Outlook 2007 still does not support newsgroup?

[Don Caton]

While intelligent people may disagree on this, the fact remains that the
guys on the front row do not consider it absurd. Where I work, we have our
own internal NNTP server and it serves strictly local newsgroups. I had to
submit special exemption paperwork making a business case to allow our
firewall to be configured in such a manner as to permit access to the
msnews.microsoft.com NNTP server and it's the only external NNTP server
we're allowed to access. I had to _prove_ that the company would save money
by allowing access to these newsgroups.

Brian:

Sorry, that didn't come out the way I meant it.

Newsgroups have the potential to be abused, no question about it. What
I meant to say was that everything else you can do in Outlook has the
same potential to be abused as well. So why use this argument only
against newsgroups?

There are tons of RSS feeds that an employee could subscribe to that
have nothing to do with that person's work, but I don't see the same
argument being made against RSS feeds in OL 2007.

There is nothing inherently bad about newsgroups that made them
unsuitable for business use; they are an information source, just like
email, RSS, web sites, etc. Like everything else, newsgroups have the
potential to be abused, but access to them can be controlled via
firewalls and other means, just like your company does.

And if newsgroup access were added to OL then policy settings could also
be added to control or disable it.

From a purely selfish standpoint I don't care, as I will be able to
continue to sell my newsgroup add-in for OL2007. But IMO, none of the
reasons thrown about for not including them in OL2007 hold water. MS
might have a very good reason for not doing it, but only they know what
that is.

 

[xfile]

But IMO, none of the reasons thrown about for not including them in OL2007

hold water.

Precisely!

 

[xfile]

Add to myself,

Can you find any function from Notepad that is not covered by Word, and any
functions of Paint is not covered by any image software?

Will anyone expect to use both Word and Notepad for doing word processing?

If Outlook is truly designed for Exchange Server as SQL Server Management
Studio for SQL 2005 and Enterprise for SQL 2000, don't sell it.

I am just curious for the reason, but in any case, Office 2007 will not be
listed as our next upgrade.

But IMO, none of the reasons thrown about for not including them in
OL2007 hold water.

Precisely!

 

[280Z28]

Hi,

I did some research on the net and is it true that Outlook 2007 still does
not support newsgroup?

With all the technologies available, why MS insists us to use two programs
for daily task?

Is it so hard for it to understand that many of us wish to use only one
program?

I use the new Outlook 2007 in an exchange environment for nearly
everything. For newsgroups, I use Thunderbird (free at www.mozilla.com).
You should give it a shot, I think you'll be quite happy with it.

The thing that got me to "try out" Thunderbird is Outlook Express
doesn't like marking entire threads as watched based on a condition of a
reply in the thread (I like marking threads as watched that I've replied
in, like this one). One I started using it more, I found that I just
like the interface overall for newsgroups.

Sam

 

[Brian Tillman]

Newsgroups have the potential to be abused, no question about it. What I
meant to say was that everything else you can do in Outlook
has the same potential to be abused as well. So why use this
argument only against newsgroups?

I agree. You should have seen how long it took befire my company decided
that employees could use the INternet without having to sign away their
first-born and document everything. As it is, all web activity where I work
is logged and many, many web sites are blocked by a "net nanny" type of
program. We can't for example, connect to Hotmail, Gmal, or Yahoo mail.
According to the front fow, such places make it easier for malware to enter
our network because the corporate virus scanner can't scan that traffic.

There are tons of RSS feeds that an employee could subscribe to that
have nothing to do with that person's work, but I don't see the same
argument being made against RSS feeds in OL 2007.

Mostly, in my opinion, because OL 2007 is not a product yet. No
right-thinking company is going to allow beta software in a production
environment. Once is does become a product and we migrate to is (at least a
year after it is released),. you can bet RSS will be disabled.

 

[Brian Tillman]

Can you find any function from Notepad that is not covered by Word,
and any functions of Paint is not covered by any image software?

Actually, yes, at least for Notepad. Word simply can't keep its mitts off
of the characters in the file, whereas Notepad gives you complete control.

Will anyone expect to use both Word and Notepad for doing word
processing?

Considering the Notepad isn't a word processor, I don't see how the example
you presents is any comparison with the "newsgroups in Outlook" debate.

 

[xfile]

Notepad and WordPad are bundled with Windows, and claimed by MS some years
ago, as the substitute of word processor for those who do not own one.

Windows Mail and OE, by the same token, are the mail client for those who do
not use or don't wish to purchase additional mail client.

If you read through the entire "debate", one of the arguments is that
Outlook should not carry Windows' basic functions as it is an value-added
product. And "newsgroup" should not be allowed because it is not favored by
most "corporations".

