I've never used it before seeing the demo you linked (thanks for the link). OpenExchange has a few things OWA doesn't have, like the Pin Board, and the welcome screen that's similar to Outlook's Outlook Today.
I'll just list some things while I think of/see them:
OpenExchange might have the same access to the Global Address List that OWA does (hard to see that in the online demo). You can type the real name of someone in OWA's To: line, it'll look it up on the GAL and ask you to pick the right alias if there's abiguity. Again, OE might have that functionality (I don't know).
OWA has a spell checker in the compose form, OExchange doesn't seem to.
OWA 2k3 has the same layout of Outlook 2k3 (3 vertical panes--one for your folder list, one for messages, and the pane displaying an actual email). That might not be for everyone, but I really like it.
If using IE with ActiveX, you can drag and drop your email around, and right-click on items and get meaningful context menus.
OWA seems to load faster, but I may be much closer to my exchange server than SUSE's server, so don't read much into that.
OWA supports SMIME. I looked around in OExchange, and can't seem to find it (although it may).
Another note on the UI...OWA puts Contacts, Tasks, Notes, Calendar and Public folder in a tree structure with all the other folders. That seems more intuitive easier to navigate than OpenExchange's buttons. That may be another personal preference.
OWA will give you little notifications when you get new mail (Toast, similar to IM clients). You can turn that off if you don't like it.
OWA is skinnable. Or rather, it has themes for its fonts, colors, header pictures etc that the user can choose between. I think the Exchange admins can make news ones as they please.
The pane on the left of OWA (with your folder list) has big buttons to jump to your Inbox, Calendar, Rules, etc. You can minimize those so they are very small.
OWA's UI elements have Tooltips, just like Win32 apps.
Here's a link to OWA's free trial, if you'd like to play with it. OExchange is a pretty cool webmail client, especially compared to Hotmail or Yahoo's. OWA 2k3 seems to go beyond a webmail client though--it provides a lot of features that are only otherwise available from a local client.
It also elegantly manages multiple email accounts, has calendar integration that's top-notch compared to other apps, exposes the wealth of features available in Exchange servers, etc, etc.
Outlook is well-loved by many, many people out there. Not everybody shares your assesment of it.
Write a mail client, read up on the Windows Information Rights SDK, register it as a content consumer, and work with the IRM email all you want. The IRM is just a feature of windows and windows server. Outlook 2k3 just utilizes it.
Outlook is used by 400 million people. Far and away, the majority of them would be susceptible to viruses from opening executable attachments. Outlook's development team probably made the right choice--secure by default, and allow folks turn that off (via the regkey you linked to) if they really want to.
It's funny... Locked-down by default has been preached here on Slashdot for ages and ages. Here we have an instance of Microsoft doing just that, and folks on Slashdot bitch some more.
It's all subjective. Computer noises bug the living hell out of me. Tinnitus was the final nail in the coffin for me, as it were. Permanent hearing damage sucks.
I've ordered from Silicon Acoustics a number of times, and been very happy. The Zalman quiet power supplies are very, very quiet, with good power output. The Panaflo fans are good, but I'm dying to try the hand-balanced Papst fans that they sell.
Oh, I've also purchased and Antec Truepower PSU, and while it's not a quiet as my Zalman, it's fairly quiet.
Also, do a little investigation before you put a lot of money into components--I once dropped $300 dollars on quiet parts when I assumed the PSU, the CPU fan and case fans were making all the noise. They helped, but my whiny hard drive and whiny graphics fan were by far the worse offenders.
Everyone's moaning about how DRM will completely lock out everything but Office. If someone was so inclined, they can download the Windows Rights Management SDK, register their app as a DRM consumer, and open the Office 2k3's files like crazy.
You've got to email MS's Rights Management team to get a client certificate, and I'm not sure on the specifics on what's needed for that. Point is, third-party folks will be able to utilize the Windows DRM.
You'd have a tough time writing an open-source DRM system. That would allow anyone who could see the source code know where the real bits lie, and hack together their own non-DRM'd client to read DRM'd data.
There isn't any getting around that--the unencrypted bits are stored in memory at _sometime_, and somebody could get at them if they knew the source code.
Forced is a tough thing to argue. No one will buy anything they do not want.
More accurately, you can be pissed that most of the world uses Microsoft products and most of them lack the technical skills required to make your life easier.
Microsoft's MO is to enable folks who aren't computer savvy to use a computer. I find that admirable, and even desirable from a social evolution standpoint. Unfortunately, Microsoft has made some poor design choices, and some inevitable choices during the march forward. Some of it comes across as treating users as if they are stupid (clippy is the most blaring example I can think of).
