> So you are a Redmund dead-ender? Outlook costs $$$. The better > alternatives are free, either advertising supported or open source. Yet > you describe them as $$$ and you cling to MS's buggy behemoth from the > last century.
You obviously haven't used Outlook this century. Outlook 2007 is very stable and non-buggy and my users are bugging me (no pun) to get it. Everyone that has been upgraded from Office 2003 loves the new version of Office. Unlike previous versions of Office, it actually is worth buying. But, I agree that there are other free and very good open source options available. However, few, if any, are an integrated solution as Outlook is; not even Gmail. It's likely overkill for most home users, but for people like my wife, she wants it at home because it's what she uses at work and doesn't want to have to learn how to use Thunderbird. Interesting side-note: Gmail regards 'Thunderbird' as a typo. "Don't be evil....yet." ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