My example may not be correct, the point is very simple:

(1) If Outlook is part of Office suit and as an independent product, it
should consider how users might have used it for communication purpose and
should not consider what Windows has to offer or not.

I also used SQL Management Studio and Enterprise Manager as an example for
any reasonable person won't expect those two clients to work seamlessly with
MySQL and other database. Why? Because they are designed specifically for
and bundled with MS SQL database.

Is that the case for Outlook as well, as indicated by some people? If so,
the logic should be the same as SQL Management Studio and Enterprise Manger,
don't sell it and just bundled with Exchange Server.

(2) It is up to each company (regardless of its size) to determine its own
security policy, and what functions should be used or accessed and what
should not. Right or wrong, good or bad, it's the decision of that company.

In this case, Outlook should carry the newsgroup function as other
functions, such as Exchange integration, RSS, MSN, Hotmail, and so on. It's
up to the company to determine which will be used and allowed, not just
discriminating newsgroup.

The focus of the question (actually, I don't consider is a debate) has been
shifted to each company's security policy.

We are not talking about each company's security policy. One of the largest
(actually, the largest) cosmetic companies in the world does not even allow
its employees to use company's computers to connect to Internet.

I work closely with this company, and have no problems for that at all. In
fact, based on some logical reasoning presented here, I'd even encourage it
to have tighter control on MIS and require business cases for what should be
allowed or not allowed.

The underling puzzle is - Why newsgroup has been left out for so long?

The answer can very well be - no one knows.

Maybe MS just forgot about it and then would add it in the future. Maybe a
3rd party provider will find it makes sense to come up an add-in and sell
it.

But then again, all arguments presented here for why newsgroup is not being
included simply are not true and don't make any sense.

Up to this point, I wish to rest my case, and it was not my intension for
initiating a long debate here. I'm too familiar with this kind of thing and
thus determined to jump off the boat a few years ago.

The only thing that I wish to say is - Nothing wrong to say "I don't know"
and it's far better than giving a false answer.

That's all.

 

[xfile]

Hi,

Thanks for the tip and I will look into it.

Thanks again.

 

[Guest]

Thanks, Don, finally an authoritative treatment without a Microsoft bias.

Thanks !!


**********************

 

[Guest]

And how many small businesses, that cannot affort MS Exchange or corporate
mail servers, would love to have many of the useful features left out of
Outlook? In our opinion the answer is simple, provide the functionality, but
let the administrator either ENABLE it or DISABLE it. Don't let Microsoft
determine the censorship boundaries, rather let the company determine those
boundaries. Some companies have a problem and some, who would appreciate the
convenience of these addtional features, don't have the abuse problem.

While I understand and appreciate your views on the usefulness of newsgroups
for the technically skilled or informed users, how many corporations have
secretaries/clerks/janitors/etc. who will NOT be inclinded to post to
technical discussions but engage in the behaviors you have noted that are
all to prevalent?

--Â
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, xfile asked:

