OS like Linux without forfeiting all of your data.
Of course, Hailstorm died a PR-debacle death, because users aren't quite that stupid (or more accurately, tech-savvy users anticipated their treachery.) But Microsoft's dreams of rental pricing didn't die. After all, they have no other real improvements to offer for their core products.
Hence, no more Outlook Express.
Where's the tie? Easy. OE allowed you to store your mail on your server. But of course, Hotmail and MSN store your data on their servers. It's prepping you for the day when all of your data is on their servers.
Welcome to the future. Prepare to be assimilated.
David Stein, Esq.
Computer over. Virus = very yes.
When Longhorn comes out we are looking at a different ball game. No more security problems no more stupid users not patching no more need to worry if the Inet content is not certified, it just will not run. Good old Bill will make sure everything that ever gets on your computer is safe for you. After all that is what the trusted computing initiative is all about. Take back all control of the computer from the user. Hot Mail for all running on trusted BSD servers, the RIAA happy that you cannot get around security, and a nice big hole there for the government and their trusted computing partner MS to keep tabs on you, and your dangerous communication device sucker!
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
I'll admit having used outlook express - it is fast and there already (/me hides) .. This news comes just in time after having switched to Thunderbird, a great, nice, simple, secure e-mail client with lots of potential. For what i need, it's perfect.
[alk]
One of the questions I've pondered over the years was why Outlook was never a proper super-set of Outlook Express. I have both available to me, but I still simply use Outlook Express because Outlook lacks the Newsreader function that Outlook Express has (and I use other software for my calendar, etc.).
Can anyone explain to my why they never folded this support into the full-blown Outlook? I'm sure it can't be difficult!
They had already announced that they discontinued development of IE.
My predictions:
Soon they will put a Hotmail icon on the standard Windows desktop which will be protected from removal or hiding by the EULA. It will come with the newest Media Player or MSN Messenger. Future versions of Windows will be cheaper, at least the home edition, but the product activation will require an ongoing passport account, which, two years later, will require a monthly membership fee.
Frankly, Other than adding Outlook's stupid "Block all Attachments" Feature and setting the Security Zone to restriced by default, Something that should of been done in the first place I might add, OE hasn't changed that much since it was introduced.
The only thing that OE really needed was a Spam filter, but since Blue Mountain Arts forced MS to throw that into the toilet there isn't much else it needs that can be added.
It's simple and it works well, and it all most people need.
In Soviet Russia, Trojan exploits YOU!
Here's an interesting thing to note ... ever try removing Outlook Express after installing Outlook?
... why do I need Outlook Express installed?" --uninstall
... when you launch Outlook after removing Outlook Express, you'll get a message indicating that Outlook NEEDS Outlook Express in order to view email. Go ahead and scratch your head for a few minutes on that one, but its true.
... how is it then, that Microsoft can continue to offer Outlook while stopping development of Outlook Express? (Perhaps some merging of the development resources going on there.)
"Hey, I've got Outlook
Here's the catch
SO
Skiers and Riders -- http://www.snowjournal.com
So if I read the last line of the article correctly, they'll stop shipping stand-alone versions of IE, and put the mail client in the main OS instead? Wasn't it that "bundling" that got them in the whole mess of trouble with the judge in the first place? Why doesn't Billy learn. When I buy an Operating System, I want an Operating System. When I buy a Mail Client, I want a Mail Client. Not part of one included in the other... It just frustrates me to no end that they keep doing this and expect us to roll over and not notice/not care.
------ Will of Iron, Knees of Jello.
Problem is, most open source software is still created by hackers for hackers. Documentation is incomplete, fragmented, outdated and inconsistent in its level of detail. FAQ's are rarely kept up to date and many websites simply are not organized well. HINT: an intro page of a toolsets site should very obviously contain an "about [toolset]", "download", "documentation", "support/forum" and "other resources" that flows easily under the fingertips of the reader. It should not however look and feel like some 15 year olds site dedicated to organizing his collection of sports memorabilia or video games.... unless of course said 15 y.o. has the previously mentioned well organized site.
