| |||||||||||||
The Next Generation of Mail ClientsThe Next Generation of Mail ClientsPosted Feb 26, 2004 12:43 UTC (Thu) by pointwood (guest, #2814)Parent article: The Next Generation of Mail Clients When you do include Outlook, it could seem a but unfair not to use the latest version which AFAIK (I haven't used it) is much improved over previous versions.
(Log in to post comments)
Newer version of Outlook Posted Feb 26, 2004 15:28 UTC (Thu) by kreide (subscriber, #4708) [Link] I'm not sure I agree. Most people will still be using Office 2000/XP and some even older versions, and upgrading costs hundreds of dollars (or more!). All the other mail clients, however, you can download and use today at no cost.Also, I only had Office XP at hand when writing the review, which only helps to better illustrates my point I think.
Newer version of Outlook Posted Feb 26, 2004 15:36 UTC (Thu) by pointwood (guest, #2814) [Link] Your comments are all true, however you do talk about the "next generation" of email clients. In such a comparison, the latest (supposedly much improved) version of Outlook would be interesting. I do understand the reason that Outlook XP/2000 is included. I also understand the lack of interest in paying a lot of money for the latest version of Outlook just to be able to include it in this article ;)
Newer version of Outlook Posted Feb 26, 2004 15:51 UTC (Thu) by kreide (subscriber, #4708) [Link] Your point is also valid, however, the only reason Outlook was even included was to serve as a reference with what is commonly available for the majority of users (which still run Windows unfortunately) today.Using the latest Office 2003 would not have done most of them any good, as upgrading is not an option and might not be for some time. After reading the review they can, however, immediately decide it is time to try out one of the alternatives, several of which are multi platform.
|
|||||||||||||