Seems like this type of correspondence continues to arise on this list every few months or so. I think the reason is because people dont understand how some things work. Let me elaborate with some observations below.
Outlook is a "Mail Client" that comes with some versions of Windows (Outlook Express is the other choice)... MS Exchange Server provides the Calendaring, Email Storage and all those other handy things it supplies that are used by Outlook. Without Exchange Server, Outlook is pretty much just an Email client...... The Exchange Server is key to it's differentiation. Microsoft Office is completely separate of Outlook. In MS Office's configuration, it is set by default to use Microsoft Outlook (a separate product) as it's email client. Outlook comes bundled with some versions of Windows (XP Pro,etc..), Outlook Express comes bundled with others (Home Edition). Microsoft Office is a $400 "add-on" to Microsoft Windows. Outlook (or Outlook Express) comes bundled with the Operating System due to marketing. OpenOffice is an equivalent to Microsoft Office. It is not an equivalent to Microsoft Windows. It is not an equivalent to Outlook. It provides drawing, spreadsheet, presentation and wordprocessing functions. It can be "interlinked" other programs by modifying configuration parameters. In order for OpenOffice to internally provide functionality equivalent to Outlook, it would require writing and supporting an OpenOffice "Exchange" server and a mail client equivalent to Outlook. This would complicate the architecture and add bulk to the install image - while not adding significant value. There are several other organizations creating equivalents to this Outlook/Exchange functionality. Their success is fairly subjective - do some research and find one you like. If you need "real" Exchange Server connectivity, use Windows and Outlook with OpenOffice. There is nothing preventing you from doing that. Using Outlook as an excuse for not using OpenOffice doesnt make any sense - like comparing apples to oranges..... William Case wrote: > Hi; > > I am not snipping because the whole example has me mystified. > > On Mon, 2007-04-09 at 20:34 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> On Monday 09 April 2007, PJH wrote: >> >>> I have heard all the arguments as to why no one needs >>> Outlook, but last night, my niece, a very smart person >>> (full scholarship to MIT, MSCompSci at Berkeley paid for >>> by Bell Labs, etc.) gave me her reasons for using >>> Outlook. >>> >>> I'm going to quote her message to me and I'd like to get >>> reasonable responses. >>> >>> "The main reason Outlook is my choice is its integration >>> of calendar, contacts, e-mails, documents, and tasks >>> (to-dos). You can create a task and attach to it any >>> relevant information including documents, e-mails, >>> contact info for people involved, links, etc. When >>> you’re ready to schedule the task, you can drag and drop >>> it right into your calendar. When you go to do the task >>> (either from your calendar or a task list), everything >>> you need to accomplish it is right there in front of you. >>> >>> "As an example, we [my niece runs a small consulting >>> business] are looking to hire a web designer. My >>> business partner has sent out a request for >>> recommendations and has been forwarding me the e-mails >>> that look worth following up on. I’ve promised her that >>> tomorrow I’ll check out a certain particularly promising >>> web designer. The action is scheduled in my calendar, >>> with all my partner’s web designer e-mails attached. >>> When I go to check out the designer’s previous works, all >>> the links are right there in her e-mail; when I’m ready >>> to call her, her contact info is there. When I’m done >>> checking her out, if I want to follow up with some of the >>> other designers, I can just copy the task to my task list >>> or to a future time slot in my calendar, because all the >>> e-mails from the other designers are also attached to the >>> current task. >>> >>> "Pre-Outlook, I would have seen in my Palm calendar that >>> it was time to check out the web designer. Then I’d have >>> had to go to my e-mail and search for the e-mail my >>> partner had forwarded to me from that particular >>> designer, to follow the links and contact her. When I >>> was ready to check out additional designers, I’d have had >>> to go find all those individual e-mails to decide which >>> ones to check out first. That’s a particularly simple >>> example, because it includes only e-mails, but you could >>> imagine if there were also documents I needed to check, >>> and contact info to look up, how much easier it would be >>> if it was all in one place, right there in my calendar. >>> “It’s 10:00 – here’s what you need to do, and everything >>> you need to do it.” I can go straight into action, >>> without all that hidden un-planned-for prep time it used >>> to require." >>> >>> Doesn't that sound like something we'd all like to be >>> able to do? >>> >> That is another reason to move to Linux because there is >> more than one package in Linux that will do that. Check >> out Kontact or from what I have heard Evolution. >> >> > There was nothing in the example that I can't do with Evolution and > presumably Kontact. > > >> The programers at OOo could figure out a way to blend OOo to >> work with these packages, you will have the full package >> that MS offers and without all their garbage. >> >> > Where does OOo come into the example? > > OOo can call my emailer's compose window with the address book, can > automatically attach a file and automatically convert the *.odt to a > *.doc file (soon to include *.docx). > > I think it's a question of perception only. Microsoft users feel more > comfortable if they see everything as one package so they know it can > work together. They are afraid of getting into the frustrations of > incompatible applications that Microsoft seems to build into their (M > $'s) programs. Microsoft users just don't believe it is possible to have > two different packages (when you say 'packages' they hear > 'manufacturers') work together. > > I don't think OOo has to add anything. This list and the forum and > other 'marketing' channels could be more forward about promoting other > OSS packages just to make the point about how OSS applications work > together and differ from Proprietary OS's and Applications in this > regard. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