One rule of thumb oft ignored by forum/bbs trollers is that of solving the problem of annoying and repetative "noob" questions. Saying RTFM when the manual is not accessable, complete, organized or just plain ol' well written is silly. Also it is silly to not solve the problem. Got a lot of people asking the same questions? Hmmm, the ol' pattern recognition and reasoning centers of the brain should be firing up then. Hint: update the FAQ, documentation and forums (sticky's work wonders).
The more someone has to spend just getting a tool to work, then figuring it out, then actually adapting it to their use (learning and applying/adapting its own idiosyncrocies and differences in approaching solutions) the less that system becomes a "tool" and the more it becomes a dead weight.
Hacking is fun and many great innovations come out daily from that environment... of those a solution to this problem alas has yet to surface. Everyone hates documenting yet a team does in fact communicate on some order when solving problems. Systems have dependencies and modular systems have API's and interfaces. Instead of using word of mouth (which includes chat and email) try actually planning out what you want to do. Use issue tracking and management systems to not only make it easier for you to document but then smartly use automated systems to generate documentation and guides from there. Save time and frustration by reducing redundant questions from newbies.
MS produces eye candy that sucks. Perhaps we can produce well organized and designed Human Interfaces that make eye candy useless. Analogy: If a group of independents want to make cars that are cheaper, more efficient, more reliable and just better to drive, then wouldn't it be in their best interest to ensure that there is as little learning curve as possible. Why do silly things like put the steering wheel at their feet or the gas and brake controls on the dash? Unless there is a clear reason to be different then don't change things. (if you ain't fixing it, don't change it... btw, is it broke in the first place?) Changing for the purpose of changing is like those self proclaimed goths that for about 15 - 20 years have tried so hard to be "unique" and "different" yet were all just the same.... they just happened to be the same but be a smaller group of butterflies with attitudes.
... the Microsoft Support Line rings off the hook, "I read you are discontinuing Outlook Express, how am I going to surf the web now!?????"
Bait and Switch
Everyone needs an SMTP mail client of some kind. Now that OE is dead, we're bound to see the rise of 3rd party mail programs given that Outlook is expensive and not everyone likes hotmail.
This is my sig.
They stop developing "conventional" email client because they don't need it. .net/passport clusters for consumers.
OE is simple and standards-based (pop, imap) client, works like a charm with Unix mailservers. Why MS would need it?
Instead, they do their standard embrace-and-extend trick -
customer is fed up with insecurity of traditional email and spam?
Fine, we are going to have new mail client built right-into the OS, working some proprietary protocol against Exchange backend (for corp users) or against monstrous SQL Server /
No need to download another client just like with the browser. And guess what - in a little while SMTP/POP3/IMAP will become a niche, because everyone will have MS supermail on their desktops.
They are trying to do to email what IIS was going to do to the web - quetly and gradually replace open protocols.
Apache stopped IIS from monopolizing the web. What is going to stop this one?
Nice job missing the point entirely. The alternative isn't Outlook, it's MSN and Hotmail. Outlook Express has the feature of letting people use it for any email account, whereas Microsoft would prefer you to use MSN or Hotmail only. Including an email client that can connect to any POP3 or IMAP4 account is not consistant with their new policy of wanting people to use MSN or Hotmail.
I know people sometimes get annoyed to see redundant posts like this, but it would be wise to list the alternatives every time articles like this are posted (mail clients, ogg vorbis players, alternative browsers). At least mention the alternatives and some pros and cons.
Even here on slashdot, there are people who are still using "the wrong products", and a friendly pointer to the alternatives may be just the thing to convert some non-believers. I myself am still using Outlook because I've never been satisfied with any alternatives, and I don't have the time to go testing all the options. But I would definitely benefit from the wisdom of the slashdot community (did i really say that?)
You simply can't compare PGP to SSL because they are not used for the same thing. PGP is used for the secure transmission of the mail AND the final delivery, but SSL only protects the final delivery. To that extent, a lot of webmail providers don't even give you a choice to use PGP. Because the transmission is still through SMTP, and it is not secured by PGP, your information is not protected even if you use webmail.
Sadly, Outlook Express was far more standards-compliant than full Outlook. And that's not saying much.
