PSC Inc wrote:
Sorry hewnix:
I do not know where you got your information, but you are incorrect.
Outlook comes as part of even the most basic version of OFFICE, not the
operating system. Again, MS OUTLOOK is part of OFFICE, not Windows.
OUTLOOK EXPRESS, on the other hand, IS bundled with Windows, and is the
default e-mail client unless you select another. Windows prompts you for a
decision when you install another e-mail program like Opera, Firefox,
Mozilla etc.
Why do I know this? Because I have been using MS Office products since day
one. I am considering a switch to OpenOffice 2.2 (have just downloaded it
today) but cannot make the switch until I find a reasonable equivalent for
Outlook, which, BTW, also contains calendar and contact functions, Tasks and
Notes functions as well as it's usual use as email client. I and my
business would be lost without Outlook. IMHO, YMMV.
Best,
WJS
-----Original Message-----
From: hewnix [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2007 10:43 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [users] Why we need something like Outlook
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.
What is preventing you from using MS Outlook with OpenOffice?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
