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

The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

windowscentral.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 155 posts

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#71

Post by AnonC »

mrcsharp wrote: post #25

I've switched to Thunderbird after hearing about this a couple of weeks ago. I simply do not want yet another WebView/Electron-based application on my machine. They feel slow and out of place compared to native applications. Microsoft, in the past 10 years, have failed to provide a good UI option for developers. WinForms is legacy. WPF is legacy. WinRT is dead. UWP is dead. MAUI is a mess. WinUI looks to be either ab…

Sadly, Thunderbird is becoming (or has become) a non-option in companies that use Outlook365/Microsoft365. Microsoft seems to have been quite effective in disabling IMAP and SMTP as a default in these tenants and scaring companies that even with OAuth2, these are insecure and not as safe as sticking with Outlook as the client.

Companies (actually the information security teams) may be taking shortcuts based on Microsoft’s recommendations to reduce their work while imposing a huge cost on every worker.

It used to be that companies were locked in with Windows and MS Office. But there were some alternative options for those. IMO, now companies are heavily locked in to Microsoft by subscribing to Microsoft365. There is no migrating out or exit path for this. They just have to suffer through whatever Microsoft puts them through.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#72

Post by ulfw »

bitwize wrote: post #36
LorenDB wrote: post #2

The main problem is that Microsoft is trying to use a WebView. If they really want a single cross-platform app, they should develop a native framework that will work everywhere instead of shoving everything into a web engine.

Name a native UI framework that enables seamless cross-platform deployment without extensive testing on each platform. Go ahead, I'll wait.

There's two platforms. Two. Windows and MacOS. Let's not pretend there's dozens. Why does one have to jump through hoops for two simple platforms? Just write the UI code twice. It's not rocket science really.

Same goes for Android/iOS.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#73

Post by _a_a_a_ »

mrcsharp wrote: post #25

I've switched to Thunderbird after hearing about this a couple of weeks ago. I simply do not want yet another WebView/Electron-based application on my machine. They feel slow and out of place compared to native applications. Microsoft, in the past 10 years, have failed to provide a good UI option for developers. WinForms is legacy. WPF is legacy. WinRT is dead. UWP is dead. MAUI is a mess. WinUI looks to be either ab…

Well bloody good luck with that mate, I'm desperately looking to switch away from Thunderbird (started using it last year) and while I genuinely hate Microsoft (see many of my past posts), Outlook just plain works. Thunderbird has just been one bug after another.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#74

Post by GartzenDeHaes »

WeylandYutani wrote: post #5

I acquired Office 21 LTSC because I really hated the new design so now I'm safe for the next 5 years. Realize there are probably hundreds of UI designers working at MS who need to look busy.

I bought an Office 2007 Pro DVD on Ebay last year and it works great on Win 10.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#75

Post by lencastre »

I hate the new outlook more than the old outlook. The insider beta version of the desktop version sometimes doesn’t render properly and search is painful to use, granted the new version is missing million features from the desktop version so I use both.

I use the web version when I need only my “online” inbox, to check email and answer quickly, like a first parse including flagging, categorizing, and replying quickly. Because hotkey shortcut combos are different or non-existent and access to local mailbox PST files is not available I use the desktop version for the archiving, filing, and eventual researching and answering with attachments, etc.

I make extensive use of categories and the search folders feature of the desktop version and I made my workflow into just two archive folders INBOX and SENT where every single message that was saved is properly categorized.

The new outlook cannot access my archive and it’s also horrible at search, like it’s desktop brethren.

Finally, I use Outlook because it is m365 and mandated by IT.

For personal email I use Gmail and mailspring.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#76

Post by Propelloni »

AnonC wrote: post #71
mrcsharp wrote: post #25

I've switched to Thunderbird after hearing about this a couple of weeks ago. I simply do not want yet another WebView/Electron-based application on my machine. They feel slow and out of place compared to native applications. Microsoft, in the past 10 years, have failed to provide a good UI option for developers. WinForms is legacy. WPF is legacy. WinRT is dead. UWP is dead. MAUI is a mess. WinUI looks to be either ab…

Sadly, Thunderbird is becoming (or has become) a non-option in companies that use Outlook365/Microsoft365. Microsoft seems to have been quite effective in disabling IMAP and SMTP as a default in these tenants and scaring companies that even with OAuth2, these are insecure and not as safe as sticking with Outlook as the client. Companies (actually the information security teams) may be taking shortcuts based on Micros…

Well, there is Owl [1], which I have mentioned before. Of course, it is the old "chase the rabbit" game we know since the 2000s -- MS365 is just a faster moving target than Exchange on MS Windows Server.

So far the devs have kept up well, I can count the instances I had to fall back to OWA on one hand over the last year. And I use it daily within my company.

[1] https://addons.thunderbird.net/en/thunderbird/addon/owl-for-...

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#78

Post by duderific »

ulfw wrote: post #72
bitwize wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name a native UI framework that enables seamless cross-platform deployment without extensive testing on each platform. Go ahead, I'll wait.

There's two platforms. Two. Windows and MacOS. Let's not pretend there's dozens. Why does one have to jump through hoops for two simple platforms? Just write the UI code twice. It's not rocket science really. Same goes for Android/iOS.

Presumably that would at least double the cost. Additionally, you have to find native Windows and MacOS developers, which are harder to find than web devs. Given that, it's not surprising that companies are moving toward web tech like Electron.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#79

Post by happymellon »

gochi wrote: post #34
francisl wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if its cumbersome, it's still a win-win for them to use it. The outlook app will be native desktop and mobile (except linux for now). Plus it will give the maui project more credibility, help grow its userbase. Make the framework better by providing a real world project for the maui team to benchmark, highlighting pain point, provide in-house feedback, feature request.

I would be interested to know from anyone at the Office/Outlook team why they went with what they did, and if they had any awareness of MAUI happening at all. Fully agree with the noted benefits, so any non-MAUI team insight would be really interesting

Has the Office team ever paid that much attention to what Windows was actually recommending?

All the releases that I can think of shunned the standard UI toolkits for their own homegrown UI. Presumably to show the Windows folks that the Office team is it's own little empire.

Re: The new desktop Outlook is a bad idea

#80

Post by vladvasiliu »

mrcsharp wrote: post #25

I've switched to Thunderbird after hearing about this a couple of weeks ago. I simply do not want yet another WebView/Electron-based application on my machine. They feel slow and out of place compared to native applications. Microsoft, in the past 10 years, have failed to provide a good UI option for developers. WinForms is legacy. WPF is legacy. WinRT is dead. UWP is dead. MAUI is a mess. WinUI looks to be either ab…

Were the last Outlook versions actually native? Say starting around Office 2016. They always felt very... off. Extremely laggy. Weird scrollbar behavior.

I don't usually use windows, but my employer uses Office 365, so I've been using Outlook web for several years now. It felt much snappier and more pleasant to use than the native client. I understand there are some features missing, but since I'm a very basic user (the most advanced thing I use is combining messages into conversations), it never bothered me.

The new Outlook UI looks extremely similar to the web one, and the app feels snappier on my machine. The thing I dislike the most is the empty space at the top of the window, but I guess that's just the current fashion.

Post reply on HN