 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / General / Networking / September 2006Entourage vs. Apple Mail
Why would you want to use MS Entourage over the Apple Mail program? Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. > Why would you want to use MS Entourage over the Apple Mail program? > Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you > loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. exchange access, shared diaries. > Why would you want to use MS Entourage over the Apple Mail program? > Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you > loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. There's been more reports of data loss and gremlins in Mail users to date. Mail.app doesn't seem to have fully matured yet. I'd be happy to move across once I know it's stable and no longer exhibit a whole range of strange bugs (see MacFixIt). -- -- First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's a fully developed PIM software. And because it's one single application, as opposed to three applications (Mail, Address Book, iCal), your data is much more interactive. Entourage 2004 also contains the Project Center, a handy feature that will allow you to organise and share files and data. If you want to focus on the e-mailing experience itself, Entourage offers a convenient three pane reading mode which displays the preview pane on the right to the e-mail list rather than at the bottom, which makes it easier to read longer e-mails. Also, Entourage (in Office 2004) works closely together with Word, so you can create a more or less complex document in Word (with tables etc.) and send that as an HTML e-mail; Entourage therefore allows you to create more complex e-mails than Mail does. It also gives you more control over schedules, i.e. it allows you to precise the interval of time for every single e-mail account to check for new messages etc. Long story short: Entourage is more customisable than Mail is. If you're perfectly happy with Mail, and if Spotlight indexing is important to you, then by all means, stick with Mail. But if you own Office, you've already paid for Entourage, so you might want to give it a try. Again, it largely depends on your needs. On 11.10.05 2:00, in article 1128992444.575429.306500@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "Steve" <sfinlay@mac.com> wrote: > Why would you want to use MS Entourage over the Apple Mail program? > Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you > loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. > First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's a > fully developed PIM software. And because it's one single > application, as opposed to three applications (Mail, Address Book, > iCal), your data is much more interactive. That does not follow. > If you want to focus on the e-mailing experience itself, Entourage > offers a convenient three pane reading mode which displays the > preview pane on the right to the e-mail list rather than at the > bottom, which makes it easier to read longer e-mails. I believe that three-pane mode is a poorer implementation than separate windows. I also think that putting the preview pane on the side makes the pane too narrow to read comfortably--of course a lot has to do with the width and height of the monitor. > Also, Entourage (in Office 2004) works closely together with Word, so > you can create a more or less complex document in Word (with tables > etc.) and send that as an HTML e-mail; Entourage therefore allows you > to create more complex e-mails than Mail does. What can that combination do that Word and mail.app can't? I would think, though, that sending a complex document like that would be better as an attachment. There's no guarantee that the recipient has an email client that can display HTML mail. > It also gives you more control over schedules, i.e. it allows you to > precise the interval of time for every single e-mail account to check > for new messages etc. That definitely is a benefit; Claris Emailer had the same capability, and I wish that mail.app also had it.  SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. The biggest difference in Mail's favor for me is it's foldering system. Each element - e-mail, fax, whatever is saved individually within a folder versus Entourage which is one big inaccessible file. A while back I had a bad block on my drive on which my db lived and I lost everything because if the program ca,'t read all of the db, it can't read any of it. Huge deign flaw in my eyes. With Mail in the future if something like that happened I'd be able to access the other 99% no problem. That alone was enough for me to make the change to Mail but since there I absolutely love it. It's smooth, intuitive, looks great visually, has threading, I can get e-mail remainders, shared calendars. If you're on a Mac, to me anyway it makes sense to go with the e-mail client which is superbly designed and constantly evolving. Just my 2c. Kevin in article michelle-0F2E88.08080611102005@news.west.cox.net, Michelle Steiner at michelle@michelle.org wrote on 10/11/05 11:08 AM: >> First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's a >> fully developed PIM software. And because it's one single [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > That definitely is a benefit; Claris Emailer had the same capability, > and I wish that mail.app also had it. > The biggest difference in Mail's favor for me is it's foldering system. > Each element - e-mail, fax, whatever is saved individually within a folder [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > sense to go with the e-mail client which is superbly designed and constantly > evolving. Apple Mail is a good application, except for two glaring faults: 1) It's Bayesian filtering takes much too long to train mail as junk. 2) It fails to move what I mark as Junk into the Junk mail folder (or any folder, for that matter) immediately after I mark it as junk. I corrected this by installing a haxxie called "JunkWatch". SignatureDonald L. McDaniel Please reply to the original thread. ======================= > 2) It fails to move what I mark as Junk into the Junk mail folder (or > any folder, for that matter) immediately after I mark it as junk. That's not a Mail bug, but rather something wrong with your installation. SignatureTom Stiller PGP fingerprint = 5108 DDB2 9761 EDE5 E7E3 7BDA 71ED 6496 99C0 C7CF > 2) It fails to move what I mark as Junk into the Junk mail folder (or > any folder, for that matter) immediately after I mark it as junk. I've never seen this problem on any computer with any version of Mail, so I strongly suspect it's a local issue for you. SignatureMike Rosenberg <http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida <http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart Toyota Prius fans: Check out alt.autos.toyota.prius > > 2) It fails to move what I mark as Junk into the Junk mail folder (or > > any folder, for that matter) immediately after I mark it as junk. > > I've never seen this problem on any computer with any version of Mail, > so I strongly suspect it's a local issue for you. Whether it is a "local issue" or not is kind of irrelevant to me, since I did not "install" Mail, it was installed when the OS was installed. I simply set the options I wanted, including having Mail move Junk into the Junk mail folder. Anyway, since installing JunkWatcher, I've had no other problems with this, since JunkWatcher actually works. SignatureDonald L. McDaniel Please reply to the original thread. ======================= On 11.10.05 16:08, in article michelle-0F2E88.08080611102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's a >> fully developed PIM software. And because it's one single >> application, as opposed to three applications (Mail, Address Book, >> iCal), your data is much more interactive. > > That does not follow. In Entourage, for instance, you can link a contact to an event, a mail message to a task, etc., which you cannot do in Apple's PIM programs. Click on a link inside an Entourage item, and it will take you straight to your link target. It's neat, and it's convenient, though it could be more intuitive. >> If you want to focus on the e-mailing experience itself, Entourage >> offers a convenient three pane reading mode which displays the [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the pane too narrow to read comfortably--of course a lot has to do with > the width and height of the monitor. But you can have separate windows as well, if you want to: simply double-click a message. You can also make your preview pane behave the way you're used to, i.e. have it show below the message list. And of course it is more useful if you have a bigger screen and a higher resolution; I'm not really sure if I would recommend it for a screen