The good thing is, progress is being made (by Microsoft and others). WinXP is easier to use, far more powerful, more secure, and more stable than Win95. Same can be said of Office2003 (to be released shortly) vs Office of old.
talking to oneself is frequently the only way to carry on an intelligent conversation on/.
Too true:) I did come off harshly, and I apologize.
The problem is users. I run Windows XP at home and at work. I've been running Windows (of various sorts) for 7 years, and never been infected with a virus, email or otherwise. It is possible to run a Microsoft operating system and be virus free.
Now, I don't believe skillset required to run a secure Windows machine is any larger than that required to run a Linux machine. Any reasonably competant Linux user out there can probably use Windows with no security problems.
The skillset to run Windows at all, however, is much smaller than Linux's. That is: you don't have to be nearly as competant to use Windows as Linux. There exists a whole bunch of folks who can just use Windows but are ignorant of patches, prudent internet practice, safe emailing, etc. I don't think those folks could run Linux without some determination.
Given your use of:
- Misspellings
- Poor grammer
- Insistence to use the term 'Longhorny'
- Quote absolutely irrelevant to discussion but thrown in as a an attempt to add validity to your "argument" I believe that you are either not over the age of 8 or an insipid idiot.
Your point, underneath the "fluff and fud!", is "M$ $ucks! Ev1L T00!" Very original.
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.
*sigh* Yes, Hotmail and Outlook are the two Microsoft mail choices in the post-OE world. You're still free to use whatever non-MS client you want.
they are also abandoning the IMAP mail protocol
Outlook supports IMAP, no problem. The copy of Outlook I'm running right now talks to three servers simulateneously: my Exchange server at work, Hotmail, and the IMAP server provided by my ISP.
Exchange also supports IMAP, so you can point your favorite IMAP client (OE included) to it for your mail needs.
After all, they have no other real improvements to offer for their core products.
Office 11 will be released soon. It's beta was out like 6 months ago. Read up on it, especially Outlook's improvements.
OE doesn't make Microsoft money. Outlook does, and will continue to since MS is keeping up work on it. It does everything OE does, and more. Even talk to your own mail server.
Sure. I write code professionally, and a good part of my tools are command-line. It's nice for me, a programmer, to have. It's really, really horrible for the non-programmers out there. I believe that we should be making computers that cater to the people, rather than the other way around. {Linux, BSD, Amiga, whatever} elitists disagree.
There are some cases where one still needs to use command-line to change the system on many flavors of Linux, though SuSE I've experienced has made the most extensive changes in this area, to the point that I don't think command-line knowledge is ever needed, not even a text file editor, to update a computer's settings, add hardware, etc. The Linux world is still quite addicted to the command line. As you mention, SuSE is just now getting to the point where a user doesn't absolutely need to use a shell. Now that's progress! Windows has been there for 8 years or more, the Mac for nearly twenty.
I didn't say that the Windows world was great, in terms of new innovations. I said that it was marginally better then *nix. Linux was never intended as a new, original operating system--it is a free implementation of an operating system that's been around for 30 years.
Apple, honestly, really embraced the notion that computers should be accessible. Not that most of the features in Macs or MacOS were original innovations thought up by Apple employees: they merely adopted user-friendliness as their dogma.
BTW: WinFS is not a journaled file system. Files are actually laid out as a database, with different rows and columns for each file that are searchable. The OS (and apps, if they implement it as such) will be able to assign new fields at will to the files--now you can add whatever metadata you want to files. The files might be mapped as c:\somewhere\whatever, but that won't have any bearing on the actual location of the files on the disk. As far as I know, WinFS is truly unique. The first good use for it I can think of is a google-type tool for searching your local files. Imagine finding exactly what you're looking for in the first few hits in a search, without having to drill into the right directory first.
A journaled file system just keeps journals of metadata and operations so that data can be reconstructed in realtime if something horrible happens (unexpected shutdown, power outage). [WinFS will have similar functionality] Searching for files on a journaled file system is still done the old fashioned way.
The other good thing here is that it shows the OS war isn't over completely. So maybe someday in the future we may see some serious OS innovation again from some small upstart company or group of individuals. As great as linux/the bsds are they are a refinement not an innovation.
This is very true. I agree with a number of usability professors I've read...Linux is a 30-year step backwards as far as human interface is concerned. Under the hood, sure Linux might have pre-emptive multitasking, virtual memory, protected memory and so forth. It certainly doesn't have the bleeding edge (okay, the last 10-15 years or so) of operating system or UI research though. And it's not going to anytime soon.
Why can't our OS have stuff like global memory (system memory shared by a network of machines), transparent distributed computing, intelligent interfaces, AI agents to assist users, graphical interface that dumps the desktop metaphor, etc, etc? We've got the hardware that can do it.
