Linux.com

Outlook is pretty much forced on people. I don't think I know a single person that uses Outlook in a home environment. A lot of folks are now using web based email provided and sometimes required by their ISP.
Getting people to switch from Outlook to anything else in the corporate world will be difficult at best. We have to start with the servers, and move those to more open platforms. We need an OSS exchange killer badly, with all the functionality. Not to mention the fact, there is no complete Outlook replacement, commercial or otherwise. Most that are even close require a separate calendaring app.

#

It's great that you don't know anyone that uses Outlook or Outlook Express at home. But that is far from the norm. I've seen the headers of an awful lot of emails in my capacity at work, and let me tell you, the majority of people out there seem to use Outlook Express.

Inertia is strong. Most computer newbies use outlook express because it comes pre-installed on their computer. They don't see why they should download another one and then take the time to install and configure it. Remember, simply downloading and installing software is a big and intimidating step for most new computer users, so they are unlikely to install replacements for software that works perfectly well from their limited point of view.

The inertia sets in later. After using Outlook or Outlook express for a while, most average computer users do not see any compelling reasons to switch. They don't really care about viruses so long as it does not damage their computer or those of there employer, friend, etc. That's why symantec makes so much money off anti-virus protection - catching and removing viruses is just as good as making sure they can't infect you in the first place. If the anti-virus works, then the average user puts no more thought into the matter.

I think that weening corporations off of Exchange may help get users off of Outlook, but it won't help much. As long as Windows is the standard, the only way to kill outlook is to get a major vendor like Dell or HP to install an alternate emailer and set it up as the default. Nothing short of that will work. Well, ok, a super virus that completely destroys all data on the target machine, and infects 95% of all connected computers within minutes, that *might* convince enough folks to switch, but don't count on it.

Maybe I'm too cynical, but that's the way I see it.

#

Reread the subject... he says "Convert OE users? OK". We all know plenty of people using OE at home. His post is referring specifically to the corresponding goal of converting corporate users off of Outlook / Exchange. Outlook prime is possibly the second-worst home internet email client ever created (after the original "Microsoft Exchange" that shipped with the boxed Win95), but in the corporate environment, the mail system decision becomes a groupware decision primarily driven by the requirements of the sales force. Given also that Outlook comes with every copy of MS Office, OSS will really have to deliver a killer app that all the suits we love to rag on will fall in love with in order to break the Exchange / Outlook codependency.

#

You mean like <A HREF="http://www.osafoundation.org/" TITLE="osafoundation.org">Chandler</a osafoundation.org>?

#

"Not to mention the fact, there is no complete Outlook replacement, commercial or otherwise. Most that are even close require a separate calendaring app."

What the hell are you talking about? Lotus Notes is much more powerful than outlook and is very widely used in the industry.

#

ximian.com ?

#

While it is true that Outlook isn't perfect, should we really pin all of the responsibility of virus transmitting on it? I think alot of the problem boils down to users blindly opening attachments they are sent. Instead of telling users 'Microsoft bad, OSS good', maybe we should try educating them on how to use email responsibly.

#

YES, blame it! It is dumb (no, wait, dumber then dumb) to allow embedded script in an e-mail client. By doing so it is only asking --no, begging-- for trouble.

#

This attitude really annoys me. Instead of laying
the blame for broken software at the door of the
criminally negligent idiots who made it, we
instead blame the user of the software. What kind
of reasoning, if any, is in use here?

I can just see myself explaining this to an elderly relative:

Me: People can attach files to emails and send
them to you. You click on the attachment to open
it.

Elderly relative: Oh, thats easy.

Me: Oh, by the way, some attachments, which
look just like every other attachment, contain
viruses and/or worms, and if you open one of
those, you will be infected. Everyone will
then call you an idiot.

Elderly relative: Oh dear! How do I know which
attachment is ok?

Me: Well, you can't really.

Eldery relative: Um, maybe I'll stick with writing
letters.

The moral: There is no reason for email viruses
to exist. They only exist because of the
idiocy of Microsoft. They should not even be
called "email viruses", they should be called
"Outlook viruses."

#

And that is what I have taken to calling them. Microsoft Outlook/Internet Explorer viruses. I do this with EVERY windows user who asks me about them.

#

Perhaps reading the post more clearly would benefit you. I never said it was completely the user's fault. I don't see how you can honestly say that all email viruses are Microsoft's fault.

Elderly relative: Oh dear! How do I know which
attachment is ok?

Me: Well, you can't really.

