Entourage ‘08

I don't recall whining about anything in this thread, but it was a while ago, so maybe I've forgotten. Perhaps if this was a valid comment, I'd go back and read through it again, and waste time arguing with you, but since it isn't, I won't bother.

Jeez, Jared, you're a real fucking whiner. Just pipe down already and stop your fan-boy point-counterpoint. Exchange support is used to extort money, plain and simple. Just like selling Entourage ONLY as a part of Office is extortion. I don't need Word, Excel, or Powerpoint, but suddenly I have to purchase them to get Exchange support? Fuck that, and fuck you fan boy.

Well, I was thinking of more traditional commercial software in the context of this discussion, but there are certainly lots of free software alternatives that don't.

I don't know about Red Hat, though; I'm pretty sure they sell commercial support for their products, which includes licenses to use particular features (like update subscriptions for RHEL), but maybe I'm wrong there.

I don't think there's anything wrong with it necessarily, though.

Red Hat doesn't do it. And Novell doesn't do it, at least not with their growing product line.

Off the top of my head, you can buy Apple Remote Desktop 10-client edition for $299, or unlimited-client edition for $499. There's a similar structure for Mac OS X Server. Although it's not quite the same, since in this case it's the scope of the license that changes rather than the featureset.

Still, Entourage without Exchange support is just another POP/IMAP client with a throw-in calendar function. Might as well stick to Mail.app with iCal. Honestly, that's probably what most home users will do; Word for writing letters, Excel for the family budget, Mail.app for e-mail and iCal for calendar. My guess would be that MS specifically left out Exchange support in the home version to head off business users who might just grab the home version figuring "no one will know the difference."

Final Cut was what I had in mind when I mentioned Apple; don't know whether there are others from them.

I see no difference. More features for more money, whether it's Apple, Adobe, MS or anyone else. Being "overwhelmingly different" is somewhat subjective and different for every product.

Lots of software has more minor differences in features between available versions, but the degree isn't the issue, it's the fact that there are different versions for different prices.

You may as well go complain about Basecamp's pricing options, which range from free to $150 / month with four options in between (six total), all of them offering basically the same features with what you would have to consider (by the logic you're using) "minor" differences in "licensing and restrictions".

The "incentive" is the extra feature of Exchange integration, just as you get additional functionality on other software products when you buy the more expensive version / option.

If you don't think it's worth it, by all means don't buy it. I'm not trying to sell you on it (see my recommendation of other options) or defend MS per se, just calling out the clear MS-bashing bias that comes through in the original article you quoted.

Saying that "business can't get by using the home/education version" is just a ridiculous statement on its face; it's obvious that the author is just looking for things to complain about. All I'm saying is he should at least complain about things that make sense.

What Apple software does this? I can't even think of one that has multiple versions, except Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Express both of which are overwhelmingly different. Same goes for Photoshop and Elements.

There's a difference between versions that completely differ and versions that differ because of license and restrictions to make sure people purchase the more expensive version.

And that's the problem. MS isn't giving any incentive to purchase the more expensive version, they're requiring it.

Like I said above, nearly every major software company releases multiple versions / editions of their software, and the ones you pay more for come with more features.

Apple and Adobe certainly do it, along with most other companies that I can think of. Even "web 2.0" companies (like 37Signals). At the moment, I can't think of a single software company that doesn't do this, although I'm sure there are a few that exist.

If you want to view it as "disabling features", you can look at it that way, but I don't see the difference that you're implying about how MS is doing it vs. everyone else.

I don't see many companies doing this, that being disabling features in their software for business users. Apple doesn't, maybe Adobe but not exactly.

But does it suck when every other company does it, or just when MS does? :)

That's why I recommended the alternatives.

And that sucks.

No, I get what you're saying. I'd say if you're connecting to your work's exchange server, then it's "business use" by definition.

I know you used Exchange for personal use at one point, but the vast majority (probably >99%) of Exchange usage is for businesses (who are willing to pay for the more expensive license).

BUT, let's not get hung up on the labeling though ("business" vs. "home" use); it all boils down to the fact that there's a version with Exchange support and that's the one you have to buy in order to use it with Exchange. It's pretty simple, even if you don't like it.

Many software companies release multiple versions of their software and the more expensive ones usually contain features that the cheaper ones do not. That's just the way it is with commercial software.

Obviously they've determined that people who want to use the Exchange functionality are willing to pay extra for it.

I'm not talking about the EULA, I'm talking about the fact that I'd be buying a home version for home not for business.

Also, the EULA doesn't state in requirements for using Home or Business. They just are producing two separate versions with different capabilities.

Also, at one point I did use exchange and it was for home/personal use.

If you do decide to use something else instead, I'd recommend Evolution, as it does have pretty good Exchange support.

I'm just not sure if they have a port that will run natively on a Mac, but you could always use it in a VM. Although, if you're going to do that, you could just use Outlook from a VM too, assuming you have a license for it.

Does Apple have any software (like WINE or Crossover Office on the Linux side) that allows you to run native Windows apps without using a VM? I thought I heard something about that recently. If so, you could run Outlook in that too.

Not according to their license, which you unfortunately just have to deal with if you choose to use their software.

If it's your company making the choice, then they can choose to pay for the license that allows you to use Exchange.

From Microsoft's point of view, the case you mentioned would certainly be considered "business use", regardless of where you're physically using it, and that part makes sense: connecting to your work's Exchange server is obviously "business" related.

[Side note / tangent]: Hopefully you can't connect directly to your work's Exchange server from outside of their network, without using a VPN or something, for security reasons.

Anyway, I guess what you're saying is charging extra for business use sucks, but that's the choice that you (or your company - whoever's buying it) has to make. I'd encourage you to use something else if you don't want to support that licensing model.

Maybe that's not the best highlight of why the new entourage isn't what it could be.

Regardless, someone like me who should be able to buy the home version to connect to my works exchange server isn't possible even though it would be my personal purchase.

Not to mention, it still keeps all its data in a giant database file the same way 2004 did. This means extremely poor compatibility with Time Machine. Every time your database file changes (say you get an e-mail or add an event to your calendar), Time Machine will make a completely separate backup copy of your Entourage database. Kind of inconvenient if your database is several gigabytes in size (not to mention with all your data in only one file, the slightest bit of file corruption means your entire Entourage environment is completely hosed).

A "business" trying to "get by using the home and education version" is probably in violation of their license anyway, so what else would they expect?

Exchange integration is (primarily) a business feature, so it makes sense for them to only include it in their
business targeted products.

The school angle is perhaps a valid complaint, although I don't know how many educational institutions actually run Exchange for student access. It didn't use to be very many, although maybe that's changed now.

You and I both may not agree with them that it's worth the extra money, but there's always the option of not using them. Luckily there are plenty of free software alternatives.