Here are just some of the things that annoy the hell out of me about Outlook:
Everyone in my office uses Outlook except for myself and a few others. I've wanted to set up a newsserver to replace our current policy of cc'ing random people when trying to have a discussion. Sadly, the only Microsoft solution would have been to use Outlook Express to connect to the news server. (No, installing Mozilla/Thunderbird on everyones machines and training people to use it is not an option, sadly.)
They've spent the last few years taking Hotmail from something that was absolutely *ubiquitous* (people who weren't advertising constructs used hotmail as a -verb-. few services can claim that) to an obscure and neglected also-ran. Now they want to do the same for Outlook Express.
And I wish them well at it! ^_^
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Apparently, there are quite a few options available. Latest developments teach us that all we need is Windows itself, no applications required.
Maybe this will cause peopel to realize that Internet Explorer and Outlook Express AREN'T the only way to use the internet. With any luck, mozilla and its ilk should be seeing a lot more customers once the EOL for Internet Explorer 6 and Outlook Express 6 hits
.NET, and so forth. I normally kept OE6 set to display messages as plain text, disabling HTML. I've heard plenty of whining about Outlook Express security, but the majority of "security" issues were caused by idiots opening executable attachments.
My primary browswer is Mozilla. My second choice is Opera. Internet Explorer is a distant third. I've got bootable Linux, *BSD, and BeOS OS systems. I'm no Microsoft shill.
For e-mail clients, I had been using Outlook Express and just switched to Outlook in the last week. I have fairly demanding e-mail needs with several domains, multiple e-mail addresses, list subscriptions, and so forth. I tried quite a few shareware and public domain e-mail clients and found all of them lacking in one critical way or another. The list included the Mozilla e-mail client, Eudora, PocoMail, The Bat, and Pegasus Mail. Most had usability issues.
At least two of the clients pretended to have imported all of my messages in all of the folders (probably about 70,000 messages for the last 7 years sent and received) only to have failed to import a substantial portion of them. No error messages were displayed during the import process. Sorry, but that's a no-go. I'm unwilling to give up my message archive for professional and legal reasons. Nor am I willing to trust a program that would silently fail in that manner.
In those years, I have never contracted a virus, trojan horse, or worm through Outlook Express. I kept it patched and up-to-date. I had it set to use the "Restricted Sites" security setting which disabled such things as scripting, Java, ActiveX,
All of that said, I'm not blind to the faults of Outlook or Outlook Express. It was idiotic for Microsoft to include scripting of any kind for incoming messages. What were they thinking? Making an e-mail client that would retrieve from web sites without the user's permission was responsible for many people telling spammers "hey, my address is live!" The inability in OE to pick up from multiple mailboxes and have each go to its own folder is a glaring fault. There are, of course, other flaws and foibles.
All in all, though, Outlook Express was a damned good e-mail client for me. It had a well-designed user interface, was reliable, and served my purposes, and those of millions of other users, very well. Maybe this will spur on the development of other clients to the point that they rival or exceed Outlook Express, but right now, OE6 is still one of the best Windows e-mail clients available.
A bright sun shone above the horizon. Songbirds lilted sweetly in lush green trees, bunnies danced across the meadow, and all disease came to an end. A Microsoft spokesperson said in a press conference - "You know folks, from now on I think everything is gonna be ok."
They're opening up the market for small, inexpensive email clients. I mean, if the alternative is full-blown office (to get Outlook), or web email, then it seems there's a big hole between the $0, lousy Hotmail interface, and the $400 MS Office interface.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
One thing that still tends to suck these days is mail access. With the exception of Evolution and Mozilla Thunderbird, the e-mail experience is really lacking these days. Web mail is nice, but it's still really slow unless you are dealing with proprietary packages. MSN and Hotmail suck compared to what could be if the right combination of technologies were used.
With the departure of Outlook Express, a void will need to be filled and I believe that this opens the door to new alternatives. If there was a project that combined web mail, a mail client and an IM client to produce a seamless user experience no matter which component is used,I think it could blow away anything that MS has to offer. Couple that with a solid backend and a new spam proof protocol and I think e-mail would be revolutionized. As it is e-mail doesn't scale well at all when it comes to content. It should be media rich, but capable of being thinned down to be able to work within a simple text only interface. That's something that is totlaly lacking right now. There's lots of work to be done to turn e-mail into something universaly useful and valuable. Let's take this opportunity to start something now.