The last time I checked, attachments come with an extension. So you can make an educated decision about what attachments to open.

Elderly relative: Oh look! Here is an email from yersereafe@yearew.com with an attachment named killWindows.exe. I don't know this person. Is that attachment safe to open?

You: There's really no way for you to know. It's all Microsoft Outlook's fault. You have no responsibility in this matter whatsoever. If it destroys your computer, it's all Microsoft's fault. Microsoft bad, OSS good.

I don't particularly like Microsoft, but this attitude is ridiculous. I wish people would stop spending so much time bashing Microsoft and put that time to a much more constructive use.

#

I'd like to disagree with you. MS is a convicted monopolist. How did these people get their Outlook? Well, it came bundled with IE (illegal tying) and there is no way to unbundle it. And why is IE so popular? Because MS has extended the W3C standard and inserted proprietary extensions to the server and client that other browser makers can't use. Very plain and simple, anti-competitive tactics. The problem lies with Microsoft, period. Elderly relative: Oh look! Here is an email from yourdaughter@yourdaughter.com with an attachment named fromyourdaughter.exe. I know this person so I'll click on it. You can't expect normal people to have CS degrees to use their applications. It would be more appropriate to start a class action lawsuit against MS for not complying with standards thus putting the public at risk. They should know better, but that would remove their competitive advantage. And they have already stated the user isn't interested in paying for security. This from a company with $40+ billion in the bank from their ill gotten gains. MS not to blame my a**.

#

While blaming problems on softwrare seems a little easy, I agree in this case.

First of all, why is windows STILL after years preconfigured with extensions turned _off_? People tend to get to know extensions anyway, they know about exe and jpg and gif. If extensions are usually of, it's a lot easier to trick them into opening "nice_holiday_pic.jpg" than opening "nice_holiday_pic.jpg.exe". That in addition to the possibility to start executables right from the email client makes this software really dangerous. While directly opening attachments might be ok for documents, it should not at all be possible. Executables should always have to be saved to disk first.

The same is true for browsers. All those nice ActiveX controlls that install after clicking ok enable powerful web applications. But how do you tell people not knowing that much, that for us well known plugins of well known vendors are ok, but most other stuff isn't? One single mistake and you might be the victim of a very costly dialer experience.

In both cases, the final step was done by the enduser not being careful or knowledgable enough but it could have been easily prevented by microsoft just making their apps that are nearly everywhere a tiny little bit more secure.

I think Microsoft get's way too little blame for this, especially since those design flaws already caused massive worldwide problems more than once.

#

A little harsh on your relatives?

Don't forget to mention pif, vbs, cpl, wsf, vb, js et al.
Also those jpegs, gifs might have a double (hidden) extension, that outlook doesn't show, and some virus blockers don't catch by default. And some virii will run automatically.


  You should be able to see them if you download the latest service packs, office patch and IE, say 150 MB over your 56k dialup line (that delivers 24k due to old copper and the telcos DACS splitter).

An average user will not subscribe to virus bullitins, or have a fast internet link.

Rather than educating SOHO users, microsoft chose the administrator as default user, and as a consequence all programs inherit this privilege.

They at least could have insisted that all program installs / plugins be carried out through the Add/Remove section in control panel, like MS Terminal services, and restrict access to docs/ system files to these programs.
All other code would have the execute flag turned off.
The added level of indirection might allow you to give a simple coherent list of DO NOT's to your relative.

Of course you really would like external input to be sandboxed, in its own little vmware type box, to guard against programmer mistakes and to teach the user (and windows programmers) about permission levels but that isn't common in the unix world either yet.

#

.pif is especially nasty. Also, Outlook is bad about not showing the extension in the filename is something like "grandson.jpg.pif". Plus, some of the malicious attachments specify a safe content-type like audio/x-wave, but it is really an executable. Outhouse is too stupid to ignore the filename spec (with the MIME RFC's should only be used for informative purposes).

I agree that requiring users to know every extension type under the sun is ridiculous. Also, MS has gotten in the habit of hiding extensions from users anyway (by default) and using icons to imply type (check the file explorer options and how showing extensions can be disabled).

BTW, let's not forget all the virus that have spread without a user even having to open up an attachment. Some have spread just by previewing the message.

#

Sun, with Netscape's cooperation), established a carefully researched "applet" security model in preparation for delivery of executable content through the browser and subsequently, email.

Microsoft, desperate to preserve their desktop hegemony, entered that "executable content" marketplace with *none* of the security research.