| Dear Don,
|
| Thank you very much for your balanced and detailed explanations.
|
| I've not heard the term - transport provider, for a long time and
| almost forgot about it. And yes, I could comprehend what you meant
| and thanks for that again.
|
| During the 15+ years of working in tech industry with a business major
| background, I had to train myself to learn various technologies to the
| degree of every details, including assembling components and systems
| and writing codes, and so on, all simply because refusing to accept
| craps from engineers.
|
| Speaking of non-business activities, I've seen so many engineers
| using IM for chatting, surfing sites for trading personal stocks, and
| exchanging porn pictures with emails, instead of coming to newsgroups
| like this or others for searching assistance or providing ones.
|
| Now I run my own business, heavily depended on IT, but outsourced all
| to 3rd party service providers.
|
| What also counts is the "intension" of doing something rather than
| judging solely by the "behavior". That is, any tool can be abused
| and used for non-business-related purpose, and on the other hand, can
| also be used to improve productivity for the benefits of all.
|
| Over the years, I have learned so much from various newsgroups and
| forums (and from people like you), and I even demanded our engineers
| (while at the last company) to participate some forums and newsgroups
| to exchange skills and tips. I just don't get the idea for why some
| people have the thoughts for newsgroups are not business-related?
|
| Once again, thank you for your kind explanations. I will wait and
| see if such add-in will be provided in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| || ||
||| Finally, speaking of overhead. BCM is truly an overheard and with
||| almost no
||| integration with contacts. Do you really think adding newsgroup
||| will increase additional overhead to Outlook and why is it not for
||| OE?
||
|| No, it would not "increase additional overhead". This excuse is
|| often thrown about, but having written a newsreader add-in for
|| Outlook, I can tell you it has absolutely no basis in fact. And I'm
|| sure if you ask the authors of any of the other newsreader add-ins,
|| they will tell you the same thing.
||
|| Outlook is basically a UI around one or more MAPI-compliant
|| databases (the .pst and .ost files). Things like emails, tasks,
|| contacts, etc. are simply records in one of these databases.
||
|| In order to send and receive messages or other items, Outlook loads
|| "transport providers". A transport provider is basically a DLL that
|| contains code that knows how to connect to a specific type of data
|| source, and how to read/write records in a MAPI database. Each
|| account you set up in Outlook is associated with a particular
|| transport provider.
||
|| To send and retrieve POP3 email for example, Outlook loads the POP3
|| transport provider. Outlook ships with transports for POP3, IMAP,
|| HTTP and Exchange servers. If you want to retrieve email from Lotus
|| Notes, you would install a Lotus Notes transport provider. Likewise
|| for any other information source that someone has written a
|| transport provider for.
||
|| In Outlook 2007, MS added the ability to retrieve RSS feeds and that
|| was done by writing a transport provider that knows how to connect
|| to an RSS feed.
||
|| To access newsgroups in Outlook, all you need is a transport
|| provider that knows how to connect to a NNTP server. If third-party
|| vendors such as myself can write one (using the horribly outdated
|| and incomplete MAPI documentation), there is no reason why MS
|| couldn't write one too. And the idea that this would add "overhead"
|| to Outlook is simply absurd. It would add no more "overhead" than
|| the supplied POP3 transport does.
||
|| Outlook is slow, IMO, because it is based on MAPI, a circa-1993
|| technology that's overly complicated and all but obsolete. I'm a
|| little surprised that MS hasn't switched to SQL server databases by
|| now, but perhaps there is too much legacy and third-party code that
|| would break to make that practical.
||
|| And the premise that newsgroups are not useful and have the
|| potential to be abused in a corporate environment is equally absurd.
|| I've sold a number of site licenses to large corporations and I'm
|| sure the other newsgroup add-in vendors have as well. Employees can
|| waste company time on personal email and RSS feeds too, and Outlook
|| has the ability to connect to any web site so you can surf porn
|| sites all day long without ever leaving Outlook. Companies that are
|| worried about this can block access to HTTP sites, and they could
|| block access to NNTP servers just as easily.
||
|| As to why MS doesn't add newsgroup capabilities to Outlook, only
|| those folks within Microsoft who make those decisions know the
|| answer to that.
||
|| --
|| Don Caton

 

[Guest]

Well articulated, Don. In our opinion these basic, useful features should be
included in the program, while letting the Administrator or Owner ENABLE or
DISABLE the features they do or don't want! You're 100% correct in pointing
out that many other features could be equally abused, but are not targeted.

And talking about bloat, we think there would actually be a rather healthy
small business market for several additional features now absent from
Outlook. As a small business, we'd love to see additional modules that would
allow Outlook to become a true communications center for small businesses.
In otherwords, allowing it to become a common repository for ALL forms of
communication including email, newsgroup messages, rss feeds, faxes, voice
messages, automated answering and messaging, origination of voice calls
through the computer, and voice call recording! It only seems logical to
manage all these forms of communication from one cental location.

Ironically, today's hardware is powerful enough, we have the disk space, so
why not provide an efficient program to manage ALL our small business
communications needs from one center? Over the years, there have been
several great comm programs that have nearly accomplished this end, so how
can we characterize these useful functions as 'BLOAT' for a Microsoft
product? We for one, would love to see a comprehensive, yet inexpensive,
solution for our ENTIRE small business communications needs.

Thanks again, Don, finally an honest voice that appeals to a good sense of
reason.


************************

 

[Guest]

Well articulated, Don, not to mention a breath of fresh air! In our opinion,
these basic, useful features should definitely be included in Outlook, while
letting the Administrator or Owner ENABLE or DISABLE the features they do or
don't want for themselves! You're 100% correct in pointing out that many
other features could be equally abused, but are not targeted.

And talking about bloat, we actually think there would be a rather healthy
small business market for several additional features now absent from
Outlook. As a small business, we'd love to see additional modules that would
allow Outlook to become a true communications center for small businesses.

In otherwords, allow Outlook or a companion product to become a common
repository for ALL forms of communication including email, newsgroup
messages, rss feeds, faxes, voice messages, not to mention automated
answering, automated messaging, computer dialing for voice calls, voice call
recording, and video communications! It only seems logical to manage all
these forms of direct communication from one cental location.

