Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

windowslatest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 535 posts

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#201

Post by hylaride »

SoftTalker wrote: post #155
hylaride wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Active Directory and MS SQL Server are both solid products, as is .NET. The windows NT kernel is very well thought out, too. The last iteration of windows phone was quite good, if too little too late. Don't get me wrong, MS will enshitify anything it can to make a quick buck. They're much like Disney in that regard.

SQL Server is a fork of Sybase. Not a MS invention. Active Directory is probably based on someone's LDAP server, though I don't know for sure. .NET is a copy of Java NT kernel is good, thank Digital/Dave Cutler for that.

> SQL Server is a fork of Sybase. Not a MS invention.

It's long-since been rewritten. Pre-SQL Server 2000 it was garbage, but it's been improved significantly since then. I'd still use alternatives given the choice, but it's a solid DB.

>Active Directory is probably based on someone's LDAP server, though I don't know for sure.

So you don't know. It was written in house, using a bunch of standardized protocols (LDAP, X.500, kerberos), though with proprietary extensions (GPOs, etc).

> .NET is a copy of Java

That's a gross oversimplification. It's arguably a rip-off after MS tried to sabotage java, but it's their own implementation.

> NT kernel is good, thank Digital/Dave Cutler for that.

Yes, MS hired an experienced OS person for it. Probably one of the best things they ever did.

---

I'm not saying MS deserves kudos or the benefit of the doubt, but they can put out good software, and these are all mission-critical examples of what they have to (having AD go down would bring a whole corporation to a halt). The problem is that with almost everything else, MS has the incentive and capability to ruin. And ruin they do...

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#202

Post by thewebguyd »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #63
patates wrote: post #8

> Outlook is based on WebView2, and like all web apps, it’s slow Fastmail also has a web based email client, which is as fast as (if not faster than) Outlook Classic. The new Outlook is just bad. Load order is wrong, it renders everything on every window, loads unnecessary data, etc. Plain annoying.

IME running the new outlook in an actual web browser (through outlook.office.com) is waaay faster than the heavy (heh) client. Bonus points for it running fine on Linux, too. I understand there are some missing features compared to the old one (can't recall which), but for basic corpo emailing it works perfectly for me. I now have 0 reasons to use Windows at work, so, for once, I'll nonironically cheer MS for a job w…

> I understand there are some missing features compared to the old one

There are some people that use Outlook for...well I'm not sure what but things that go way beyond email and calendar. I've been using the web app for several years now, it's fine. When I was new in IT, I always struggled to see what the big deal was with Outlook desktop. The web mail has folders, rules, shared mailbox support, integrated calendar, etc.

What more do you need out of email?

Well, turns out a lot. People treat email has a permanent data store. I've encountered folks with multiple PST files archiving 10+ years of email. I ran into people that needed to queue up a bunch of offline emails in their outbox to send when they're on network again (ok, I kind of get this use case), and I came across all manner of horrors of COM Add-ins.

Anyway, the root of the problem is people using email for everything it was never intended to do or be. If "new" Outlook can break some of those habits, we'll all be better off for it.

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#203

Post by gigel82 »

bob1029 wrote: post #199
patates wrote: post #8

> Outlook is based on WebView2, and like all web apps, it’s slow Fastmail also has a web based email client, which is as fast as (if not faster than) Outlook Classic. The new Outlook is just bad. Load order is wrong, it renders everything on every window, loads unnecessary data, etc. Plain annoying.

WebView2 can be a fantastic experience when the application is designed around it with intent. It can't be a technological afterthought. Taking an application that was designed for web and throwing it in a desktop shell is how you wind up with bad experiences. A hybrid of WebView2 and native elements seems to be the best approach. You can completely hide the browser startup delay with these techniques. The Discord en…

Until you look at memory consumption in Task Manager or Process Explorer. WebView2 spawns ~400Mb worth of various browser processes. Your main app process by itself might look nice and slim, but all that (somewhat hidden) cost is atrocious.