The result is one of the most flawless examples of disrespect for one's customers that I have ever seen. In 30 years as a developer, I've never seen an organization flout their responsibility so flagrantly. Outlook and IE deserve their insecure reputations based on Microsoft's need for marketplace "dominance" with zero regard for their customers.

#

Outlook or OE are quite nice to use if only they don't allow that much scripting support. The good thing I feel about MS products are that they are scriptable, but therein lies their problem.

While I have yet to find anything that comes to fully replace those 2 programs among FOSS (Evolution's fonts really do suck!), I can live without worrying about viruses and worms whenever I open my emails/attachments.

User education is important and just becuse no one has found a way to make Evolution, KMail or even Mozilla Mail vulnerable it doesn't mean it will stay that way for all times.

Same as we argue about password complexities. Reagardless we use Windows or NIXes, using blank passwords for admin/root accounts is a surefire way to get rooted.

Now can we argue that if we use NIXes it will be less vulnerable?

Eric
Malaysia

#

Have you tried Evolution 1.4? If you turn on antialiasing for GTK2 and run Evolution 1.4; the fonts are *very* nice.

#

No I have not, I will definately try out the latest version. Although Evolution is an excellent prodeuct but I have no control over the fonts and that is what I hated and made me stuck to OE and Outlook.

Thanks for the info.

Eric
Malaysia

#

You should try GNOME's (not Evolution's) font settings for HTML rendering.

#

You use outlook just because you like the fonts?!?!

#

Most of the *nix e-mail clients are smart enought not to allow embedded script in the mail so you don't get yourself into this mail virus mess. Maybe that is why no one has found a way to turn these mail clients virus engines. Sometimes, less is better!

#

Discussions about scriptable content in Mailclients pop up in the development lists every once in a while. Usually suggestions in that direction get smashed very quickly. I really hope it stays that way.

#

Agreed. For us in the know less is better but for Joe Six Packs, the more fancy stuff (e.g. eye candy) to play with, the more reasons to stick to a particular platform.

Although many would argue that HTML mails are bad but hey, they do look good and at the end of the day it is what looks good that really matters. One may have written the "best" mail client in the world but if the interface looks like crap, who would besides the techies would have reasons to use it?

Also I do have 2 Hotmail mail accounts (I know they are spam magnets but I got them when the Net was still relatively more behaved!) and am still wondering how am I going to use any FOSS mail clients to retrieve mail from Hotmail.

I am no troll and absoultely adore my MDK box at home. I am a network guy and absolutely find it hard to persuade people to switch to FOSS because they have tons of MS propreity data and it is HARD if not impossible to accurately convert them to open formats.

Eric
Malaysia

#

try gotmail its like fetchmail but works with hotmail (where do you put the $ in hotmail??).

#

Although many would argue that HTML mails are bad but hey, they do look good and at the end of the day it is what looks good that really matters. One may have written the "best" mail client in the world but if the interface looks like crap, who would besides the techies would have reasons to use it?

Text/enriched existed before HTML, and it had a tagging structure for people to set fonts and colors and other basic formatting characteristics. It had no scripting capabilities and it was designed to have messages to still be readable by non-supporting MUAs, unlike the sh*t HTML that MUAs like Outlook generate.

So, if you wanted something that looked pretty, but was safe, text/enriched could have been used.

#

Ummm... what about the recent Outlook vulnerabilities that have been exposed in the processing of email headers, where you don't even have to open the email for the virus to be executed?

Now true, buffer overflows are certainly not limited to Outlook and other MS products, but don't assume that every virus outbreak is fueled by "dumb users".

(BTW, how would you know to not open an email when it comes from a familiar person in your contact list, and is a reply to an email you just sent them recently? The "social engineering" in some of these viruses is pretty astounding!)

#

There are two main issues here:

1) a homogenous network makes virus writing/spreading easy.

2) Netscape/mozilla do not execute attachements when you click on them. Outlook thinks this is perfectly ok.

If soone wants to run anattachement, it should be _clear_ that they are doing so and the dangers.

That outlook's maker's can't grasp such a simple basic concept is more than enough reason to eradicate their use.

as for the exchange server argument. If you are only doing e-mail, mozilla mail is fine.

If you do need additional features, use outlook for everything _but_ e-mail.


 

#

And once again, it's "blame the user" not the virus writer.

Yes, I will accept that the user is responsible for his/her/it's own actions. But the same applies to the wastes of oxygen that write the things in the first place.

