Yeah like VLAN administration........... ;-)
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew S. Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "NT 2000 Discussions" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 8:15 AM Subject: RE: MS Outlook 2000/2002 > My only complaint with Outlook is the apparent lack of multithreading > when downloading mails as a POP3 client. > > Other than that, most of your complaints can be configured by options > native to the application. > > If you're that concerned, don't use Outlook. > > I must say that you spend a whole lot of time complaining, but that > would be overstating the obvious. Perhaps you should consider a less > irksome occupation. > > > ============================================================== > ASB - http://www.ultratech-llc.com/KB/?File=~MoreInfo.TXT > ============================================================== > "I see no day", I heard him say, "so grey is the face on > every mortal." -- Queen. > > > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Adam Smith > >Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 11:06 PM > >To: NT 2000 Discussions > >Subject: MS Outlook 2000/2002 > > > > > > > >All, > > > >Outlook is so useless. I am finding this more and more with many > >Microsoft written programs these days that although they may > >be a market > >leader and have a good interface for their software, the > >core features > >are barely up to scratch. > > > >Take message rules. > > > >How many people do you know who have message rules set up? Heaps. I > >have about 15 on my own system. One is set up to parse the > >headers of > >incoming emails for "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" so that emails to this list > >sort into the correct folder. Another one is for a Linux list, a BSD > >list and a whole host of newsletters etc. > > > >There are times where I load up Outlook, it downloads mail > >and sorts it > >into the correct headers. > > > >Message Rules Annoyance #1 -- Why does Outlook need to have every > >single email come into the Inbox *before* its headers get > >parsed? It's > >extremely aggrovating to sit on my Inbox watching email > >download, move > >to my Inbox, get parsed and then sort to the correct box. > >Why? Because > >every time an email comes through, the contents of my inbox > >moves down > >one row and then back up one row. When you've got multiple emails > >coming in being sorted all the time, you keep mis-clicking > >things. "Why > >don't you wait for it to finish, then read your email?" .. Err.. Why > >should I! > > > >Message Rules Annoyance #2 -- Many, MANY times I load Outlook and it > >begins to download email, appears to parse the headers and > >then leaves > >the message in the Inbox! There have been countless times > >that I have > >loaded Outlook only to find that its left mail there that should have > >been sorted correctly. So I trott off to the Message Rules > >options to > >manually run the sort on the Inbox. When I get there, I > >have to click > >*EVERY* rule manually, because there's no "Select All" button. How > >annoying! When I run it, it works!! > > > >NEXT! > > > >Outlook takes ages to load. I have approximately 800Mb > >worth of email. > >I keep it all, because I am a hoarder. I keep mailing list archives > >going back as far as to the date I joined, and I used to even file my > >SPAM mail in a folder called "SPAM". I deleted nothing. > >These days I > >keep everything but the spam and newslettery things that I > >receive that > >I don't want to read. So due to the fact that I'm on three > >high-volume > >mailing lists, (NT2000/freebsd-questions/LinuxSA), I get > >quite a bit of > >mail every day. If I reboot, Outlook loads in about 60 seconds. It > >often completely freezes my computer until it has loaded. > > > >If I close Outlook and reload, its fast. Caching is great! But why > >does it take so long to load in the first place? I am not asking > >Outlook to load all of my mail before I read it, I just want > >to get into > >the program and get on with my work. I think it could have been done > >better. One big file for each of my mail folders seems like > >a massive > >great mistake... > > > >NEXT! > > > >The Contacts book. What a load of sh...amefulness. > > > >Let's say I have my main contacts book, and within that are three > >sub-groups I have created.. "Employees," "Clients" and "Suppliers". > > > >In my Employees group I have heeeeeeeeaps of email addresses > >because I > >make so much money I need heaps and heaps of employees. > >Now, I need to > >write an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I stoke up the editor by > >pressing the "New" button. OK. Click the "To..." button > >and there are > >no addresses listed in the address list! Why? Because Outlook is > >trying to read addresses from somewhere else *OTHER* than its Address > >Book! Dumb! The only way to send him an email without knowing his > >address is to go to his contact information, right click and > >click "Send > >Message to Contact". Duh. Of course you should. I mean the "To..." > >button is there for ordering pizza, right? > > > >So instead of doing that you decide to put in his email address > >manually. So you type in the following into the 'To' field: > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >and click Send. OOPS!! You typed ".co" instead of ".com". Too late! > >The email has gone. Oh well, go into the sent items box, > >copy the text > >out of the email (because there's no way to just re-send a > >message thats > >already be sent, no, who'd want to ever do that??).. Anyway, so you > >compose a new email and put in his email address correctly, and paste > >the text back into the email and press send. It goes > >through. *PHEW*. > > > >Two days later we need to send an email to Tom Cruise again. > > We stoke > >up Outlook and start typing his email address, and Outlook prompts us > >because it's remembered him from last time! How clever, > >Outlook!! So > >you look at the list of matches and it shows you two of them: > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >Now if we press the TAB key, it will select the first match, which is > >wrong. So every time we want to quickly send an email to > >Tom Cruise, we > >need to press Down--Enter. This is going to get annoying because I > >intend to be conversing with Tom Cruise quite a bit. I > >might even give > >up a lamb