Un-news
Try something called hotwayd. It is a POP gateway to hotmail, so you can use any POP mail client with your hotmail account. I've been using it for a year with KMail and it works great.
There is also something called gotmail I believe which will also do the trick.
I wish that a few large, influential companies would stand up to Microsoft and call them on their lame business strategy: closed, proprietary standards that keep everyone else out of the game. Microsoft simply does not compete on innovation. Why doesn't this get more press? Why does the main stream media not criticize Microsoft more often? They appear to be going out of their way to keep data formats and protocols both closed and unnaturally complex just to keep other systems out of the game. I think that alone says that they recognize that their software is not superior!
I work at a large Fortune 100 company and we use Lotus Notes as our groupware. I hate Lotus Notes: it has the worst user interface I've ever encountered, is fairly buggy, and just generally kind of sucks. Everyone at work wishes we'd switch to Outlook! In my mind, that's the only advantage Lotus Notes has: it's not Outlook! That's all Microsoft wants: a few large influential companies to use Outlook so they can play the vendor lock-in card, start changing standards, and have another Office-like monopoly on their hands... but with email.
The Internet Explorer monopoly is scary enough. Now Microsoft is working on email. Microsoft is working very hard at destroying the openness of the Internet; they want to own the Internet.
Ok... I still use Outlook Express... for one reason. I have several IMAP servers (yes, all over SSL), and in OE, I have them set to syncronize all messages, without having to go offline. I know this is not exactly the main use of IMAP, but I like it-- I don't have to download a message each and every time I view it. No, it's not a speed (bandwidth) issue-- but a latency one. Even over my home network, if it has to hit the server for each message, it's not as fast as if it's cached locally. Evolution doesn't do this, nor does Thunderbird, so far as I can tell. Or do they? And if so, how?
P.S. Please no "feature = bug in OE that I can't find anywhere else" replies. There's enough threads with those already.
-- Is "Sig" copyrighted by www.sig.com?
But they always made complete sense when viewed through the perspective of gaining control. Looks like this may be another example.
They think webmail is going to be more popular than imap, or pop3 mail boxes.
If Microsoft lets its market share for desktop-based e-mail clients slip, it could be short-sighted.
I use web-based mail at work (iPlanet/SIMS) and web-based mail (Yahoo) at home as my primary mail-reader. I have broadband in both locations and the responsiveness of web-based e-mail conpared to desktop e-mail clients is negligible.
My work-at-home CEO has satellite at home. He can't use the web-based product because the interactive sluggishness from delay and packet loss would kill his productivity. SSH-tunneled POP works great for him because his local e-mail client (Outlook) downloads new e-mail in the background and sends messages out in the background while he is composing/reading mail quickly in the foreground.
When I administered e-mail for a dialup ISP, the primary method our users preferred to access their e-mail was POP to Outlook Express or Netscape Messenger. It is painfully slow to browse through e-mail over a dialup connection. There are still millions of dialup users out there. They are the majority of users on the Internet.
If people use wireless devices in the future, their experience will be more similar to dialup/satellite than broadband, and they'll demand a product that isn't web-based-only. Some of the ideas brought to light by Central or similar technologies could satisfy both broadband/fixed and narrowband/mobile users.
Microsoft makes an excellent user interface for e-mail. They're good at that. Their enterprise/corporate customers may continue to pay for it. Other products like M2, Evolution, and Mozilla will help fill the consumer niche if they open it up. If it weren't for Microsoft's early monopoly bundling tactics vs Netscape Navigator (founded on a "beta/intro is free, production version costs money" business model), we might not have nor expect free browser and e-mail software. We're spoiled. If it weren't for security or playform supportissues, more of us Slashdotters might use Outlook Express.
-ez
PS: I lied. My primary mail reader is MH.
says Dan Leach, lead product manager for Microsoft's information worker product management group
Coincidence? I think not. Ok, so there's spelling, but since when have I cared about that?
====
Crudely Drawn Games
Does this mean MS will finally put newsgroup support in the full Outlook product? About freakin' time.