#

After years of Windows Virusses, Outlook Viruses and other malware in form of spyware etc. I sometimes feel that there can't be enough of those things. We need even more Emailviruses that shut down corporate networks. Maybe eventually even the slowest decision makers will understand that either they have to put pressure on Microsoft to finally (after years) thing a tiny bit about security or to search for alternatives.

Then again, I think it's perfectly right to punish virus writers if they are caught, since it's a crime.

But I can't think of a company that get's away with such a blatant ignorance of their users security as microsoft. Maybe people or Microsoft have to learn it the hard way and seemingly it's not hard way enough yet.

#

Apparently lots of people are still using Outlook. Whenever a new virus or worm comes out the web world almost grinds to a halt.

It's annoying how the inevitable argument is always trotted out: Don't blame Microsoft for all those viruses, users should be more careful about opening attachments.

Problem! Problem! Oh! Oh!

Should I wear rubber gloves 24/7 and scratch my nose with a ruler because I might get a germ? We have medication for that kind of mentality.

Whatever happened to responsibility in product design? And why, after all this well-known trouble, is this flawed product still being promoted to consumers without educating them on security measures and patches??

I get e-mails, with or without attachments (which are, so sorry, still possible virus carriers) that have names of people I know and carry likely sounding subject lines. I can get a virus without opening an attachment.

If I have my Preview Pane open (as is the default setting) it's vulnerable the instant I click once on an e-mail...heck, I can't even erase the thing without opening my computer to infection...unless I close that view pane. And who knows to do that??

How many users are being made aware of this subject, and what they need to do besides scour their inbox for suspect mail?

Huff puff. I am tired of being treated like an imbecile. Microsoft should recognize that it has responsibility to its customers or Bill & Co. should find a new line of business.

#

Outlook should be blamed its crappy unsafe software. This is not Microsoft bashing. Its just calling a spade a spade and a crappy program a crappy program. True users should be better trained and educated, but given the infinite variety, sophistication and complexity possible in Outlook viruses, the proper main line of defense has to be the vendor. They have to put out a better product.

We don't simply rely on training safe drivers,for example, we also provide seat belts, airbags and minimum safety standards for cars. The same goes for software. Critical software such as email clients, should meet minimum safety requirements.

Then there is the social cost associated with crappy software like Outlook. I may not use Outlook (so educating me in circumventing Outlooks flaws is pointless), but I still bear costs from Outlook use by others. These costs may range from, loss of services due to virii shutting down businesses, businesses passing on their higher IT costs to me etc. In addition there can be catastrophic losses from having my sensitive/confidential information emailed to others, from a confidantes Outlook equipped computer. The society as a whole is also exposed to greater risk of damage to the national IT infrastructure from all sorts of unsavory characters out there.

NO! educating Outlook users in its flaws is not enough. Just like spammers, virus writers will always be a couple of steps ahead of Joe and Jane User. The thing to do is to demand, safe software from vendors. This is not MS bashing, just the honest to Gods truth.

emk

#

If Mozilla is not your taste, then use <A HREF="http://www.eudora.com/" TITLE="eudora.com">Eudora</a eudora.com>. Like Mozilla, it is not subject to the fundamental design flaws in MS-Outlook that spread viruses and worms.

#

By allowing embedded script in an e-mail client, Microsoft's Outlook has the competitive edge... on stupidity, that is.

#

>>>By allowing embedded script in an e-mail client, Microsoft's Outlook has the competitive edge... on stupidity, that is.

Outlook & Outlook express haven't allowed script to be run for years. It would be good if you (or Roblimo) knew what you are talking about.

#

Shouldn't that be "the competitive edge... FOR ME TO POOP ON!"

#

For the majority of people out there the Mozilla Browser and Mail client won't work. Here's why:

Browser:
* There are a lot of websites out there that don't work properly with Mozilla Browser. I know this fault lies within the web designer who designed "specifically for" Internet Explorer and is using code that's not a standard. The point still stands... To people used to Internet Explorer the Mozilla Browser will appear "broken" on a lot of websites.

* Java, flash, and other plugins don't seem to be as easily installed as those for Internet Explorer. I know for those of us who have used the internet since Netscape 1.0 know how to remedy this, but the average user won't take the time. They'll go back to the Internet Explorer/Outlook Express combo.

Mail Client:
* It's not as straight forward to use for the average user as Outlook Express is. I know I know<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... that should keep people from using it. That said, people will use the path of least resisitance to get their job done.

* The Mozilla Mail client doesn't integrate well with Internet Explorer when clicking links. If it does it isn't a default setting.