size less than 1024*768. And to be honest, it's not even ideal at that resolution on my 15" iMac G4. >> Also, Entourage (in Office 2004) works closely together with Word, so >> you can create a more or less complex document in Word (with tables [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > as an attachment. There's no guarantee that the recipient has an email > client that can display HTML mail. Of course. Which is the reason why I always try to send e-mail messages in plain text format. However, some people like to send HTML messages, and if you want to have a complex document as your e-mail body, then the integration of Word and Entourage definitely is an advantage: you can for instance create tables in a Word document, then have Word encode that table into HTML and pass it on to Entourage. Of course, this is no miracle solution: you'll still have to deal with Mac Word's less than perfect web page encoding, but it is an option that might be ideal for some users. And this integration can only be achieved if you use Entourage as your e-mail client, since Word does not allow you to send encoded complex documents to Apple Mail. But as you said, in that case, you'd better attach the document the old-fashioned way. But still, it IS one thing Entourage can do which Apple Mail can't. >> It also gives you more control over schedules, i.e. it allows you to >> precise the interval of time for every single e-mail account to check >> for new messages etc. > > That definitely is a benefit; Claris Emailer had the same capability, > and I wish that mail.app also had it. I know. I find the pre-configured schedules too limited, and it would also be great if you could actually specify different schedules for different accounts. > >> First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's > >> a fully developed PIM software. And because it's one single [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > mail message to a task, etc., which you cannot do in Apple's PIM > programs. That has nothing to do with it being one application vs. three applications. > However, some people like to send HTML messages, and if you want to > have a complex document as your e-mail body, then the integration of > Word and Entourage definitely is an advantage: you can for instance > create tables in a Word document, then have Word encode that table > into HTML and pass it on to Entourage. And you can do that with Entourage and mail also, with copy and paste or save and insert. Or it could be done with an Applescript. BTW, you can do the same with Pages and Mail; Pages can export to Word, HTML, and RTF format (and plain text, too). SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. On 11.10.05 19:20, in article michelle-E90B7D.11201011102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >>>> First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's >>>> a fully developed PIM software. And because it's one single [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > That has nothing to do with it being one application vs. three > applications. Entourage can link items because its different components are all regrouped in one single database. Because of that monolithical database, there is some kind of superstructure that links together all these categorically different items, address book entries, e-mails etc. and allows them to interact in ways that cannot be possible if you have three separate databases. So maybe you're right, it's not strictly speaking the application itself, but rather the underlying structure. But then again, I'm not a programmer, so I'm not sure if you could actually have a centralised database and then have different programs access it in a way that mirrors the way Entourage behaves. >> However, some people like to send HTML messages, and if you want to >> have a complex document as your e-mail body, then the integration of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > BTW, you can do the same with Pages and Mail; Pages can export to Word, > HTML, and RTF format (and plain text, too). True, but using the Word/Entourage combo is more convenient. Compose your message in Word, send it to Entourage as HTML, pick a recipient and send it. That's easier (marginally, I'd agree, but still) than composing a document in Word, selecting the text, copying it, opening a new message in Mail and pasting it all in there. Especially since you cannot be sure that the copying and pasting is going to preserve your text, keeping it the way you are able to see it in your word processor. As I said, I never use that feature precisely because I tend to send my messages in plain text format and attach strongly formatted text as a separate file. However, this is one feature which Entourage offers that cannot be found in Mail, and that's one of the things the OP asked for. > Entourage can link items because its different components are all > regrouped in one single database. Because of that monolithical > database, there is some kind of superstructure that links together > all these categorically different items, address book entries, > e-mails etc. and allows them to interact in ways that cannot be > possible if you have three separate databases. I believe that's not true either. What can it do that's not possible with separate databses, and why is it not possible with separate databases? > True, but using the Word/Entourage combo is more convenient. Compose > your message in Word, send it to Entourage as HTML, pick a recipient > and send it. That can be done with Word and Mail via an Applescript. And I'm sure that MS could have designed Word to do it with Mail if they had wanted to. > That's easier (marginally, I'd agree, but still) than composing a > document in Word, selecting the text, copying it, opening a new > message in Mail and pasting it all in there. Especially since you > cannot be sure that the copying and pasting is going to preserve your > text, keeping it the way you are able to see it in your word > processor. I don't see why copying and pasting won't preserve everything; and know that by using an attachment, it will preserve everything. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. On 11.10.05 23:34, in article michelle-70A281.15342911102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> Entourage can link items because its different components are all >> regrouped in one single database. Because of that monolithical [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > with separate databses, and why is it not possible with separate > databases? Read Paul Berkowitz's reply for a detailed explanation. >> True, but using the Word/Entourage combo is more convenient. Compose >> your message in Word, send it to Entourage as HTML, pick a recipient [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > that MS could have designed Word to do it with Mail if they had wanted > to. Maybe they could have. Maybe they could not. And why would they? Their product ships with an e-mail client, so why should they support other e-mail clients? >> That's easier (marginally, I'd agree, but still) than composing a >> document in Word, selecting the text, copying it, opening a new [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I don't see why copying and pasting won't preserve everything; and know > that by using an attachment, it will preserve everything. Have you actually tried copying and pasting strongly formatted documents into either Mail or Entourage? Just to give you an example: open Word, create a table. The default line size is 1/2 pt, which is clearly visible and prints, too. Select the table, copy it, and paste it into either a new Entourage or Mail window. Result: you won't see the table. In fact, Mail will only display the table if the line size is 1pt or higher. In Entourage, the table won't even show up. And there you go, a bit of text that was perfectly visible in Word has lost its formatting by pasting it into a different application. By the way, the same thing applies to Pages: create a table and paste it into Mail, and tell me that the end result is the same thing as the table you have in Pages. And just to prove my point, the table will not show up in a new Entourage message, either. The only way of correctly translating this complex document from Word into an HTML-formatted e-mail is by using the Word/Entourage combo. (There may be other, more complex ways, but this one is the only obvious method.) Michelle, this is not an Apple-bashing post or anything like that. The OP simply asked (amongst other things) what Entourage has in addition to the features that Mail has. That does not mean that Entourage is "better" than the iApps: they're different, and choosing your e-mail application is, as Daiya pointed out, a matter of personal preference. There's no need to bother with Entourage