Comments for Xobni outs Outlook inadequacies at http://www.itwire.com , comment 1 to 11 out of 11 comments http://www.itwire.com Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:26:32 -0600 FeedCreator 1.7.2 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-11843 You are crazy to think that Outlook 2007 is not the ..stuff. Its the same as people holding on to the fact that Vista sucks. Vista is fast and great. I get no errors at all. I wish I could say the same for my XP install. If you are that big of a mail user, you should be hooked up to an exchange server. I am an IT company of 1 and am running a MS SBS Server 2003. Very cheap to setup and operate and gives me real features. Um like the ability to use Exchange over HTTP. There is nothing better than this with Outlook 2007. Features, features, features. This is how we big boys do real email for business. - myphatself Fri, 23 May 2008 07:10:38 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-11730 I did try XOBNI and found that it slowed down my pc enormously. So off it went, after one(1) day. Business wise still use Outlook because i do like it. @ home I run my own server with Desknow and use online mail. So I do have the best of both worlds. - Cas Wed, 21 May 2008 21:45:09 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10593 I think there are two issues here. Outlook 2007 is known to be slower then previous versions. We use it daily with larger amounts of email on both POP3 accounts and an excvhange account. We do find that it has pauses that mean waiting, especially if you want to read mail while others are being downloaded. Saying that I find it still better then previous versions for its features. On the Xobni issue, we have Windows desktop search installed on out systems and it indexes our data drives AND email so that we can quickly search for emails. I have a mailbox that is over 1 gig and it takes about 5 seconds to do a search on through the entire email file as well as the archive pst. We did have google desktop installed for the search, but the Microsoft one gives you the results in catergories (mail, docs, pictures) much better then the Google search engine style results. - Glen Fri, 09 May 2008 10:58:04 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10472 Hello Stan. Extending on from my previous post yesterday, I was thinking today (on the train :-) about your article and why you may have come to the conclusion that Outlook is slow (for you). Then I wondered whether you have Outlook configured to connect into your Hotmail or Gmail accounts. If so, that is why you experience poor performance. I tried using Outlook to connect into the free web-based e-mail programs but it was a slug, so I stopped doing that and use Outlook for POP3 accounts only. I reiterate what I said yesterday: my POP3 account with my ISP flies in Outlook with no problems whatsoever. So... I wonder if you use Outlook to grab your Hotmail/Gmail e-mails? If so, problem solved. - Overseer Wed, 07 May 2008 19:25:24 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10471 I do not understand this article. Am I dumb? No I am not. Maybe you are joking about the web email progams being the gun? They are as slow as! Hotmail even place a notice on their Live pages as they load which says "Taking too long? Try the classic version". Now what does that tell you mister journalist? - Light Bulb Wed, 07 May 2008 19:17:10 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10418 Holy smokes... that Clare person above doesn't take much to convince. Perhaps Clare, you should have searched for a few separate reviews from other web sites before you took the plunge on new 3rd party software. - Question Everything Tue, 06 May 2008 23:54:47 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10417 Hello Stan, I use Microsoft Outlook 2007 everyday. While I am at work, I receive about 100 e-mails every day. Touch wood, but I have no problems thus far. I too am a bit unsure what you mean by it being slow. The web based e-mail programs are good for people who go on holidays, etc., but business people who travel would typically take their own laptop with them. I have the free web e-mail accounts, and I also have a proper POP3 account through my ISP. I have tried both (who hasn’t). I prefer to use my POP3 account with Outlook as my primary service. - Overseer Tue, 06 May 2008 23:50:39 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10416 I'm convinced to give Xobni a try. Installing it as I type - Clare Tue, 06 May 2008 23:41:17 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10410 Stan my man, somethings up. You must have a virus huh? My outlook has no probs. - Vietnam Tue, 06 May 2008 22:32:13 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10408 Hi Thunder I can only talk from my own experience. Perhaps I get more emails than you - I am a journalist after all. However, I can tell you Web-based clients kill desktop clients on the road. I still have Outlook on my computer and occasionally use it to retrieve emails from past times. As soon I have finished using it, I kill the process because it slows my system down noticeably. - Stan Beer Tue, 06 May 2008 21:46:03 -0600 http://www.itwire.com/content/view/18069/1023/#comment-10407 Stan... you've lost me... I use MS Outlook every day, at work and at home. I have no idea what you are talking about with it being slow and unresponsive. That simply is not true. The only time you have to wait a little bit is when it is downloading large file attachments from the mail server. If your incoming emails are simple text, they download into your inbox very quickly. When you sign into Hotmail or Gmail, you just see the summary of each email... you do not get the attachments straight away, which is why you may think it ''seems'' more responsive, but in reality, when you want the attachment on a web-based service, you must wait for it to download, just the same as Outlook. My opinion? I find my own web based email clients annoying because when you click from one email to the next email, you have to wait for a new web page to load. In Outlook, the shift from one email to the next email is instant. I think you were a bit unfair in this article, and did not compare the overall pro’s and con’s of both methods. Different people will like different features in each method, and ultimately, it is a personal choice. - Thunder Tue, 06 May 2008 21:13:50 -0600