I know to us those aren't big challenges to overcome, but to the average user who wants to just check email, browse the web and play some web-based games (pogo.com, games.yahoo.com, etc) Mozilla Browser won't work as well for them as Internet Explorer.

What do I use myself? Well, I'm using Internet Explorer and Outlook Express while running antivirus software. I'm still looking for a mail client that is as easy to use as Outlook Express, but as secure as Mozilla Mail.

There ya go<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... my 2 cents

#

I assume you are using windoze, so there really isnt anything to replace Outlook, but Mozilla and Evolution work just great together on my Linux Box....
My understanding is that the evolution calendar plugin works very well with Exchange server, but I dont use it because:
1. It costs money....
2. It defeats the purpose of getting away from Microsoft "taxes" in the form of CALS... You have to dump Exchange to really get substantial benefit...
Basically, until there is an alternative calendar server to supply the secretaries and other folks whose lives revolve around meetings with their scheduling fix, Exchange is pretty much the only game in town - though I have heard rumors that SUSE has a good candidate in the works...

#

Yes, I do use MS Windows. I have no choice at work, and at home I use it because I can get my work done faster than in Linux at this time.

#

I use Outlook at work (cuz I have no choice) and kmail at home. kmail, IMHO, is just as easy. So there one alternative for you.

#

Browser:
* There are a lot of websites out there that don't work properly with Mozilla Browser. I know this fault lies within the web designer who designed "specifically for" Internet Explorer and is using code that's not a standard. The point still stands... To people used to Internet Explorer the Mozilla Browser will appear "broken" on a lot of websites.

While I agree with your facts I am very put off by this attitude. Now before you think I am flaming you, I am not. You are stating facts which I cannot deny. But the fact remains that for every person who goes back to IE to view a site, its another time we reward inept web design. My hope and desire would be to have users ignore sites that do not conform to standards. But to be honest that really should be titled "a dream."

Again, no personal attacks just reacting to a soar spot being hit. And don't worry I am getting therapy.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)

#

I completely agree with you. Just to let you know, I didn't feel attacked<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

I'm trying to get away from the IE/OE combo in Windows, it's just hard to find programs that play well together.

#

Verizon's billing site in the past was usable by any browser. Then they decided to "improve" the site, and clients like Mozilla (I use Galeon) would not work on their site. I called and complained, and when they said to use IE, I told them I wouldn't and that I would mail in my check from now on.

Well, sometime recently, they must have done some additional changes, because I was able to pay my bill online again (although I had to get in using the right URL, so it is not that friendly yet to non-IE browsers).

I think if we non-IE users complain enough, especially to large corporate sites, we may be able to change things. As they say, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease."

#

Well it also helps if you are a "valuable, yet squeaky wheel" ie a prime customer! I dont see BigCorp inc changign unless u yourself are a significant customer!

#

I think the above poster is right when he says it's somewhat apparent that he uses Windows. It's hard not to be locked in to Microsoft products when one uses that OS - that's one of the main reasons a lot of people switch. Java and flashplayer install quite simple with Mozilla on Linux, and more current versions ship flash and Java plugins preinstalled. Actually, I've yet to come across a website that didn't work well with either Mozilla or Konqueror, as most important webpages do. And as far as outlook, well KMail is just as easy to use, but much more secure. It even alerts you of enbeded messages and automatically knows not to display html in email unless you click to have it viewed.

#

Yes I go to internet explorer site with mozilla there is just one trick UaBar change what your browser tells the site you are. There are a few thing still missing number one is the java layer of mozilla need a few more functions to cover the mode but other than adds bitting the dust nothing much else does. Note java in my terms means<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.jar<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.class not javascript that is built into the page. Basicly it can lie and lie good all mozilla need now is a auto stealth with a few extra java functions and it is home.

Basicly Mozilla is a full standards browsers that is verry able to change lets see microsoft side match it. Long term you pay for being microsoft only sites to use some features you have to pay for using a windows server not a linux server also you can not check you page on the linux server so you have to run a windows client to check it basicly cost cost and more cost. So I really think is is funny that more sites don't support linux.

#

I use Mozilla (at home) and Firebird (at work, because I'm stuck using Outlook for mail there, so I don't need mail<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)).

And I can't remember the last time I had a serious problem viewing something in Mozilla. Seriously. My university e-mail logon page checked for IE, but that was easily subverted by bookmarking the page IE redirected you too. Apparently the REAL reason so many banks, etc. disallowed N6 and earlier Moz versions is that they didn't respect an IE specific flag to prevent the browser from auto-saving logons (which the banks thought was a bad, bad idea). Moz respects it now, as does N7, so now we're allowed to play wherever we want.