if you're perfectly happy with Mail; however, if you need some of the features mentioned in this thread, then Mail won't do the job. Mail clearly has some features which are not available in Entourage, such as Spotlight indexing, and for some, that's already reason enough to stick with Mail. And Mail offers a better integration with Safari (you can send an entire webpage as an HTML message, if you really want to do that). The best thing to do is to try both programs and see which one suits you better. > >> Entourage can link items because its different components are all > >> regrouped in one single database. Because of that monolithical [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Read Paul Berkowitz's reply for a detailed explanation. I read it, but it didn't convince me. > > That can be done with Word and Mail via an Applescript. And I'm > > sure that MS could have designed Word to do it with Mail if they [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Their product ships with an e-mail client, so why should they support > other e-mail clients? They do sell Word as a stand-alone application, apart from Office. > > I don't see why copying and pasting won't preserve everything; and > > know that by using an attachment, it will preserve everything. > > Have you actually tried copying and pasting strongly formatted > documents into either Mail or Entourage? Into Mail, but not from Word; I don't have any Microsoft products other than their mouse drivers and IE (which I hardly ever use) on my system. > The only way of correctly translating this complex document from Word > into an HTML-formatted e-mail is by using the Word/Entourage combo. > (There may be other, more complex ways, but this one is the only > obvious method.) I did some experimenting with Pages and Mail. The only way I could get it to work right was to save the document and then open it in Safari (I didn't try it with any other web browser) and then copy and paste into mail (or drag it). (Or if you don't need to include it in an existing outgoing message, just press command-I to create a new message from Safari.) This means that it can be done with pages if Apple fixes the bug that prevents it from happening. If I imported the HTML document, it appears as an attachment, and does not display in the message; that can also be fixed because a plain text document imported into Mail displays in the body of the message instead of appearing as an attachment. So there are some bugs to be worked out, but there's nothing else that prevents it from happening. > Michelle, this is not an Apple-bashing post or anything like that. The OP > simply asked (amongst other things) what Entourage has in addition to the > features that Mail has. And I'm saying that except for a few bugs, Apple's apps can do the same things. I'm not bashing Microsoft. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. On 10/11/05 11:20 AM, in article michelle-E90B7D.11201011102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> In Entourage, for instance, you can link a contact to an event, a >> mail message to a task, etc., which you cannot do in Apple's PIM >> programs. > > That has nothing to do with it being one application vs. three > applications. Yes it does Michelle. You don't actually know what Michel is talking about because you don't have Entourage. He's not referring to a URL or anything like that, nor some sort of home-made reference. Nor a script that only scripters can write. He's talking about an Entourage artifact called a LINK. It can only exist because this is a single application with a single database. You can make a link for a message to a contact, group, calendar event, task, note, or from any of those to any other. It's only because they're all Entourage objects that you can make links from each one! You can also make a link from each of those to an external file as well. You start out form the item, you click the Link button or menu item, navigate to the Entourage object, or file, you want to link to , and it's done. Now both objects have a link to the other that will open it immediately without navigation. It's pretty good for people who have complex organized lives. There's nothing at all like in between the iApps. It may be of no interest to you, or maybe it would be. Please test out Entourage for a month some time - the Test Drive is free - before pronouncing on its uselessness. There's lots lots more in Entourage that no on has commented on here, in addition to Projects, exchange, links, notes already mentioned. You may have no use for any of it, and that's fine. But don't say it has nothing that the Apple apps have, because that's simply not true. They also have a few things that Entourage doesn't, particular easy access to external devices via iSync and Sync Services (which should come within the next year, after Apple fixes some bugs holding things up). SignaturePaul Berkowitz > It's pretty good for people who have complex organized lives. There's > nothing at all like in between the iApps. It may be of no interest to > you, or maybe it would be. Please test out Entourage for a month > some time - the Test Drive is free - before pronouncing on its > uselessness. I never said that it is useless. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. > He's talking about an Entourage artifact called a LINK. It can only exist > because this is a single application with a single database. You can make a > link for a message to a contact, group, calendar event, task, note, or from You can do this with multiple databases. There's nothing magic about it all being in Entourage's singular (and, sadly, susceptible to corruption, as well as hard to search from outside) DB. I wish Apple's AddressBook were substantially more powerful - there is a lot that it cannot do, some of which should be easy. But there is nothing preventing, say, an event in iCal from linking to entries in one's AddressBook. I do that all the time. Similarly, while they don't actually offer it, there's nothing preventing Apple from adding the ability to link an event in iCal to an e-mail message. > any of those to any other. It's only because they're all Entourage objects > that you can make links from each one! You can also make a link from each > of those to an external file as well. You start out form the item, you click In the absense of Apple having provided a means to do this sort of thing, it's a pain in the butt, but it is absolutely do-able. Under 10.4, every mail message, every iCal event, every AddressBook entry (as well as every file on your hard drive) has associated meta data and in the cases of things which are not individual files (ie. iCal events and address book entries, as opposed to mail messages or normal files), there is a "meta data cache file" which points directly to the DB entry associated with it. It'd be really nice if Apple would enhance the interfaces to give folks more access to this stuff, but in the meantime, if you'd like to see what I mean, open iCal, create an event with a unique name. Call it, say, "My Test Event". Then go to the command line and type mdfind "My Test Event". You'll get back something which looks like this: /Users/YOURUSERID/Library/Caches/Metadata/iCal/VARIOUSSTUFF-.icalevent That File is, within your system, a unique link to that event. Wanna see? Open it: open /Users/YOURUSERID/Library/Caches/Metadata/iCal/VARIOUSSTUFF-.icalevent > the Link button or menu item, navigate to the Entourage object, or file, you > want to link to , and it's done. Now both objects have a link to the other > that will open it immediately without navigation. There's nothing about multiple DBs or files to prevent this. In fact, the multiple DBs and a standard, apple-provided interface, allow other Apps to use these DBs easily. There are already non-apple programs which use Apple's AddressBook DB, for example. > It's pretty good for people who have complex organized lives. There's > nothing at all like in between the iApps. It may be of no interest to you, > or maybe it would be. Please test out Entourage for a month some time - the > Test Drive is free - before pronouncing on its uselessness. There's lots There's nothing wrong with Entourage (though I don't like monolithic, proprietary DBs and the side-effect of that DB - that Spotlight can't search it easily). I don't use it, but several friends of mine use it heavily. To each his own. Frankly, I don't use Mail.app all the time, either. Since my mail is on an IMAP server, I can use several different mail programs simultaneously. Until Tiger's Mail came out, I used Thunderbird much more than 10.3's Mail.app. Apple's got a way to go before I'll be fully satisfied with their iApp suite, but they are making progress and the open access they offer to those Apps DBs will encourage more outside development