![]() |
![]() |
|
February 06, 2006Outlook 2003 - How it misses the boat when it comes to multi-domain productivitySo after two hours of google searching hell, I have come to the conclusion Microsoft TOTALLY missed the boat with Outlook 2003. I happen to have accounts on TWO Small Business Server 2003 networks, both running Exchange. Currently I use Outlook Web Access for both accounts, and today decided I would start using Outlook over HTTPS so I could tap into Business Contact Manager. One problem. Outlook isn't capable of CONNECTING to two Exchange servers at the same time. ARGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG! Microsoft, you missed the boat here. Why is it I can use Outlook Express to connect to multiple S/IMAP servers without issue, but using your own technology I can't access more than one of your other servers running your own technology. This seems really nuts to me. You mean to tell me NONE of your enterprise customers don't have more than one exchange account? I was thinking about moving to Windows Mail as I am starting to prep to move to Vista for my day use machine, but heck... it won't help me either. *sigh* I will say though, it looks like Vista might take care of my Calendar hell. We will have to see. So now I am back to having to use OWA. Man you missed the boat on productivity on this one Microsoft. I hope something changes in the next version of Outlook. Posted by SilverStr at February 6, 2006 05:58 PM | TrackBackComments
Oh yeah? How about this for fun...two hospitals merge, call them A and B. Corporate compliance officer comes to hospital B. She uses a computer joined to a domain in hospital B (so she gets all the drive mappings at hospital B). She wants Outlook to connect to hospital's A Exchange server WHILE she is logged into hospital's B domain! Hospital A's exchange server won't accept cross authentication. Citrix is out, because she wants to use her PDA locally to sync with Outlook. My solution? A RunAs script which launches the hot sync manager and Outlook under hospital A's credentials while she is really logged into hospital B's domain! Hacky tacky, but it worked. I hope a _lot_ changes in the next version of Outlook. There are so many ways in which Outlook shows signs that its developers don't use it in anything outside of a single scenario - that of a single organisation working out of a locally-managed Exchange server. (i.e. the way Microsoft uses it) Trying to use Outlook to access a POP account has been irritating beyond belief. I still can't believe that they haven't resolved the issue of "interrupted POP session => dozens of duplicated messages". Posted by: Alun Jones at February 7, 2006 08:22 AMHave you tried using Outlook profiles. I have not done this but I have to think that a profile for each org. would work. I am sure you cannot connect to 2 orgs. concurrently but this may help you along. You can configure Outlook to prompt for which profile to use when it starts. bill Posted by: Bill Faulkner at February 7, 2006 11:30 AMYou could always switch to Lotus Notes which for all its interface quirks demolishes Outlook when it comes to connectivity / replication to multiple information stores (wether email, document, database, discussion etc). Posted by: Raj at February 7, 2006 11:31 AMADAM: Use profiles and set the profile for the Hosp A connection to always prompt for username and password. I currently have the outlook instance on my machine set up with at least 10 different profiles that hook into 10 different Exchange Orgs, some that trust the Domain/Account I am using interactively, some that don't. I agree with Dana though that Outlook should be able to use multiple Exchange ORGs simultaneously. That pops up all sorts of questions about Address Book resolution, etc but those can all be answered. Even more than multi-ORG support though I would like to see outlook use LDAP for Exchange Org AB resolution. Dump NSPI, it is a big pain in the ass both for managing DLs/users from within Outlook but also is a huge pain in the ass from a troubleshooting standpoint. The AD and Exchange DEV folks made it too easy for the Outlook folks to sit back and not do anything to fix any of that by crutching that shitty mechanism. joe Posted by: joe at February 7, 2006 01:44 PMAbout 3 years ago, my team actually started digging down into the core of the MAPI stack for a stillborn feature in our web-based VPN portal. What we found was really ugly. We eventually ran into exactly this issue, called PSS, and got back a "sorry, you're out of luck". The whole subsystem is a pain in the ass, though; not Microsoft's best software engineering. I guess they architected in an assumption that there would only be one active MAPI profile/client at a time. Posted by: Steve Dispensa at February 7, 2006 08:10 PMI made the same exact complain in December. http://www.slashstar.com/blogs/tim/archive/2005/12/19/WhyDoesOutlookSupportOnlyOneExchangeServer.aspx It's really, really frustrating, especially with RPC over HTTP/S which really ENABLES you to use more than one concurrently. Sadly, it is not (yet) fixed in Outlook 12. I've asked if there are but haven't gotten a concrete answer. Judging from Steve's comment above though, it won't unless they've done some drastic refactoring. Posted by: Tim Marman at February 13, 2006 09:30 AMPost a comment
|
![]() ![]()
My 5 Favorite Books
Writing Secure Code
Secure Programming Cookbook Security Engineering Secure Coding Principles & Practice Inside the Security Mind ![]()
My 5 Favorite Papers
Smashing the Stack
Penetration Studies Covert Channel Analysis of Trusted Systems DoD Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria NSA Security Recommendation Guides ![]()
Archives
February 2006
January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 November 2002 October 2002 September 2002 August 2002 July 2002 ![]() |
|