Really there's very, very few sites that aren't moz friendly now. games.yahoo.com has worked fine for as long as I can remember.

help...about plugins directs you to plugindoc.mozdev.org, which has incredibly simple to follow directions for any plugin you'd want. And flash has auto-decected Moz fine for at least a year or two. And Moz has auto-detected java (or vice-versa) also for the last year or so.

Use a current build or STFU. For me the browser seems a lot more 'broken' when i have windows popping up all over the place that don't seem to close. But that's just me.

#

I would have to disagree. IE doesn't work.

It can't even tell the difference between DNS error, server not responding, connection refused, and a timeout on a file.

#

You my friend (as well as others out here who think Mozilla is the only alternative) haven't looked very far.

For the price of a week's worth of Starbucks (or free with ads, if you're that cheap), Opera for browsing and Eudora for email. Add Agent to the suite (free or not) and you've got a nice newsreader too.

Yeah, some sites don't work with Opera. But if everyone just rolls over and loads Internet Exploiter instead, they never will.

Yeah, the OEMs shove MS-Everything down our throats. But there are other options. While Dell & Gateway will never tell the customers about them, we "geek friends" whom they come to for advice certainly can.

Yeah, I love Linux, use it every day. But it just ain't ready for janedoe@earthlink.net. Until then, the best we can hope for is to turn Jane onto alternatives she can run under Windoze. At least she'll stop annoying us with all those Lookout Distress transmitted diseases.

#

I am very much aware of Opera (it was my fave web browser last year), and i have tried Eudora when i was using M$ windoze.
We always prefer to mention Mozilla (and not Opera) as an alternative, not because it's all we know, but because it is better. As you mentioned, there are some sites that doesn't work with Opera. Besides, Mozilla is the most web-standards-compliant browser, AFAIK.

#

See Thor Larholm's page of <A HREF="http://www.pivx.com/larholm/unpatched/" TITLE="pivx.com">Unpatched IE security holes</a pivx.com>.

As of the 16 June 2003, there are currently 18 unpatched vulnerabilities in Microsoft's Internet Explorer subsystems. These are known vulnerabilities for which Microsoft has chosen not to release a patch or update to fix the issues, in some cases, over a year has past since Microsoft was first notified of the vulnerability.

Many of these vulnerabilities can be exploited either directly or indirectly though Microsoft's Outlook email client.

Although the open source of development does not inherently prevent the potential introduction of such vulnerabilities, the developer community and Linux distributions will almost always provide a patch/update to fix any similar vulnerability within days or even hours of the discovery of the vulnerability.

Open source products are always inherently more "secure-able".

#

How do I uninstall Outlook Express on a Windows 98 box? I tried to just blow away the directory, but now when I try to do the "Windows Update", it keeps trying to force another "Outlook security patch" at me. You just can't get away from it!

(Even if you install and use Mozilla, Outlook is still sitting there, waiting for some virus to exploit it. I guess I could set it up with invalid server names, which would prevent anything from getting out, but it still just galls me that I can't uninstall it if I don't want it.)

#

How do I uninstall Outlook Express on a Windows 98 box?

Easy: http://www.98lite.net

#

Just because it's installed doesn't mean you have to use it. When I used to use Windows, I just did a "parallel" install of Mozilla and used that.

#

The system wont let you uninstall Outlook Express and the only way I could manage to impede users from using it was changing permissions of executable file.

#

How do I uninstall Outlook Express on a Windows 98 box?

Install Linux on it.

#

Or if you do not wish to use Linux:

Shut down to DOS and at the C> type in
Format c:/q

#

<A HREF="http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microsoft.com:80/support/kb/articles/Q263/8/37.ASP&NoWebContent=1" TITLE="microsoft.com">How to Manually Remove and Reinstall Outlook Express in Windows 2000</a microsoft.com>

There is a similar one for 98. Google is your friend.

#

I use Outlook as well because it's the client of choice at work. There wasn't any competition, it's the only choice for a MAPI based mail/groupware system on Exchange.

Should you be trying to get people away from Outlook or companies away from Exchange?

#

http://kroupware.kde.org/

Getting companies to an Outlook compatible Linux server is underway, thanks to our friends the German government.

#

We are an Exchange campus so people, for the most part, are forced into using Outlook. However, there are a few of us in the Computer Science Dept. that use Evolution and Ximian Connector. So Outlook is always the only choice for Exchange.