Windows isn't moving very fast either. At least they've punted the command line, and are working some innovtive stuff like WinFS (database-driven filesystem) and 3D API's into Longhorn.
Hopefully Linux will be a kick in the butt for the market to start advancing the state of the PC.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll just list some things while I think of/see them:
Here's a link to OWA's free trial, if you'd like to play with it. OExchange is a pretty cool webmail client, especially compared to Hotmail or Yahoo's. OWA 2k3 seems to go beyond a webmail client though--it provides a lot of features that are only otherwise available from a local client.
Hope that's helpful
It also elegantly manages multiple email accounts, has calendar integration that's top-notch compared to other apps, exposes the wealth of features available in Exchange servers, etc, etc.
Outlook is well-loved by many, many people out there. Not everybody shares your assesment of it.
Write a mail client, read up on the Windows Information Rights SDK, register it as a content consumer, and work with the IRM email all you want. The IRM is just a feature of windows and windows server. Outlook 2k3 just utilizes it.
If you get the chance, try OWA that shipped with Exchange 2003. It's awesome. FYI
Outlook is used by 400 million people. Far and away, the majority of them would be susceptible to viruses from opening executable attachments. Outlook's development team probably made the right choice--secure by default, and allow folks turn that off (via the regkey you linked to) if they really want to.
It's funny... Locked-down by default has been preached here on Slashdot for ages and ages. Here we have an instance of Microsoft doing just that, and folks on Slashdot bitch some more.
It's all subjective. Computer noises bug the living hell out of me. Tinnitus was the final nail in the coffin for me, as it were. Permanent hearing damage sucks.
I've ordered from Silicon Acoustics a number of times, and been very happy. The Zalman quiet power supplies are very, very quiet, with good power output. The Panaflo fans are good, but I'm dying to try the hand-balanced Papst fans that they sell.
Oh, I've also purchased and Antec Truepower PSU, and while it's not a quiet as my Zalman, it's fairly quiet.
Also, do a little investigation before you put a lot of money into components--I once dropped $300 dollars on quiet parts when I assumed the PSU, the CPU fan and case fans were making all the noise. They helped, but my whiny hard drive and whiny graphics fan were by far the worse offenders.
Everyone's moaning about how DRM will completely lock out everything but Office. If someone was so inclined, they can download the Windows Rights Management SDK, register their app as a DRM consumer, and open the Office 2k3's files like crazy.
You've got to email MS's Rights Management team to get a client certificate, and I'm not sure on the specifics on what's needed for that. Point is, third-party folks will be able to utilize the Windows DRM.
Yes, it's multi-threaded. There are some scenarios that you _could_ get a hangup on the main thread, but they're very uncommon.
Another posted pointed out cached-exchange. It works great, and you can read all your email without even being connected.
You'd have a tough time writing an open-source DRM system. That would allow anyone who could see the source code know where the real bits lie, and hack together their own non-DRM'd client to read DRM'd data.
There isn't any getting around that--the unencrypted bits are stored in memory at _sometime_, and somebody could get at them if they knew the source code.
cut and paste does not work with Outlook DRM protected emails. If you reply, the reply note has a blank body.
Did you disable the security enhancements for Internet Explorer? I found that the web was unusable because that thing was so locked down.
Forced is a tough thing to argue. No one will buy anything they do not want.
/.
:) I did come off harshly, and I apologize.
More accurately, you can be pissed that most of the world uses Microsoft products and most of them lack the technical skills required to make your life easier.
Microsoft's MO is to enable folks who aren't computer savvy to use a computer. I find that admirable, and even desirable from a social evolution standpoint. Unfortunately, Microsoft has made some poor design choices, and some inevitable choices during the march forward. Some of it comes across as treating users as if they are stupid (clippy is the most blaring example I can think of).
The good thing is, progress is being made (by Microsoft and others). WinXP is easier to use, far more powerful, more secure, and more stable than Win95. Same can be said of Office2003 (to be released shortly) vs Office of old.
talking to oneself is frequently the only way to carry on an intelligent conversation on
Too true
The problem is users. I run Windows XP at home and at work. I've been running Windows (of various sorts) for 7 years, and never been infected with a virus, email or otherwise. It is possible to run a Microsoft operating system and be virus free.
Now, I don't believe skillset required to run a secure Windows machine is any larger than that required to run a Linux machine. Any reasonably competant Linux user out there can probably use Windows with no security problems.
The skillset to run Windows at all, however, is much smaller than Linux's. That is: you don't have to be nearly as competant to use Windows as Linux. There exists a whole bunch of folks who can just use Windows but are ignorant of patches, prudent internet practice, safe emailing, etc. I don't think those folks could run Linux without some determination.