Ironically, today's hardware is powerful enough, we have the disk space, so
why not provide an efficient program to manage ALL our small business or
personal home communications from one center? Over the years, there have
been several great comm programs that have nearly accomplished this end, so
how can we characterize these useful functions as 'BLOAT' for a Microsoft
product? We for one, would love to see a comprehensive, yet inexpensive,
solution for ALL of our small business and personal communications needs.

Thanks again, Don, finally an honest voice that appeals to a good sense of
reason.


************************

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

Well, I, for one, enjoy folks who like shouting into the wind.

Keep this discussion going for as long as you like. Perhaps by the time you have completed flogging this issue into the ground (circa 2010 or so) you will get the idea that it is not going to happen.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All
unsolicited mail sent to my personal account will be deleted without
reading.

After furious head scratching, The Blue Max asked:

| Well articulated, Don, not to mention a breath of fresh air! In our
| opinion, these basic, useful features should definitely be included
| in Outlook, while letting the Administrator or Owner ENABLE or
| DISABLE the features they do or don't want for themselves! You're
| 100% correct in pointing out that many other features could be
| equally abused, but are not targeted.
|
| And talking about bloat, we actually think there would be a rather
| healthy small business market for several additional features now
| absent from Outlook. As a small business, we'd love to see
| additional modules that would allow Outlook to become a true
| communications center for small businesses.
|
| In otherwords, allow Outlook or a companion product to become a common
| repository for ALL forms of communication including email, newsgroup
| messages, rss feeds, faxes, voice messages, not to mention automated
| answering, automated messaging, computer dialing for voice calls,
| voice call recording, and video communications! It only seems
| logical to manage all these forms of direct communication from one
| cental location.
|
| Ironically, today's hardware is powerful enough, we have the disk
| space, so why not provide an efficient program to manage ALL our
| small business or personal home communications from one center? Over
| the years, there have been several great comm programs that have
| nearly accomplished this end, so how can we characterize these useful
| functions as 'BLOAT' for a Microsoft product? We for one, would love
| to see a comprehensive, yet inexpensive, solution for ALL of our
| small business and personal communications needs.
|
| Thanks again, Don, finally an honest voice that appeals to a good
| sense of reason.
|
|
| ************************
| "Don Caton" wrote:
|
|| ||
|||
|||| And the premise that newsgroups are not useful and have the
|||| potential to be abused in a corporate environment is equally
|||| absurd.
|||
||| While intelligent people may disagree on this, the fact remains
||| that the guys on the front row do not consider it absurd. Where I
||| work, we have our own internal NNTP server and it serves strictly
||| local newsgroups. I had to submit special exemption paperwork
||| making a business case to allow our firewall to be configured in
||| such a manner as to permit access to the msnews.microsoft.com NNTP
||| server and it's the only external NNTP server we're allowed to
||| access. I had to _prove_ that the company would save money by
||| allowing access to these newsgroups.
||
|| Brian:
||
|| Sorry, that didn't come out the way I meant it.
||
|| Newsgroups have the potential to be abused, no question about it.
|| What I meant to say was that everything else you can do in Outlook
|| has the same potential to be abused as well. So why use this
|| argument only against newsgroups?
||
|| There are tons of RSS feeds that an employee could subscribe to that
|| have nothing to do with that person's work, but I don't see the same
|| argument being made against RSS feeds in OL 2007.
||
|| There is nothing inherently bad about newsgroups that made them
|| unsuitable for business use; they are an information source, just
|| like email, RSS, web sites, etc. Like everything else, newsgroups
|| have the potential to be abused, but access to them can be
|| controlled via firewalls and other means, just like your company
|| does.
||
|| And if newsgroup access were added to OL then policy settings could
|| also be added to control or disable it.
||
|| From a purely selfish standpoint I don't care, as I will be able to
|| continue to sell my newsgroup add-in for OL2007. But IMO, none of
|| the reasons thrown about for not including them in OL2007 hold
|| water. MS might have a very good reason for not doing it, but only
|| they know what that is.
||
|| --
|| Don Caton

 

[Guest]

Just a suggestion. Why not add the 'Newsgroup Mail' icon to your toolbar for
reading newsgroup mail? True, it simply loads Outlook Express as the news
reader, but it creates a close integration that makes it very easy to open,
as if it were a part of the Outlook program. The problem is that Outlook
2007 makes it harder to find and add this icon to the toolbar. Perhaps one
of the MVP's can provide the steps for enabling Outlook Express as your
Outlook 2007 news reader so that you can add it to the toolbar.

*****************
Original Message
*****************

 

[xfile]

Hi,

Thanks for the tip and it has been a while for me not visiting this
newsgroup.

I will investigate the tip provided.

Many thanks, and yes, providing functionalities for possible use is the job
for product provider, and as far as for how, and if, to use it or not, it's
none of their business - frankly speaking.