It might just be the way ours is configured, I suppose, but…
I’m a Lotus Notes guy, since for the last 8+ years I have been at companies that used Notes for their e-mail client. It has its share of problems, but it handled e-mail OK, and it had a TON of configurable rules.
Outlook, though…this shit escapes me. The only time you can have a rule run automatically is when a message enters your inbox. No scheduling, no running it after a message is read, nothing like that…stupid thing.
My next complaint has to do with how it handles outgoing mail. I am part of a group e-mail list. This does not mean that every time I send an e-mail tot hat list, I want a fucking copy of the same damn message sent to me. Listen fuckers, I have a 50MB limit on my account. I don’t want this shit cluttering it all up. (yes, I know 50MB is paltry, but I just work here. And yes, I delete them, but it’s an annoyance)
You know what I REALLY don’t need, though? A fucking read (or deleted without reading) receipt for fucking messages that I sent to myself because I was on the group list. Holy shit that’s just assenine.
Bill Gates, people already have enough reasons to want to belt you in the nuts (repeatedly). Please fix Outlook.
You can turn off the options for saving sent messages and requesting a read receipt. If you can’t figure it out, I can hunt around later and tell you the exact menu options and so forth.
Out of curiosity, in what circumstance would you want a rule to run after a message had been read? It’s just never occurred to me to do something like that, so I’m curious why someone would want to.
In my job, I occassionally find myself assigned to places that use Lotus Notes instead of Outlook. Last time was six months straight, and I gave Bill a blow job when I returned to Outlook. Notes drives me fucking insane. I hate it, especially it’s calendar.
I don’t get the problem with receiving mails sent to a Distribution List I belong to. I have set up to get a Read Receipt on every email I send, so if I do send myself an email, I’ll also get the receipt (Shift-Del permanently deletes it when it happens).
Lotus Notes, I think, tried to create their own environment so as to create new, exciting problems and inconsistencies that would not normally be possible under a typical, familiar interface.
Seriously, it’s like the designers had never used Windows before.
I hate Lotus Notes. Have you ever tried to send an email-based newsletter with html formatting in Notes? Of course you haven’t because it doesn’t fuckin’ work. That alone is enough to make me hate it. I’d rather use Outlook Express than the POS software.
Not when you’re doing an internal newsletter for people within the same company. It an easy elegant method for making attractive functional newsletters.
If the newsletter was purely internal, why did you have to do it in HTML rather than Notes rich text?
I’m a person who does Notes administration for my company. We’re going to be moving to Outlook in the not-too-distant future (among other things, because Blackberry consultants laugh at us and/or hang up when we tell them we’re a Notes shop), and I’m absolutely dreading it. Notes may be a labyrinthine piece of shit, but dammit, it’s my piece of shit! Once you are familiar with all the ways in which it sucks, it’s pretty easy to work with.
Thanks, I know how to turn off the read receipts, but for some godawful reason we are doing our change management through Outlook, and they use these forms that have read receipts defaulting to “ON” on them. It’s not a global preference that I can set…for these forms, I will get a read receipt, always.
Why do I want to run a rule after a message is read? Well, perhaps I’d like to delete e-mails in a certain category after a certain period of time. Or, once read, I’d like Outlook to automatically put it in a folder for me. There are a million things you can do with rules if you’re given a little flexibility.
Yes, the notes calendar sucked, and it was a PITA to sync with PocketPC or Palm. I admitted it was not perfect. But outlook just isn’t the happy shit that everyone makes it out to be, and it does a lot of stupid shit.
LMAO. It’s a for that uses a standard feature of Outlook. You are tryiung to tell me you don’t find it incredibly stupid that I’m sending a read receipt to myself. Like I didn’t fucking know I just read the message I sent to myself. Thanks for telling me, outlook.
What is this, e-mail for people with Alzheimers? It reminds me of the “Starbucks across the street from a Starbucks” routine by Lewis Black.
Yes, it’s a form that uses a standard feature of Outlook. It’s a form that was designed by someone in your company to have that feature turned on for that form. If you think that is stupid don’t blame Outlook, blame the designer. Perhaps discussing it with him/her will explain their reasoning.
Wrong again. I’m not complaining that I can’t turn off the read receipts. I’m complaining that if I send myself a notification, I don’t need a fucking read receipt to tell me I read the damned notification. I know I read it. Holy shit how obvious is that?
I’m sorry, I am not angry at you, just frustrated by the stupidity of this system.
At least you aren’t using GroupWise 7.0. Last i heard they delayed service pack 1 to fix something like 1,500 errors and glitches and problems. Novell dropped the ball big time on GW7
Create a rule to move all messages from yourself to the “Deleted Items” folder. If you have some reason to send messages to yourself regularly, then create the rule for messages sent from yourself AND to any of the distros to which you belong.
I think it’s probably a good thing that rules are only applied when a message arrives. I definitely wouldn’t find it convenient to have rules that moved messages among folders after having already read them - it can be hard enough when you have multiple folders to remember where a particular message lies. It would be much worse if you had to remember where a message lies, whether any rules existed that might apply to it, when it would have been scheduled to be moved, and whether that time has yet passed.
I would imagine that the archive feature is sufficient for most needs, and rule scheduling features would be pandering to a limited crowd, which wouldn’t justify the additional development time.