#

Maybe you should send this article over to the folks at Lindows, who <A HREF="http://linux-universe.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=30&forum=4" TITLE="linux-universe.com">apparently use Outlook</a linux-universe.com> as their email client.

#

Still?! I busted their b*lls about that ages ago.

#

*SIGH*, but then, Lindows isn't a REAL Linux company now is it??<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)

leonpmu

#

I use "The Bat" (http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/index.html). It's very customisable, very advanced, and isn't prone to most of the Outlook vulnerabilities.

#

Actually, it is not free(at least, the last time I looked<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:), but I would definitely recommend it for a winbloze user who can actually pay for it(I was _very_ happily using it for a few years before I got rid of my 3com winmodem and went to kmail<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:). It's just that some users don't understand that HTML, javascript(and ActiveX or whatever<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:))) are not healthy and in most cases are absolutely useless for email...
Anyways, TheBat! is definitely my(and everyone else I know that tried) favourite windoze client...
P.S. On the article itself - yes, I did the job converting a few OE users to evolution and kmail, but it seems that those that accepted that could be easily converted to linux as well...

#

I've said it before and will again! The fault lies not in OE or Outlook for that matter, is the user's fault! If they don't update their AV software and/or put serious firewall protection between themselves and the web, the lies goes to them for being insecure! Yes, MS software is full of bugs and holes, but they can be properly patched and secured. I've used W98, W2K Pro and WXP Pro and I've been never infected nor affected by any security vulnerability. But perhaps I'm of the minority that is actively on the lookout for these issues.

It's not to say that I've not dwelved into the OSS domain. But frankly, I don't think that Linux 'is there'. And Macs are too expensive.

You can have my Thinkpad, when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers!

#

Yeah right, so the default enduser gets pushed into using IE and OE because of Microsofts huge market share, it's "contracts" with resellers that foribid installing something else and because nothing but those two tools is on a default windows box. Those two tools have security flaws by design and the usual not really stopable programming errors and in the very end you still blame the enduser for being tricked and pushed into using software that is insecure by design?

Naahh, I guess the enduser can be blamed partly but the major problem here is still Microsoft. It would be so easy to make OE much more secure. Get rid of all the scripting shit and don't allow attachments that the operating system will execute to be executed without prior saving. And get rid completely of extension hiding. Filenameextensions are just too important in windows to be hidden away from the enduser.

If Microsoft did that, the problem would be much smaller.

#

Come on... Why should people run firewalls and anti-virus software ?
And these latter are often not free (do open antivirus exist for MS so called OSes?)...

The real problem is scripting in both OE and IE that are completely bad designed.

You can choose to spend money on bad software.

I definetely do not.

#

>

RedHat 9 was painless to install on my A30 Thinkpad, runs much more responsively, is easy to use, and most of the apps I use for everyday development and use have both windows and linux versions (mozilla, jedit, open office, ant, file sharing is easy with samba, webdav is built into nautilus (the file browser). My Linksys wireless card worked by default, my Palm syncs without difficulty (better than on Windows actually).

#

How about the modem?

#

My Conexant (winmodem) worked just fine on Redhat 8 & 9.
I had to configure it manually on Slackware 8, though

#

The real problem with Outlook is it has the features users want. As a sys admin I think things like automatically displaying email messages or running attachments are security risks. Most users seem to want these features. Most of the in house users are running a variation of the netscape/mozilla email client and they complain that email isn't automatically loaded.

Outlook appeals to the most basic user, it takes care of their every need. Until someone figures out a way to keep the user from thinking and also protect the user from viruses Outlook will be king.

#

I've used Mozilla Messenger and emails load/display for me when I click on them. Do you mean attachments?

I'm stuck with Outlook for work, but use the web intrfce via mozilla, just for spite, and because doesn't require installing software that mandates Windows file/print sharing be activated and that MSN messenger be running just to function (Outlook 2002), speaking of vulnerabilities.

-+-

#

Why do that many Gnome apps don't work for me? Evolution only displays a nice gnome crash dialogue on my desktop (Gentoo) and also on my Laptop (Mandrake 9.1). I'd really like to know.

#

Are you sure you're not running betas? Evolution on GNOME works for me (Redhat & Slackware).

#

Hello folks,

I have found that Ximian Evolution is a good replacement for Outlook (no, I don't mean Outlook Express, but it's a good replacement for that, too). I use Ximian Evolution with the Exchange Connector ("ExchConn") here at work, and we have MS Exchange Servers. Works pretty well, actually--I've got my ExchSrvr scheduling, email, and so on. I'm fairly impressed with the work Ximian did on this one, so for me, it was worth the $69 for the ExchConn. Beats the price for any edition of MS Office, since I use both StarOffice and OpenOffice.org.