and use of them. These are good things, and hopefully Entourage will keep Apple's feet to the fire. SignaturePlain Bread alone for e-mail, thanks. The rest gets trashed. No HTML in E-Mail! -- http://www.expita.com/nomime.html Are you posting responses that are easy for others to follow? http://www.greenend.org.uk/rjk/2000/06/14/quoting BreadWithSpam@fractious.net: > though I don't like monolithic, proprietary DBs So the vast majority of the world whose data is contained in DBs like Oracle are plain wrong? DG Let's not forget the powerful feature in Entourage, where it can randomly and indiscriminately place your events and invitations into TWO separate calendars, but then allows no way for you to view them together or keep them in sync! Most disturbingly, a Microsoft employee actually stated out loud, in writing, on this forum... that it never occurred to anyone on their project management team that somebody would need to see both calendars at the same time. Staggeringly simple-minded. This has caused untold grief at our company since the SP2 update. If I weren't forced to use Entourage because of my company's exchange server, I'd run from it as from a burning building. Michelle, if you have the choice, use Apple Mail. It worked flawlessly on my system for 2 years, and it integrates perfectly with iCal and Pages. Entourage's single GIANT database file that can't be searched and is saved in a Microsoft proprietary format does not justify the (minimal) benefits described below. sw On 10/11/05 7:52 PM, in article BF71C886.B2FA2%berkowit@spoof_silcom.com, > On 10/11/05 11:20 AM, in article > michelle-E90B7D.11201011102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > Sync Services (which should come within the next year, after Apple fixes > some bugs holding things up). On 10/15/05 8:41:25 PM, in article BF7719F5.1914D%msnews@beachmusic.com, > Let's not forget the powerful feature in Entourage, where it can randomly > and indiscriminately place your events and invitations into TWO separate [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the same time. Staggeringly simple-minded. This has caused untold grief at > our company since the SP2 update. Scott, if it's my post to which you're referring, you're misquoting me. I said that I had never expected that someone using an Exchange account would only want to use the local calendar. I do not remember seeing anyone saying "that it never occurred to anyone on their project management team that somebody would need to see both calendars at the same time". It is quite the contrary. On the other hand, we needed to get the enabling functionality built first (i.e., existance of multiple calendars) before we could tackle some of the display issues. If you are referring to another post, could you please provide references? Otherwise, I would appreciate it if you would stop maligning us for something we never said. > If I weren't forced to use Entourage because of my company's exchange > server, I'd run from it as from a burning building. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > in a Microsoft proprietary format does not justify the (minimal) benefits > described below. I don't understand the "can't be searched" comment. Entourage provides both a simple and advanced Find functionality that lets you search entire identities. -nh SignatureNathan Herring MacBU SDE/Development This posting is provided ³AS IS² with no warranties, and confers no rights. OK Nathan, then let's use your exact words: > On 9/26/05 8:06:07 PM: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > regards to people using an Exchange account), but I am not on the program > management staff. Not asking you to speak for the program management staff, just your honest opinion: You don't find it completely embarrassing that NOBODY there would expect that a user might want to use only the local calendar?!? Or at least want a single comprehensive calendar view (list views don't count, as they're basically useless for "looking" at a calendar). ESPECIALLY with SP2's erratic placement of events into either calendar, and not correctly updating invitations or modifications to events? I can name 30 people in my company alone that have this problem. On my personal machine, I've traced this back to an issue where, prior to the SP2 "update," I had events in a certain category sync'd with Exchange. Now, since the update, I have NO WAY of rescinding this; those events (that used to reside in my Local calendar) are now forced into the Online calendar. More infuriating, if those events are moved to the local calendar, any updates received will create new events in the wrong calendar. Sorry Nathan, you're gonna have a hard time convincing me that this glaring issue is a minor, excusable oversight. >> Or even more basic... NO WAY to view all events from both calendars in a >> single calendar view?!? How can that have escaped EVERY programmer of this [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > to get the enabling technology out the door to support our Exchange > customers, so it's one step at a time. OK, again... I want to make sure that I'm understanding your exact words correctly: So it's OK to radically change the way the program works, adding an additional calendar without notifying users of the irrevocable change in operation once the database is converted? And the programmers were actually AWARE that there would be no way to view all events at one time, but it was more important to enable Exchange technology and make people use separate calendars until they can fix the viewing problem? OK Team, we've got the engine and the gas pedal working great! Let's get that "out the door" to our customers, then we'll get right to work on perfecting a brake pedal for the next update. You know... one step at a time. And in regard to the database being unsearchable... sorry, I misspoke. I meant to tell Michelle that it is unsearchable using Apple's integrated Spotlight Search Engine, that has been hailed in reviews as revolutionary, and is able to search EVERY other file on my computer. So Michelle, if you're still listening... the Entourage database is completely searchable... as long as you don't want the search results to relate to any other files on your computer. Hope that clears it up. In closing, let me state that it is not my intent to flame about this. However Nathan, you seem focused on defending Microsoft's indefensible position with these multiple calendars that were forced on users with no warning. This has basically screwed a few dozen people at my company, and until your program management team resolves it, we spend wasted time every day manually resolving conflicts between our new "bonus" calendar installed by the SP2 Update. It has resulted in missed appointments, double-booked group meetings, etc, etc. Aggravating, and never a problem before the SP2 update. Until it's resolved, consider yourself _self-maligned_. Your own words do more damage than I ever intended to do. I just came here looking for answers, and a simple acknowledgement that "we know it's a mistake and we're working hard to fix it as quickly as possible" would have gone a long way toward that cause. sw On 10/16/05 1:55 PM, in article BF780C57.82690%nathanh@online.microsoft.com, > On 10/15/05 8:41:25 PM, in article BF7719F5.1914D%msnews@beachmusic.com, > [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > -nh We know that these are issues and we're working on addressing them. Specifically: * The calendar/contact split was not adequately advertised in ReadMe or ORK was a bug. * That if you had calendar/contact synching by Category didn't split the calendar accordingly on upgrade is a bug. * There are some ease-of use issues when you're trying to use a Calendar not associated with your account (e.g., the local Calendar when receiving Exchange-based invitations and updates). * That there is no unified Calendar view. I've written some comments inline. -nh On 10/16/05 4:40:15 PM, in article BF7832EF.191A2%msnews@beachmusic.com, > OK Nathan, then let's use your exact words: > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > updating invitations or modifications to events? I can name 30 people in my > company alone that have this problem. I do not believe that "nobody here would expect that the user might want to use only the local calendar", so it's hard for me to find that non-existant state "completely embarrassing". I just did not personally expect that people would want to use the local calendar for Exchange-based invitations. Exchange has a permanent Calendar folder for such events, and to use a different folder breaks the Exchange paradigm. That isn't to say it isn't worthwhile, but we'd have to _add_ customizability. As for "erratic placement of events", it should be deterministic. * If the invitation came in