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#205

Post by efsavage »

patates wrote: post #8

> Outlook is based on WebView2, and like all web apps, it’s slow Fastmail also has a web based email client, which is as fast as (if not faster than) Outlook Classic. The new Outlook is just bad. Load order is wrong, it renders everything on every window, loads unnecessary data, etc. Plain annoying.

Just last week I vibed an .eml viewer that uses WebView2 and can confirm that it's very quick when not encrusted with garbage.

https://github.com/efsavage/WinEML

Also a daily Fastmail user and it's as fast as any local mail client I've ever used.

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#207

Post by nxc18 »

beart wrote: post #25
netsharc wrote: post #5

Started a new job, with Windows 11. notepad.exe now takes 3 to 4 seconds to load on my work system... (even after closing the last tab and reopening the program). Hah, it even has in-app purchases, for AI writing...

As slow as Windows is (very), once you start adding the corporate security tools on top of it (Crowdstrike) and have to deal with a slow and buggy corporate DNS system, it just becomes unusable. The only way I can do anything timely now is through WSL.

True, those things make Windows unusable. They also make the Mac worse, but not so much worse that it isn’t an absolute breath of fresh air compared to any corporate provided Windows device.

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#208

Post by KetoManx64 »

thewebguyd wrote: post #202
vladvasiliu wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IME running the new outlook in an actual web browser (through outlook.office.com) is waaay faster than the heavy (heh) client. Bonus points for it running fine on Linux, too. I understand there are some missing features compared to the old one (can't recall which), but for basic corpo emailing it works perfectly for me. I now have 0 reasons to use Windows at work, so, for once, I'll nonironically cheer MS for a job w…

> I understand there are some missing features compared to the old one There are some people that use Outlook for...well I'm not sure what but things that go way beyond email and calendar. I've been using the web app for several years now, it's fine. When I was new in IT, I always struggled to see what the big deal was with Outlook desktop. The web mail has folders, rules, shared mailbox support, integrated calendar,…

Outlook COM addons + AutoHotKey was one of the ways that I learned programming back in the day. Email arrives > check the sender > if sender is $company > check for keywords and then run excel macros based on that > generate PDF report and automatically generate an outlook email, attach and send the file.

Good times, it feels like we're getting less and less flexible with the hackability of our corporate workflows as time goes on.

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#209

Post by bluGill »

rafterydj wrote: post #193
Eric_WVGG wrote: post #174

hey, I have a question for any product managers who are in charge of making decisions re: rebuilding app UI in Electron, like 1Password with their entire app, Adobe with their dialog boxes, Windows with their Start Bar (!#@!$!) My understanding was that the proposition of Electron is that it’s there's some cross-platform advantages, also it’s basically easier and you can hire a junior dev to wing it. My understanding…

Not a product manager but I habitually try to play devil's advocate as one. I think it's popularity, full stop. You _could_ vibe code a native app no problem - but then you're targeting one set of hardware. If you're already just vibing it, why not make something that will work cross-platform while you're at it? And if an LLM is prompted with that, they'll usually go with the popular choice: web app on Electron.

There are plenty of cross platform options. I write with Qt for example.

Re: Microsoft new Outlook takes 10 seconds to do what Outlook Classic does instantly

#210

Post by nicoburns »

olex wrote: post #10
patates wrote: post #8

> Outlook is based on WebView2, and like all web apps, it’s slow Fastmail also has a web based email client, which is as fast as (if not faster than) Outlook Classic. The new Outlook is just bad. Load order is wrong, it renders everything on every window, loads unnecessary data, etc. Plain annoying.

The Fastmail client is good when it's up and running, but not as good as well-implemented native apps. The initial startup is much slower, and the iOS / iPadOS app (which is the same webapp iirc) is pretty bug-ridden, with the webview freezing or app not progressing past the loading animation without a close swipe / reopen.

My main gripe with the Fastmail client is that it doesn't work offline. This is of course absolutely possible to do with a webapp, and IMO ought to be a priority for an email client.
Post reply on HN