Once the RPC/DCOM vulnerability is released and a worm spreads rapidly through the internet, Microsoft announces it will no longer work on the email client it bundles with its own operating systems. "Microsoft executives are hoping those users will now switch to the full-blown Outlook client (and pay for an Office licence in the process)."
I guess Microsoft isn't taking the joke in the WinBlast virus too seriously. "billy gates why do you make this possible? Stop making money and fix your software!!"
I've never spent much time with the Windows version, but the old MacOS version was superb, and I know a bunch of very savvy tech folks -- people that were generally of the Linux & Free software persuasion -- that swore by OE/Mac as their favorite mail client.
However, it has been obvious for a while that that software probably didn't have a future. Outlook Express was never updated to be a native OSX application, so you had to run it in Classic mode. That was enough to start turning away users, but I understand that even still it's fairly popular.
But I digress.
If you read between the lines here, it's not just OE that's being dropped. Consider this quote from the article:
In other words, Microsoft saw OE as their IMAP client, and so by dropping OE, they are also abandoning the IMAP mail protocol. In spite of what Mr Conn says, IMAP is a very rich protocol: it allows you to maintain multiple mail folders on the server, it allows you to keep your mail client configuration on the server, and in principle it allows you to store arbitrary files on the server.
All of this allows the user to have great mobility: leave the office and you can have all the same data available at home, or at school, or while travelling. All of this, in other words, is open competition for Exchange.
This isn't just abandoning OE, this is vendor lock-in. Microsoft is trying to steer us towards a world where you have two choices for mail access: get a Passport & sign up for MSN Hotmail, or buy a copy of Office and use Outlook to connect to your corporate or ISP provided Exchange server.
There is no room for open protocols in this worldview, and so no room for alternative servers (Sendmail, Postfix, Qmail, Exim) or clients (Mozilla, Thunderbird, Mail.app, Pine, Mutt, Eudora, etc).
The death of an open protocol is the real headline here, but both the journalist & the story submitter seem to have missed it.
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
Stocks in all major Antivirus vendors were down on the news.
CEO's of major Antivirus vendors were unanimous in advising their shareholders that "there's nothing to worry about - there are plenty of other Microsoft products out there..."
... to a few people at work.
--COO shrugged... Eudora
--CEO shrugged... Eudora
--CTO shrugged... Eudora
--Project Manager #1 Shuddered... (Sky is falling!!!)
--Project Manager #2 shrugged... (But he shrugs at everything, so not sure what it means.)
--IT guys #1 and #2... "Out what? Servers are up, everything running fine. Nothing is Out."
Basically, it seems to be a big, "Yeah. So?"
Why the hell aren't there any good, modern CypherPunk/Mixmaster/Nym enabled clients out there? The only good one I know of is Jack B Nymble, which is ancient.
I've seriously thought of writing a new one from scratch in Java, but I'm way, way too lazy.
Tools -> Message Rules -> Mail -> New -> "Where The Message is from the specified account" -> "Move it to the specified folder" ..
Damn! You learned me sumthin' new. I thought "Where The Message is from the specified account" referred to the sender's address (as in "From:").
Just to make it clear, I did notice Microsoft's casual dismissal of IMAP, but I didn't mention it for journalistic reasons. I reported the facts; this discussion inteprets them. I do agree, however, that stopping OE development is stupid and replacing it with Hotmail is really stupid, but I left that for the reader.
So you see, there can be journalistic neutrality on Slashdot!
A friend of mine decided to toss Outlook Express a couple of weeks ago (this headline makes him feel better about that decision). He asked me what to use.
I steered him towards Mozilla. He's very happy with it.
Even more important is the fact that he cannot believe how good something FREE is. Yeah, free as in beer, but he gets the Free thing too.
My guess is that he'll be a lot more receptive to a Linux desktop in the future. Mozilla makes a good preview of Free software.
But dropping the protocol is the story!
If things do go according to my interpretation, then the relevance of open protocols like IMAP, POP, and SMTP will be diminished, and the end result will be that all non-Microsoft mail software (both client & server) will be crowded out. This is a doomsday scenario, and I don't expect it to be quite that bad, but it seems obvious to me that this is what Microsoft is pushing for.