roast dinner for it. OK So this is easy. Let's just edit > >this list of addresses that Outlook's cached and remove the redundant > >entry. > >Where do you go to do that? Oh wait, you can't!! Hooray! > > > >NEXT! > > > >One day, we've composed an email and its sitting in the > >"Outbox" which > >means its waiting to be sent, but hasn't left the email client yet. > >Cool. You just want to double check that email before it > >goes out, so > >you double click on it to load it up and read it. It's all > >good. Then > >you press "Send/Recieve" and the email stays in the Outbox. > >You click > >it again and it stays there. "What the fork?," you say. > > > >You ring up IT support and they tell you that the email won't go out > >anymore because you've loaded it up while its in the Outbox. > > You need > >to drag the email into your 'Drafts' folder, then re-send it. If you > >look at it now, its in italics. After you double click to load it > >during its stay in the Outbox, you make it proper-case. > >That means it > >won't leave anymore. What kind of an idiot wouldn't realize that? I > >mean, REALLY! > > > >NEXT! > > > >"Outlook has blocked access to the attached attachments: > >IMPORTANT-VIRUS-FREE-EXECUTABLE.EXE" > > > >Well that's all well and good, because I know that my mate at the > >computer next to me just emailed me this file. But now I > >can't load it > >because Outlook won't let me. You see Outlook doesn't > >realize that I'm > >an intelligent enough person to make my own decisions when > >it comes to > >file attachments. Had it prompted me on installation to enable or > >disable these "security" precautions, then maybe I'd be a bit more > >happy. Sure I can disable them in the registry, but who wants to do > >that all the time? Give me the good old outlook.conf file. > >And we all > >know the real reason Outlook blocks these types of files is > >because it > >is still coded to run attachments that you haven't told it to. Like > >loading of HTML pages in an email. This is a work around to make > >Outlook look like its helping you when in fact it's only > >stopping itself > >from causing more problems on your system. Then again if > >you're idiotic > >enough to load a .VBS file that was sent to you by [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >then its your own fault, but then again, who designs an > >Operating System > >security system that allows an executed program to have the identical > >level of security to the person who ran it? Err.. > > > >NEXT! > > > >When you create an email account, why do you have to click the "More > >Settings" button to give it a non auto-generated name? Aaaarrrgh!! > > > >NEXT! > > > >People send you emails in HTML/Rich Text format all the time. Sure I > >dont mind reading them in that format, but I'd never send ANYONE an > >email in RTF or HTML format. Yucko! When I click reply to an RTF > >email, why does it reply in Rich Text mode? I have configured my > >Outlook to generate emails in Text only!! Oh, thats right.. > >G-E-N-E-R-A-T-E emails. Not reply to emails in Text Mode. Generate > >only. So all replies to emails go back in the format they > >started in. > >Riiiight. > > > >NEXT! > > > >The blue quote line. What a piece of garbage that is. When someone > >sends me an email I like to cut it up and reply to parts of it by > >quoting one or two lines that they had said, then responding to that. > >For example: > > > >----------------- > >> Hello! > > > >Hey, how are ya? > > > >Cya later! > >----------------- > > > >If they send that message in RTF or HTML, you reply in RTF > >or HTML. So > >Outlook auto-quotes their original message with a solid blue > >line down > >the left of it. That means you are forced to reply at the top of the > >email. Who replies like that? It's inconsistent, gross, and hard to > >follow. > > > >So if you go down and decide to break up the message a bit, > >you can't!! > >All you can do is modify the original message. But wait!! > >There's one > >way around it! Change the current format of your email from > >HTML into > >text! YESSSS that ought to do it!! "Format Menu, Plain Text". Cool. > >It says you'll lose your formatting, but that's what we want. So you > >click OK, and Outlook takes away the blue line, and doesn't > >prefix the > >original message with those lovely '>' characters. So > >you've got to do > >it manually!!!!!!!!!!! > > > >NEXT! > > > >Doing it manually will just cause Outlook to have a gross amount of > >characters per line, which means that any generic email > >clients will see > >it quote properly the first time, then if that original > >quote makes it > >through to a second reply, it will come out looking > >something like this: > > > >> This is a line of text that Outlook has played around with and > >> made really > >> dumb. So dumb in fact that it drops words so that they 'fit' > >> when in > >> actual fact they just make things look gross. Hard to read, > >> hard to > >> quote with too! > > > >NEXT! > > > >"Extra line breaks were removed in this message. To restore, click > >here." This is a little yellow line on the status bar in the middle > >between your email and your preview pane. If you actually > >*RESTORE* the > >line breaks, the email usually looks right. Amazing! > > > >NEXT! > > > >Quoting with UNC pathnames. > > > >If an originating email has a line beginning with a backslash, ie a \ > >character, it comes out as a link in Outlook, (underlined > >blue). If you > >then go and hit reply and reply in text mode, Outlook stops > >quoting the > >> character including and after that line. Very very wrong! > > > > > >I think I've had enough... I need a coffee... > > > >Maybe next week I'll bring you another Microsoft product review :-) > > > >My rating: 2/10 > > > > > >1 point for Looks > >1 point for Interface > >8 points lost for annoyances. -- No bonus points for you, Outlook! > > > > > > > > > >Adam Smith > >IT Officer > >SAGE Automation Ltd > > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://www.sageautomation.com > > > >Phone: (08) 8276 0703 > >Fax: (08) 8276 0799 > >Mobile: 0414 895 273 > > > >ԿԬ > > > > > ------ > You are subscribed as [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp > To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------ You are subscribed as [email protected] Archives: http://www.swynk.com/sitesearch/search.asp To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