from Exchange-mail, it'll go onto the Exchange calendar. * If it was just created, then if the current account is an Exchange account, it'll go onto that Exchange account's calendar, and otherwise onto the default mail account's calendar (which is either Exchange or the local calendar for non-Exchange accounts) * If it was opened from an .ics or .vcs file, it should go onto the default mail account's calendar. If it is not doing that, it's probably a bug. If you think that the design is "erratic", was there some alternate design that wouldn't require extra custom settings (like a per-Account setting of "Use this calendar")? Custom settings didn't make it into the schedule. It's pretty obvious that one might want a single comprehensive calendar view; it just didn't make the schedule. > On my personal machine, I've traced this back to an issue where, prior to > the SP2 "update," I had events in a certain category sync'd with Exchange. > Now, since the update, I have NO WAY of rescinding this; those events (that > used to reside in my Local calendar) are now forced into the Online > calendar. More infuriating, if those events are moved to the local calendar, > any updates received will create new events in the wrong calendar. The category synch issue is clearly a bug. Do you receive updates to that event on your Exchange e-mail? Or elsewhere? In the case of the former, per above, we'd expect the event to live in your Exchange calendar. In the latter, we should be looking at your default mail account, and if it's Exchange, using that calendar. If it's not working according to that logic, it's a bug. > Sorry Nathan, you're gonna have a hard time convincing me that this glaring > issue is a minor, excusable oversight. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > more important to enable Exchange technology and make people use separate > calendars until they can fix the viewing problem? Largely correct. Lack of notification was bad form. Database upgrades have always been (and probably will always be) irrevocable, so there's nothing new there -- back up your data before upgrading! You can view all of your events using a custom view, but since that's in table format rather than calendar format, it's not quite the same. > OK Team, we've got the engine and the gas pedal working great! Let's get > that "out the door" to our customers, then we'll get right to work on > perfecting a brake pedal for the next update. You know... one step at a > time. I do not understand how you can consider this to be a reasonable analogy. I don't worry about Entourage hopping the curb and killing pedestrians. Furthermore, the event add/update problem only affects an incredibly small section of Exchange customers: Exchange users who don't use their Exchange calendar or wish to use their Exchange calendar for non-Exchange accounts. Even multiple calendar users can switch back and forth between calendars to view events. It's not a showstopper for either subset of users, whereas not having a brake pedal is a showstopper for every driver. > And in regard to the database being unsearchable... sorry, I misspoke. I > meant to tell Michelle that it is unsearchable using Apple's integrated [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > as long as you don't want the search results to relate to any other files on > your computer. Hope that clears it up. Spotlight support is in the works. Support for it and other new-to-Tiger technologies were announced at MacWorld 2005, though they have been delayed due to some interoperability concerns. http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2005/jan05/01-11Macworld2005PR.mspx > In closing, let me state that it is not my intent to flame about this. > However Nathan, you seem focused on defending Microsoft's indefensible [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > group meetings, etc, etc. Aggravating, and never a problem before the SP2 > update. Could you explain this a little more; we'd like to understand the scenario a little better so that we know we're really addressing your problems: * How do group meetings get double-booked? If you're talking about resources (rooms, a/v equipment) using the auto-accept and auto-decline agents on Exchange, it shouldn't matter what calendar is being used in Entourage. Are you talking about invitee's free time not being reported correctly due to events on their local calendar? * How do appointments get missed? Entourage should alert you for appointments for both the local and Exchange calendar. * What are the conflicts you are seeing? Are users accepting events for which they are not free, because there's another event accepted on a different calendar? Something else? > Until it's resolved, consider yourself _self-maligned_. Your own words do > more damage than I ever intended to do. I just came here looking for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > sw Personally, I think explaining what is going on is an honorable thing, so I don't feel like I've maligned myself at all. The bugs I've mentioned are mistakes, but the design choices we made involved tradeoffs. These tradeoffs aren't always easy to evaluate, even after the decision was made, the work completed, and the product shipped. I'm still pretty sure that the design was not a mistake, even if it had negative consequences for some users -- by far, more people were helped. That said, let me reiterate what I said at the top: We know that these are issues and we're working on addressing them. SignatureNathan Herring MacBU SDE/Development This posting is provided ³AS IS² with no warranties, and confers no rights. > First of all, Entourage is more than just an e-mail program, it's a fully > developed PIM software. And because it's one single application, as opposed [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you > > loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. It's too bad that Microsoft no longer sells a "stand-alone" version of Entourage. Paying $400 (for the entire Office suite) for an email client is kind of out of reach for many people. I could probably swing $99 (as in the XP version), but $400 is just too much. SignatureDonald L. McDaniel Please reply to the original thread. ======================= > It's too bad that Microsoft no longer sells a "stand-alone" version > of Entourage. Paying $400 (for the entire Office suite) for an email > client is kind of out of reach for many people. Buy the Student Version for $149; it is exactly the same as the full retail version. The downside is that you can't buy upgrades, but when the next version comes out, you'd have to pay $149 again for a new package. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. > Buy the Student Version for $149; it is exactly the same as the full > retail version. The downside is that you can't buy upgrades, but when > the next version comes out, you'd have to pay $149 again for a new > package. AND you're actually getting three serial numbers for that price. SignatureMike Rosenberg <http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida <http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart Toyota Prius fans: Check out alt.autos.toyota.prius > > Buy the Student Version for $149; it is exactly the same as the > > full retail version. The downside is that you can't buy upgrades, > > but when the next version comes out, you'd have to pay $149 again > > for a new package. > > AND you're actually getting three serial numbers for that price. Y'know, I don't buy it even at that price; there's nothing in the MS Office package that I need or want. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. Michelle, at this point, I must ask - why are you here? You seem intent on just inciting people with your jabs and flames. It's not the place for this - we're all here to help or to get help. SB On 10/14/05 6:21 PM, in article michelle-3523F6.18214114102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >>> Buy the Student Version for $149; it is exactly the same as the >>> full retail version. The downside is that you can't buy upgrades, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Y'know, I don't buy it even at that price; there's nothing in the MS > Office package that I need or want. > Michelle, at this point, I must ask - why are you here? This thread is cross-posted, notice, so "here" is also comp.sys.mac.comm for this thread. She isn't actually hanging out on the Entourage group. :) DM > You seem intent on just inciting people with your jabs and flames. > It's not the place for this - we're all here to help or to get help. > >> Y'know, I don't buy it even at that price; there's nothing in the MS >> Office package that I need or want. Thanks Daiya - I never look at that, and frankly, I hate cross-posting!!! SB On 10/14/05 7:02 PM, in article BF75B151.4C329%daiyaNOSPAM@mvps.org.INVALID, >> Michelle, at this point, I must ask - why are you here? > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >>> Y'know, I don't buy it even at that price; there's nothing in the MS >>> Office package that I need or want. > Thanks Daiya - I never look at that, and frankly, I hate cross-posting!!! Well, for a question about the pros and cons of two programs, it makes a lot of sense to request opinions from two different groups, where people, um, will likely offer different perspectives. > > Michelle, at this point, I must ask - why are you here? > > This thread is cross-posted, notice, so "here" is also > comp.sys.mac.comm for this thread. She isn't actually hanging out on > the Entourage group. :) That's true; and I actually didn't notice that it is being cross posted until you mentioned it. I'll remove the entourage group from any further replies. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. > Michelle, at this point, I must ask - why are you here? > You seem intent on just inciting people with your jabs and flames. > It's not the place for this - we're all here to help or to get help. Excuse me? If you think that my saying that I don't have a need for Microsoft Office is a flame, you have a problem. And in that one message, you have done more inciting and flaming than I have. I don't see you helping anyone, so why are you here? SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. I didn't realize that this newsgroup was here for people to come and tell everyone (over and over) how much they don't like/need/use a product? You seem very bitter, Michelle. Just an observation. Actually, I'm here to answer the occasional question that I might have an answer for, but more importantly, to find answers to questions and problems I'm having with my clients. Have a great day. SB On 10/14/05 8:08 PM, in article michelle-74C05B.20080114102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> Michelle, at this point, I must ask - why are you here? >> You seem intent on just inciting people with your jabs and flames. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > And in that one message, you have done more inciting and flaming than I > have. I don't see you helping anyone, so why are you here? > I didn't realize that this newsgroup was here for people to come and tell > everyone (over and over) how much they don't like/need/use a product? It's already been pointed out this this thread is crossposted to microsoft.public.mac.office.entourage and comp.sys.mac.comm, and Michelle is reading it in the latter group, as am I. SignatureMike Rosenberg <http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida <http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart Toyota Prius fans: Check out alt.autos.toyota.prius > I didn't realize that this newsgroup was here for people to come and > tell everyone (over and over) how much they don't like/need/use a > product? Haven't you figured out yet that there's more than one newsgroup involved? And how do you define "over and over"? > You seem very bitter, Michelle. Just an observation. No, a projection, not an observation. (comp.sys.mac.comm removed from followups; I don't need to hear any more from you) SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. On 10/14/05 6:21 PM, in article michelle-3523F6.18214114102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: >> AND you're actually getting three serial numbers for that price. > > Y'know, I don't buy it even at that price; there's nothing in the MS > Office package that I need or want. You spend quite a proportion of your time being nostalgic for Claris Emailer, Michelle. As you well know, Entourage (and OE before it) was built by much of the same team that built Emailer, and to some extent was built on its heritage, but taken much further. It's only because the company that hired Jud Spencer, Dan Crevier, and and Dave Cortright (but not you) is called "Microsoft" that you won't give it the time of day. They're the same great developers and managers they always were. And so is their product - only 50 times as good as Emailer ever was. But if you don't need it (without even trying it), that's OK too. Have fun scripting Mail. You could have a lot more fun scripting Entourage, which is a proper scriptable app. Even now that Dan has gone elsewhere. SignaturePaul Berkowitz > >> AND you're actually getting three serial numbers for that price. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > You spend quite a proportion of your time being nostalgic for Claris > Emailer, Michelle. Not quite a proportion; just a passing thought every so often. > As you well know, Entourage (and OE before it) was built by much of > the same team that built Emailer, and to some extent was built on its > heritage, but taken much further. Yup; but frankly, I wouldn't have spend $99 on Emailer either. And the additional features (e.g., PIM) aren't on my list of features I want or need. > It's only because the company that hired Jud Spencer, Dan Crevier, > and and Dave Cortright (but not you) is called "Microsoft" that you > won't give it the time of day. Wrong. If Microsoft made a product I had a use for, and it was superior to the competition, I'd buy and use it. That's the reason I have a wireless Intellimouse Explorer and am using the Microsoft driver for it. Oh, the reason they didn't hire me was that I never applied for the job. Oh, Dan Crevier was never a Claris employee; he was an independent contractor, hired to write the Applescript implementation for Emailer, and was (still is, for all I know) a personal friend of Jud's. Jud is the one who persuaded him to go to work for Microsoft after Jud went there--which, by the way, was way before Claris became Filemaker, Inc., and dropped Emailer. Jud left after Emailer 2.0 shipped, before we started to work on 2.1. But I'm sure that those facts don't mean anything to you. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. On 10/14/05 8:05 PM, in article michelle-F9E333.20055514102005@news.west.cox.net, "Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote: > Jud is > the one who persuaded him to go to work for Microsoft after Jud went > there--which, by the way, was way before Claris became Filemaker, Inc., > and dropped Emailer. Jud left after Emailer 2.0 shipped, before we > started to work on 2.1. I didn't know that. > But I'm sure that those facts don't mean anything to you. Actually, they do. Thank you for filling me in. If it's of interest: After a few years, Jud became tired of administration, and stepped down from being Development Manager to become a (very senior) developer on Entourage full-time, no admin responsibilities. The person promoted to Development Manager of the whole of Microsoft MacBU at Silicon Valley Campus was - Dan Crevier, who thus became Jud's boss. Dan stayed there for several years, remaining Entourage's most prolific developer and still AppleScript implementer, as well as Dev Manager. Over a year ago, Dan left MacBU for Redmond and the Windows side of Microsoft, where's he's now elevated to something called a "Software Architect". (He just released some new technology on Windows code-named "Max": http://www.microsoft.com/max/ .) In the meantime, Jud is still an (even more) senior developer on Entourage, in charge of many new developments. I understand you don't have any need for the PIM side of Entourage, although I imagine you must use Apple's Address Book if not iCal? If you don't include the Entourage newsgroup in your reply, I won't see it, by the way. SignaturePaul Berkowitz > I understand you don't have any need for the PIM side of Entourage, > although I imagine you must use Apple's Address Book if not iCal? I use the address book; you can't use mail without it because mail doesn't have an integral address book. I also store phone numbers and a few street addresses there, and since I do keep the phone numbers there, I synch them with my cell phone. But if Address Book didn't have the facilities to store phone numbers, I wouldn't be synching the computer and address book, and if it didn't have street address fields, I'd be using something else too--maybe a pen and paper solution. It's a convenience, is all. I had the opportunity to work on Claris Organizer after we finished MacWrite Pro (a year or so before we acquired emailer), but turned it down because it's not a program that I would have used in my daily life. I worked on Claris Impact instead, and when that was finished, we were just getting started on Emailer, and I asked to be put on that team; I was the second SQA person on the Emailer team. > If you don't include the Entourage newsgroup in your reply, I won't > see it, by the way. OK, I'll include it in this message, just so you can see it. