> I just don't understand why all the coding effort is being duplicated and
> segregated into two products, a combination of which many Mac users would
> want.
But it's not duplicated. The two products target similar tasks but in two
entirely different markets. Outlook works only against an Exchange server,
and only talks the proprietary MAPI protocol. This is a great setup if
you're in a company where group scheduling, public folders, delegate access
to data, centrally managed global address books, and other similar groupware
features are needed.
Entourage, on the other hand, is designed for the stand-alone or small
workgroup Mac. The data is stored locally, you can sync with your Palm, ...
It is truly a *personal* information manager.
Of course there are some who all of this rolled up into a single product all
for $99. Reminds me of the Simpsons episode where Homer designs a car. If a
product tries to be all things to all people more often than not is useful
to no one. There are huge UI and architectural issues with product goals
like "It could be a local address book of 50 contacts, or there could be 12
shared address books on the server, each with 100,000 contacts." And of
course if you do it, in the end I think the product ends up diluted.
IMHO, of course.
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
