Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 18th Dec 2012 00:03 UTC
Microsoft Microsoft has just responded to Google's move regarding Exchange ActiveSync. Sadly, instead of addressing the very real problems consumers are about to face, Microsoft starts talking about switching to Outlook.com.
Thread beginning with comment 545771
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[9]: Comment by lucas_maximus
by tylerdurden on Tue 18th Dec 2012 21:42 UTC in reply to "RE[8]: Comment by lucas_maximus"
tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

You're all over the place trying to fit as many red herrings as you can. Again, I was simply pointing out that outlook.com has its fair share of issues from an end "user experience" standpoint; it only implements microsoft's own protocols properly, with support for alternative protocols either discouraged or simply non-existent. In contrast, google's services as of now support EAS, POP, IMAP, and DEV as well.

Your approach thus far is to conjure an alternative future reality in which microsoft has implemented those protocols...

So google is moving away from having to pay microsoft a hefty license fee to access their protocol, whereas microsoft is basically just focusing on their own protocols. The two parties look equally political and self interested to me.

Edited 2012-12-18 21:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

You're all over the place trying to fit as many red herrings as you can. Again, I was simply pointing out that outlook.com has its fair share of issues from an end "user experience" standpoint; it only implements microsoft's own protocols properly, with support for alternative protocols either discouraged or simply non-existent. In contrast, google's services as of now support EAS, POP, IMAP, and DEV as well.


You neglected to answer how POP support is flaky, or even relevant to the discussion. Outlook.com supports POP, I haven't run into issues, but its possible others have which is why I asked for clarification (which you so far haven't given)

The other part of your statement was that POP was discouraged, AS IT SHOULD BE. POP has no place in modern e-mail.

Microsoft has not dropped IMAP for politics, it has just never supported it in the past, but it has stated that it plans to do so.

That's entirely different from Microsoft supporting IMAP in Outlook and then dropping it and telling users to take a hike and use EAS. That is the difference which you refuse to acknowledge because it is not convenient.


Your only response thus far is to conjure an alternative future reality in which microsoft has implemented those protocols. Which would be a valid argument if we had time machines. Our shared present reality, you know where "facts" tend to live, is different however.


It is one thing for me to say:
- Maybe Microsoft will implement IMAP

it is another thing for me to say:
- Microsoft has stated they will implement IMAP.

You are conflating the two, I mentioned the latter, not the former. You saying that it is vaporware because a ship date hasn't been announced just shows the weakness of your own argument.

Microsoft will support EAS, POP, and IMAP for all. Gmail will only support EAS if you pay for it, and Google doesn't use all of IMAP's features for Push on Android.

So Google is really removing one proprietary protocol, while leaving their proprietary protocol conveniently in place.


So google is moving away from having to pay microsoft a hefty license fee to access their protocol, whereas microsoft is basically just focusing on their own protocols. The two parties look equally political and self interested to me.


Google still pays Microsoft for a license! They have to! Android clients implement ActiveSync.

This is getting ridiculous.

Reply Parent Score: 2

tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

From the outlook.com terms:

Use of POP/SMTP is discouraged for @outlook.com addresses, but it will work if you set the servers to pop3.live.com and smtp.live.com, respectively. The availability of either server is not guaranteed. Note that you must sign in to the SMTP server to send mail.


That seems pretty flaky to me. In any case, whatever your personal opinion of POP may be is irrelevant. I was just providing a counter example to your original point regarding the supposed better "user experience" of outlook.com, by illustrating how said service can only interoperate with a much smaller fraction of protocols than google services currently do.

And yes by dropping ActiveSync google is reducing significantly the functionality of their services. But that does not mean microsoft is any less "political" since they are yet to support seriously anything other than their own proprietary protocols.


Perhaps you are projecting your own insecurity regarding your argument's strength? You're now playing semantic games after trying to pass vapor announcements as fact/features.

Edited 2012-12-19 01:37 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2