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. > If you don't include the Entourage newsgroup in your reply, I won't see it, > by the way. If she has excluded the Entourage newsgroup after looking at the headers, she will maybe answer in comp.sys.mac.comm since your response will go there too. But you knew that. leo Signature<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/> > > It's too bad that Microsoft no longer sells a "stand-alone" version > > of Entourage. Paying $400 (for the entire Office suite) for an email [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the next version comes out, you'd have to pay $149 again for a new > package. Since I am not a student, or parent of a student, or teacher or other educational user, I don't qualify for the Student and Teachers Edition. SignatureDonald L. McDaniel Please reply to the original thread. ======================= On 10/14/05 8:31 AM, in article 141020050831151248%invalid@invalid.com, >>> It's too bad that Microsoft no longer sells a "stand-alone" version >>> of Entourage. Paying $400 (for the entire Office suite) for an email [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Since I am not a student, or parent of a student, or teacher or other > educational user, I don't qualify for the Student and Teachers Edition. During the period when they made Entourage X available as a stand-alone (@ $99), they didn't sell very many - apparently not enough to justify the separate packaging. (When they sell Word and Excel separately, they charge a lot more, just $100 less than the full Office price.) If you were at Macworld SF 2004, they were giving them away free. ;-) There are so many people who need Word, Excel and/or PowerPoint and get the whole suite, effectively getting Entourage "for free" that they've reverted to this format only. I don't think they can justify selling Entourage alone at a price that makes it economical for them. My understanding is that they view the Student and Teachers Edition as a sort of "Home Users" edition, but I guess unless they make that licensing explicit you're sort of stuck. Maybe they allow "part-time studies" as valid? SignaturePaul Berkowitz MVP MacOffice Entourage FAQ Page: <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html> AppleScripts for Entourage: <http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/> Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be ignored. PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using - **2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions otherwise. > On 10/14/05 8:31 AM, in article 141020050831151248%invalid@invalid.com, > [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > I guess unless they make that licensing explicit you're sort of stuck. Maybe > they allow "part-time studies" as valid? Honest resellers will always ask for a copy of a student ID, which I do not possess. I have no desire to purchase a software product from a dishonest reseller. Anyway, thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it. SignatureDonald L. McDaniel Please reply to the original thread. ======================= <<Honest resellers will always ask for a copy of a student ID, which I do not possess.>> That I find an interesting statement, Donald. What you've directly implied is that neither Apple nor amazon.com are honest resellers; neither asks for verification of student status. I'm more inclined to think that Microsoft has, either through an act of commission or (more likely that case) one of commission, somehow blessed these transactions in the interest of market share. They simply must know what's going on; after all, hundreds or even thousands of copies of Educator Office didn't just fall off a truck full of stolen goods and land in amazon's or Apple's warehouses. Further, and from a marketing perspective, the marginal revenue of an additional user at $149 is certainly better than losing a customer to an uncomfortably high price tag of, say, $399. And if even half of those users grow to love the product, buy upgrades and even recommend the product to other Mac users, MS stands to lose nothing. It's a volume game, and MS is, I'd bet, hedging that it can win over the minds of users, particularly those who otherwise wouldn't have considered the product. While I don't work for the Mac BU, I'd have to assume that some of the strategy lies with some market research that show a certain (healthy) percentage of Mac purchasers work in environments where Windows (and thus almost assuredly MS Office) prevail. If that new Mac purchaser is used to working on the PC and Office, it's not a big hurdle to sell the advantages of Office on the Mac. However, because the Mac is likely a home PC, the standard price tag of some $400 is not in most purchasers' budgets: Perhaps another reason for the student discount strategy. At the end of the day, it's about market share and accurately calculating the average customer's propensity to buy a product. If Apple's market share is growing, even marginally, why wouldn't Microsoft want a good piece of it? On 10/15/05 08:48, in article 151020050848256384%invalid@invalid.com, > Honest resellers will always ask for a copy of a student ID, which I do > not possess. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Anyway, thanks for the explanation. I appreciate it. > Further, and from a marketing perspective, the marginal revenue of an > additional user at $149 is certainly better than losing a customer to > an uncomfortably high price tag of, say, $399. And if even half of > those users grow to love the product, buy upgrades and even recommend > the product to other Mac users, MS stands to lose nothing. One of the conditions regarding the student edition is that there are no discounted upgrades. When a new version is released, you have to pay the full price for it. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. > Honest resellers will always ask for a copy of a student ID, which I > do not possess. > > I have no desire to purchase a software product from a dishonest > reseller. I guess that you will not be buying anything from any Apple company store in that case; they don't ask for ID when selling that particular product. They do ask for it when selling hardware with a student discount at their brick and mortar stores. Also, they do not discount any software for students at their brick and mortar stores. (The price they sell the student package of MS Office is Microsoft's list price; Apple stores do not discount from that.) They do offer student discounts for both hardware and software at their web site, but all they ask is the name of the school; they do not ask for student ID numbers. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. > Honest resellers will always ask for a copy of a student ID, which I do > not possess. _NO_ vendor, as far as I know, ever asks for a student ID when someone buys the student and teacher edition of MS Office. I know people who have purchased this edition from several Apple Stores, several CompUSA locations, Amazon.com, MacMall, and others. Not one has requested ID. There's no indication whatsoever that Microsoft requires a valid ID. SignatureMike Rosenberg <http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida <http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart Toyota Prius fans: Check out alt.autos.toyota.prius Maybe the key word is "honest" resellers. On 10/16/05 10:18 AM, in article 1h4iujc.1b5ng4q117rmgwN%mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid, "Mike Rosenberg" <mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid> wrote: >> Honest resellers will always ask for a copy of a student ID, which I do >> not possess. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > locations, Amazon.com, MacMall, and others. Not one has requested ID. > There's no indication whatsoever that Microsoft requires a valid ID. > Maybe the key word is "honest" resellers. Maybe, but then you'd be saying that every last reseller I'm aware of is dishonest. Or, to put it another way, find an example of a reseller that's ever requested ID from someone purchasing the Student and Teacher Edition of MS Office. Does _anyone_ reading this have an example? I strongly suspect that MS doesn't impose this requirement on its resellers in the first place. SignatureMike Rosenberg <http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida <http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart Toyota Prius fans: Check out alt.autos.toyota.prius >> > It's too bad that Microsoft no longer sells a "stand-alone" version >> > of Entourage. Paying $400 (for the entire Office suite) for an email [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Since I am not a student, or parent of a student, or teacher or other > educational user, I don't qualify for the Student and Teachers Edition. I've been told that you can buy the student/teacher edition off Apple's education store website without any verification of educational status. My guess is that Microsoft "looks the other way" in exchange for sales increases--at least in the Mac Office category. Believe it or not, anyone can buy the education version -- sans any verification requirement -- at amazon.com for $130. Microsoft is quite evidently looking the other way on this... http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001WN16M/qid=1129324001/sr=8 -1/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-0907389-9471865?v=glance&s=software&n=507846 On 10/14/05 12:24, in article #fqZdTP0FHA.3000@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl, >>>> It's too bad that Microsoft no longer sells a "stand-alone" version >>>> of Entourage. Paying $400 (for the entire Office suite) for an email [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > My guess is that Microsoft "looks the other way" in exchange for sales > increases--at least in the Mac Office category. > Since I am not a student, or parent of a student, or teacher or other > educational user, I don't qualify for the Student and Teachers Edition. Anyone can buy that edition from any vendor, no proof of affiliation required. SignatureMike Rosenberg <http://www.macconsult.com> Macintosh consulting services for NE Florida <http://bogart-tribute.net> Tribute to Humphrey Bogart Toyota Prius fans: Check out alt.autos.toyota.prius > > Buy the Student Version for $149; it is exactly the same as the > > full retail version. The downside is that you can't buy upgrades, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > educational user, I don't qualify for the Student and Teachers > Edition. You walk into the Apple store, take a copy off the shelf, take it to the register, and pay the money. They don't ask for evidence of eligibility. SignatureStop Mad Cowboy Disease: Impeach the son of a Bush. It's personal preference, really, depending on your needs and your working style and which features matter most to you, but a few things that don't seem to have been mentioned: Integration with Office: --ability to Data Merge from Word --not having to set up an AutoCorrect alternative because I can use my shortcuts from Word Newsreading ability--which while limited in certain ways, for me is worth the convenience of having everything in a single program instead of running the Mail/iCal/Address Book combo *plus* a newsreader. Those things matter to me, while I don't care at all about iSync (or Spotlight, not being on Tiger). Again, personal choice. > Why would you want to use MS Entourage over the Apple Mail program? > Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you > loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. >It's personal preference, really, depending on your needs and your working >style and which features matter most to you, but a few things that don't >seem to have been mentioned: [...] >Newsreading ability--which while limited in certain ways, for me is worth >the convenience of having everything in a single program instead of running >the Mail/iCal/Address Book combo *plus* a newsreader. Just make sure you set up your preferences so that they conform to some "common courtesy" standards, like no HTML postings and no top-posting. Entourage users often bear the brunt of ridicule for abusing netiquette because of some not-so-bright default settings (at least in past versions). Not that you have to be using Entourage to look like a newbie... :) SignatureGregory Pratt gp@panix.com East Rutherford, NJ, USA http://www.panix.com/~gp/ "The only good spammer is a dead spammer." PGP Key Fingerprint: DC60 FCDE 91E2 3D41 91A3 45DB B474 3D3A 3621 AAFE The best reply on this topic! Some things are just best left to "personal choice" Some things just don't work in Apple Mail if you're on an Exchange server. I don't get why some people here are defending one POV or another over an email program??? If you like it and it does what you need - USE IT! :) SB On 10/11/05 2:34 PM, in article BF717E02.4B3BE%daiyaNOSPAM@mvps.org.INVALID, > It's personal preference, really, depending on your needs and your working > style and which features matter most to you, but a few things that don't [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >> Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you >> loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. > I don't get why some people here are defending one POV or another over an > email program??? Because the newsgroups would be pretty boring or nonexistent if there was only one point of view on any app or OS. The OP's crossposted newsgroups contain both Microsoft and Mac. Gunpowder and fire regardless whether they are talking about programs on the same OS. leo Signature<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/> Well, personally, I come here for information and answers, not entertainment, but to each, his/her own! SB On 10/11/05 4:25 PM, in article leo-BF82B5.16252911102005@news.supernews.com, "Leonard Blaisdell" <leo@greatbasin.com> wrote: >> I don't get why some people here are defending one POV or another over an >> email program??? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > leo > Newsreading ability--which while limited in certain ways, for me is worth > the convenience of having everything in a single program instead of running > the Mail/iCal/Address Book combo *plus* a newsreader. I use Entourage too but for news I prefer MacSOUP. SignaturePer Erik Rønne http://www.RQNNE.dk On 17/9/06 05:34, in article 1hlspm9.13v73vs19twbxfN%per@RQNNE.invalid, "Per Rønne" <per@RQNNE.invalid> wrote: >> Newsreading ability--which while limited in certain ways, for me is worth >> the convenience of having everything in a single program instead of running >> the Mail/iCal/Address Book combo *plus* a newsreader. > > I use Entourage too but for news I prefer MacSOUP. I too prefer a dedicated newsreader for 'serious' newsgroup work (although I use MTNW rather than MacSOUP). However, for these newsgroups I use the newsreader built into Entourage simply for the sake of convenience. SignatureBarry Wainwright Microsoft MVP (see http://mvp.support.microsoft.com for details) Check out the Entourage User's WebLog for hints, tips and troubleshooting <http://homepage.mac.com/barryw/weblog/weblog.html> > On 17/9/06 05:34, in article 1hlspm9.13v73vs19twbxfN%per@RQNNE.invalid, "Per > Rønne" <per@RQNNE.invalid> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > use MTNW rather than MacSOUP). However, for these newsgroups I use the > newsreader built into Entourage simply for the sake of convenience. Occasionally, I too use something else. 40tudie Dialog when being on a Windows computer :-). SignaturePer Erik Rønne http://www.RQNNE.dk > Why would you want to use MS Entourage over the Apple Mail program? > Doesn't seem to add any functionality not available in Mail, but you > loose iSync functionality and Spotlight searching. I just got a new iBook and the guy setting it up offered up that the calendar in Entourage 2004 is part of the app rather than a separate app, i.e., iCal is a standalone and not part of Mail. Signaturehttp://www.jamlady.eboard.com I'm very new to newsgroups but am interested in this topic. I tried to start reading from the beginning but was surprised to find that I needed to skim through various personal skirmishes. We're not talking politics or religion here, are we, guys? ;-} Re the original question, I use Mail for my teaching correspondence and Entourage for everything else. Personally, I always prefer to use Apple's native apps, and I'm definitely concerned with Entourage's single DB. For example, I recently -- carefully -- backed up my Entourage base, twice, in preparation for reinitializing my iMac G5 disk and installing Tiger. (I know I didn't need to do that, but it was time for a clean slate.) Unfortunately, both Entourage BUs were corrupt and I lost the last month of info. I suspect I could have avoided it by rebuilding the DB before backing up, but hindsight....... The reason I choose Entourage is that I love the interface that allows me to move seamlessly from Mail to Address Book to Calendar to Notes, etc. In fact, I think the Entourage app looks more like an Apple interface than the Mail app does. As several people have mentioned, it boils down to personal preference and I really hate switching among applications -- especially when I can just click a box up in the corner of whatever window I'm in. Bottom line is that both programs are excellent but both programs have their own "issues." I would definitely encourage people to try the trial version of Office and decide for themselves. As with most things in the human condition, I suspect we'll all find reasons to complain, anyway. :-} |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message