Given your use of:
- Misspellings
- Poor grammer
- Insistence to use the term 'Longhorny'
- Quote absolutely irrelevant to discussion but thrown in as a an attempt to add validity to your "argument"
I believe that you are either not over the age of 8 or an insipid idiot.
Your point, underneath the "fluff and fud!", is "M$ $ucks! Ev1L T00!" Very original.
How this comment received karma baffles me.
And get iRate over the overuse of 'i' in marketing. I find it annoying to the X-Treme.
They both use MAPI as the middle layer between the client and server. They are totally disparate otherwise.
Recent versions of Eudora, AOL and Netscape Messenger also utilize MAPI.
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.
*sigh* Yes, Hotmail and Outlook are the two Microsoft mail choices in the post-OE world. You're still free to use whatever non-MS client you want.
they are also abandoning the IMAP mail protocol
Outlook supports IMAP, no problem. The copy of Outlook I'm running right now talks to three servers simulateneously: my Exchange server at work, Hotmail, and the IMAP server provided by my ISP.
Exchange also supports IMAP, so you can point your favorite IMAP client (OE included) to it for your mail needs.
Death of IMAP indeed.
Wearing your tinfoil hat?
After all, they have no other real improvements to offer for their core products.
Office 11 will be released soon. It's beta was out like 6 months ago. Read up on it, especially Outlook's improvements.
OE doesn't make Microsoft money. Outlook does, and will continue to since MS is keeping up work on it. It does everything OE does, and more. Even talk to your own mail server.
Outlook (no Express) talks to hotmail. Outlook 11's (soon to be released) spam filter even works while talking to hotmail.
If they "kill" it, then just keep using the copy you've got. It'll be awhile (like 6-7 years) before it's not usable on current versions of windows.
Sure. I write code professionally, and a good part of my tools are command-line. It's nice for me, a programmer, to have. It's really, really horrible for the non-programmers out there. I believe that we should be making computers that cater to the people, rather than the other way around. {Linux, BSD, Amiga, whatever} elitists disagree.
There are some cases where one still needs to use command-line to change the system on many flavors of Linux, though SuSE I've experienced has made the most extensive changes in this area, to the point that I don't think command-line knowledge is ever needed, not even a text file editor, to update a computer's settings, add hardware, etc.
The Linux world is still quite addicted to the command line. As you mention, SuSE is just now getting to the point where a user doesn't absolutely need to use a shell. Now that's progress! Windows has been there for 8 years or more, the Mac for nearly twenty.
I didn't say that the Windows world was great, in terms of new innovations. I said that it was marginally better then *nix. Linux was never intended as a new, original operating system--it is a free implementation of an operating system that's been around for 30 years.
Apple, honestly, really embraced the notion that computers should be accessible. Not that most of the features in Macs or MacOS were original innovations thought up by Apple employees: they merely adopted user-friendliness as their dogma.
BTW: WinFS is not a journaled file system. Files are actually laid out as a database, with different rows and columns for each file that are searchable. The OS (and apps, if they implement it as such) will be able to assign new fields at will to the files--now you can add whatever metadata you want to files. The files might be mapped as c:\somewhere\whatever, but that won't have any bearing on the actual location of the files on the disk. As far as I know, WinFS is truly unique. The first good use for it I can think of is a google-type tool for searching your local files. Imagine finding exactly what you're looking for in the first few hits in a search, without having to drill into the right directory first.
A journaled file system just keeps journals of metadata and operations so that data can be reconstructed in realtime if something horrible happens (unexpected shutdown, power outage). [WinFS will have similar functionality] Searching for files on a journaled file system is still done the old fashioned way.
No, not necessarily. Don't tell me that you never use a GUI though... Humans can process information a hell of a lot faster than one line at a time.
The other good thing here is that it shows the OS war isn't over completely. So maybe someday in the future we may see some serious OS innovation again from some small upstart company or group of individuals. As great as linux/the bsds are they are a refinement not an innovation.
This is very true. I agree with a number of usability professors I've read...Linux is a 30-year step backwards as far as human interface is concerned. Under the hood, sure Linux might have pre-emptive multitasking, virtual memory, protected memory and so forth. It certainly doesn't have the bleeding edge (okay, the last 10-15 years or so) of operating system or UI research though. And it's not going to anytime soon.
Why can't our OS have stuff like global memory (system memory shared by a network of machines), transparent distributed computing, intelligent interfaces, AI agents to assist users, graphical interface that dumps the desktop metaphor, etc, etc? We've got the hardware that can do it.
Windows isn't moving very fast either. At least they've punted the command line, and are working some innovtive stuff like WinFS (database-driven filesystem) and 3D API's into Longhorn.
Hopefully Linux will be a kick in the butt for the market to start advancing the state of the PC.
Thank you for the post. You've even got a URL to back up what you're saying :) If I had mod points, I'd give them to you.