I think it would have been fair to press them on this angle in the article, as the significance of this is far greater than the mere discontinuation of a particular piece of software. But it sounds like you did put some thought into this, so I'll accept that it was your call to make... :-)
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
What really happens is that Outlook does not generate any kind of revenu stream for Microsoft, while Hotmail does, spam, advertisment, extra space, and msn are a wealthy influx of money for Microsoft.
Look for more stringent conditions on hotmail usage in the near future.
But seriously folks, I've been fighting pitched battles to keep our place off of Outlook/OE and Exchange. For reasons technical, logistical, and financial.
One of the big claims that users have is "well, Outlook Express is built in. Why can't I use it?" Because
- It has a nasty set of default values that clobber our IMAP server
- Every email worm out there is designed to pull from it's address book.
- It has a tendency to take a complete dump on your settings stored in your roaming profile
- The address book has a habit of spontaneously combusting on our network.
That's why.Now they no longer have the "It's built in" excuse.
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
My guess is something like this:
Scary.
Maybe they are dropping it because users wont accept advertising in their email client (OE did for 1 version but was quickly dropped perhaps people complained?) but if its on the web (in a browser) they can advertise all they like (look at the mess that what they call hotmail now)
then they can get advertisers to focus on associating users email accounts with user names and all that lovely personal information (courtesy of your "msn wallet(TM)" and "msn passport(TM)", tie that to your machines GUID and msn's cookie stealing exploits (notice hotmail.com does not exist anymore and is now a msn subdomain) and voila , you have WindowsXP 2004 marketing machine where you are not the customer any longer, you are the product and you will even hand over 299$ (cost of XP) for the privilege while assigning all your IP rights to them and their "partners".
Microsoft isnt a software company, its a marketing company that creates software.
not that it will affect me or you but you have to feel sorry for the sheep that have no idea whats going on.
cheers
I know it very unlikely they would, but it would be very cool if they did, what the Open Source community could do with it would be great, iron out bugs, add functionality etc....
Anyone want to send an email to Bill and ask nicely?
A few days ago when the Paul Graham article was posted to the frontpage, I was thinking about the fact that MS hasn't implemented Bayesian filtering (or any powerful filtering) into OE.
The three possibilities I came up with were:
MS wanted to give Hotmail/MSN a competitive edge over other ISPs and mail services.
MS didn't consider it worth the money to add Bayesian filtering to OE.
MS is using Hotmail as a testbed for various versions of filtering software; by making changes and observing user behaviour, they could determine whether people generally agreed with the filters, thus roughly gauging their effectiveness. Since changing source on a central server is a faster method of deploying updates than forcing users to require a new client, Hotmail is the perfect place to test new filtering schemes.
Honestly, I thought that either the first or the third was true. Here, it turns out that the first and the second are true.
I wonder what ISPs will be left to do? I suppose they'll either have to seek out a cheap/free mail client for Windows, or switch to webmail.
Somebody get that guy an ambulance!
The idea that you could get your buggy, insecure software for FREE with the purchase of the OS was too much for the Microsoft brass. You need to pay to have your PC vulnerable. Basically what this gets down to is that too many casual users were opting NOT to purchase Outlook as their POP3 mail clients in favor of, the stripped down but functional, Outlook Express. I expect to see an inexpensive (relatively speaking) stand-alone Outlook being actively marketed to fill the void in the future.
http://www.tomandemily.com
You have to buy Microsoft Office, Word, and maybe Works to get a spellcheck. If you do not own any other Microsoft products, the spellcheck will not be functional. Furthermore, it states this information in the OE help.
After my internship @ Microsoft Redmond, I went back for a full-time interview with a couple different groups. My first interviewer asked the "So which products do you like?" question. I immediately said 'Outlook Express!', since I was using it religiously at the time. (It really is one of the more elegant pieces software ever to come out of the Pacific Northwest.) Later, they took me up to see someone else. It was the Program Manager for Outlook Express. ('The Godfather!') As of 1999 (or early 2000), there was only one guy. He was really cool and smart and all and I remember his eyes lit up when I mentioned that sometimes people just want a new version with better UI and graphics. That was a big part of his job, I guess. It didn't seem like there was any interest company-wide at that point (four years ago) to do anything else to Outlook Express, depite the fact that jillions of people use it every day. He implied that some of the crap features (like the Ivy/Party templates or whatever) were pushed by upper management and no one used it. :)
I'm not terribly surprised that they're forgoing future development, but I hope they don't drop it in favor of some .NET-enabled solution. As far as Microsoft software goes, it was one of the best. Here's to you, Outlook Express.
