"Brian Tillman" wrote in message
:

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

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

Precisely!

"Don Caton" wrote in message
...
"Brian Tillman" wrote in message
:

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

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.

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

Precisely!

"Don Caton" wrote in message
...
"Brian Tillman" wrote in message
:

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

xfile wrote:
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

Don Caton wrote:

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

xfile wrote:

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.
--
Brian Tillman

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.


"Brian Tillman" wrote in message
...
xfile wrote:

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.
--
Brian Tillman

Hi,

Thanks for the tip and I will look into it.

Thanks again.

"280Z28" wrote in message
...
xfile wrote:
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

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

Thanks !!


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

"Don Caton" wrote:

"xfile" wrote in message
:

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

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.

"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]" wrote:

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?

--�
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| "Don Caton" wrote in message
| ...
|| "xfile" wrote in message
|| :
||
||| 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