Shared Calender 2000 vs. 2003

  • Thread starter Thread starter James Monroe
  • Start date Start date
J

James Monroe

Greetings:

Have used Office 2000 for three years. I have a Shared Calendar set up
in Outlook.

"Upgraded" to Office 2003 and now it tells me I have to be using
Exchange Server to share a calendar! How sucko is that?

Could I be reading this wrong or something? Seems like Outlook 2003 is
a step backwards from Outlook 2000.

Thanks for any advice/comments.

James
 
By shared calendar do you mean NetFolders? Netfolders are not supported in
Outlook 2002/2003 because they were so buggy and caused data loss.

In this area it might be a step back to you, but overall OL2003 is a huge
improvement over Outlook 2000.

--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours


http://www.poremsky.com - http://www.cdolive.com
Expert Zone http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone

Search for answers: http://groups.google.com
Most recent posts to the Outlook newsgroups:
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_ugroup=microsoft.public.outlook.*&num=30
 
By shared calendar do you mean NetFolders? Netfolders are not supported in
Outlook 2002/2003 because they were so buggy and caused data loss.
Click to expand...

Yes, Diane, NetFolders is what I mean. We've used them in our office
for three years. Haven't noticed any data loss and never seemed buggy,
once they were set up correctly.
In this area it might be a step back to you, but overall OL2003 is a huge
improvement over Outlook 2000.
Click to expand...

Well, OK. I can certainly see some improvements.

However, if 2003 completely does away with a tool we use every day
then that's a fatal flaw to us.

So, it looks like we have two options:

1. Install Exchange Server.

2. Dump 2003 and go back to 2000.

Since we won't have Exchange Server any time soon, Option 2 is our
only choice. 2003 will just have to sit on the shelf and collect dust.
What a waste.

Thanks for your help and comments.


James
 
Back
Top