"IMAP is just not a very rich protocol," Steve Conn, Exchange Server product manager, told ZDNet Australia during the company's Tech Ed conference. "The great majority of people used Outlook Express because they weren't on a LAN environment, and Outlook was just too fat for them."
In other words, Microsoft saw OE as their IMAP client, and so by dropping OE, they are also abandoning the IMAP mail protocol. In spite of what Mr Conn says, IMAP is a very rich protocol: it allows you to maintain multiple mail folders on the server, it allows you to keep your mail client configuration on the server, and in principle it allows you to store arbitrary files on the server.
But it's not as rich as, let's say, MAPI.. And by "rich" I mean that IMAP isn't bloated, and everyone can write clients that use it! There are no proprietary secret extensions! That sucks!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
What is even more amazing is that if you install Outlook and you do not have OE installed, Outlook will automatically install it. You have to have the entire OE application installed to only use the news reader.
Oh well, I guess disk space is cheap.
Just because Microsoft is chosing not to continue further developement of OE does not mean that they are abandoning it.
Microsoft hasen't done squat to notepad, paint, or solitare since Windows 3.0 (maybe earlier) but continues to ship them, because they work and are stable (although I admit that functionality may be low.)
I use OE every day, and I happen to really like it. I read all message as plain text, and have never recieved a virus through OE. I can't see any reason to think that I'll be changing e-mail clients anytime soon
OK...
I can do this. I am, after all,
a superhero!
An XML based Webmail application could solve a lot of the issues brought up here. As I understand XML (through the various XML apps we use) Once a user hits the database for the requested data, that data is then stored on the client side in cached or in browser memory XML pages. With the data then stored locally, when a user manipulates that data it doesn't have to go back to the server, it just manipulates the local copy therefore it doesn't have to rely on a stable or fast internet connection, and then it just sends updates to the server afterwards in the background. Also through the transformable nature of XML it should be theoretically possible to click a button and have emails stored in some email message standard that various email readers could read or just as a text file.
I had an interesting moment the other day. My father works several doors down from me; I'm IT support for the Physical Plant, he's the Auto Shop supervisor.
.mbx files into standard RFC822 mail files."
His new laptop (for running auto diagnostic software) came without an SSH client installed, so he had been trying to use Netscape Mail to read his email. He found it impossible; it was way too inefficient for the volume of email that he gets from various technician's groups. He requested that I "put PINE on the machine so I can check my email like I do at home."
Here is a guy that doesn't like PCs at all, only using them to get info about cars and ask me where we should meet for lunch on Sunday, and a text-based MUA works better for his needs than a GUI one. Someone who gets the volume of email that you do may want to take a closer look at an MUA with the efficiency, flexibility, and power of Mutt.
Also:
http://freshmeat.net/projects/mbx2mbox/
"Converts Outlook Express
On the first page of results for "outlook". Written in Perl and supposedly cross-platform.
WMBC freeform/independent online radio.
This is just the next phase of Microsoft's "decommoditization" of basic internet services. Pay attention kids.
1. Embrace. Microsoft provides Outlook Express to connect to "commodity" internet services like POP and IMAP accounts. OE is the default mail client for Internet Explorer and quickly becomes the preferred application for many ISP's POP accounts since no additional software is needed.
1. Extend. Microsoft buys Hotmail email accounts, provides web-based interface, and launchs proprietary authentication system called Passport.
2. Extinguish. Microsoft discontinues Outlook Express, leaving ISP's in the lurch, and paves the way for a proprietary, web-services based solution.
Want to connect to Yahoo mail? Not with Microsoft's mail program. Want to connect to your ISP's mail? What? You need a separate application for that? Why can't I just click the mail icon? Of course, that takes me to Microsoft's mail system.
The big question is whether Microsoft is premature in step three. I think not.
-Hope