The version of Evolution that I'm using is 1.2.4, and I am also using the ExchConn v1.2.4. Haven't tried the new 1.4 versions yet, but sooner or later, I'll get around to it. Has anyone else tried this out?

#

1.4 is awesome... lots of gtk2 goodness.

#

Outlook XP with Exchange 2000 is free. Ximian is not.

#

What strange, twisted definition of "free" are you using?

Probably not this one http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...

FWIW, Ximian Evolution _is_ free software.

Ximian Connector isn't - neither as in freedom nor as in beer.

#

There are a lot of problems with Ximian evolution that would cause all kinds of headaches for users. The main problem I have with it is when your connection to your ISP dies... You have to kill -9 all the evolution processes because it sits there and eats up 100% CPU(tested with imap accounts). If you have a server that is firewalled off temporarily(drops packets), the client will lock up for what seems minutes until that connection times out before you can do anything else like read email, etc too.

I hope they fix that stuff someday.

#

Evolution for the Gnome desktop, beats MS Outlook already and continues to improve. Oh my good fellow, have you not also had a look at all the functionality in Star Office??

Yes once i too was an MS user, locked in and terribly vulnerable to so may worms and virii.

Now Im Sourced. Learning stuff about programming, networking and anything else you can think of about computers, all through buying one distro with thousands of programs for a third the price of MS OS or the Apps that you need to purchase additionally. (Ouch!!)

Now thats what I call educating yourself to be responsible.
Give yourself a treat windows users, be brave, be free.
Have fun, learn

#

Outlook may have featuritis in some things, but it lacks features found in other mail clients:

1. Bounce Button: Will Microsoft let you tell spammers you are not there? Why not?
   


3. No 'preview before render setting':
   Lets me see what is going on BEFORE it executes.
   

Note that Outlook renders first, chewing up all machine cycles: so it is open to attack from code that is not there and cannot be virus-checked: a tight endless loop in a script run at the start of a page

#

The most important Mozilla feature is ability
to disable javascript for mail and news.

In my opinion, of course.


                                  DG

#

I've been telling my friends not to use Outlook and Internet Explorer for a long time. Not because these programs are bad (though they are certainly inferior to Mozilla), but because you are much more vulnerable to viruses and trojans. But it's no use. People think that their neurons will melt if they try to use Mozilla (such a complex program) or that Mozilla has less features than IE and Outlook even though they have never tried to use Mozilla.
So let them be infected with viruses and trojans. We Linux users can use spam filters and ignore most infected messages.

#

Hello all. No I am not an id10t and yes I have used many email clients in my life. I did internet support at a national ISP for 2 years so I think I have tried every email client including Pine and Eudora on the Mac.

I use Outlook Express and I can defend this against even my most dedicated linux using friends. First of all there are two issues here. Using Windoze vs. using Linux. I don't want to touch that arguement, but lets assume for discussion that that choice is already made and we were all assimilated.

OK...
1.) I use hotmail. Yes I have had a hotmail account since it was the first webmail client and long long before it was assimilated. I wish to keep my address and I find checking it with a email client is much much cleaner and faster than using webmail/bannermail. Yes I know there are pop3-proxies... I have investigated many on sourceforge etc... No they are not the same. They are POP3 I want IMAP or the close equivelant which turns out to be MS HTTPemail-whatever... I learned to embrace/love IMAP and if none of you have yet done this then you are missing the boat. That should be the real arguement. IMAP frickin rocks compaired to POP3(ancient-mail). No Outlook Express doesn't use IMAP for Hotmail but it is a close equivelant.

2.) IMAP... OK yes I admit I already used this one, but I just have to say once again. IMAP rox0rs. I have tried so so many clients and I just haven't found anything that handles IMAP as smoothly as Outlook Express. I have checked some of my real IMAP accounts with Mozilla mail but it is clunky and just doesn't have the well pollished interface that OE seems to.

3.) Viruses.... OK as stated above.. first I am sidesteping the arguement of what OS we are running. That leaves us with the NEED to have Anti-Virus software running. It already needs to be there on a Windows operating system so I really think applying this arguement to a email client on windows makes itself for a valid yet weak arguement. Besides as mentioned by another poster viruses are really most often passed by stupidity. And yes an idiot can just as easily click on an attachment on Mozilla in windows as he can in Out