Editor's note 9/28/22: We have updated the "known gaps" table to reflect the latest status. As we announced today here, the new Outlook for Windows is now available for customers who are opted int...
Updated Nov 09, 2023
Version 6.0
Blog Post
Microsoft continues to confound.
Outlook gets stripped of essential and productivity features while Excel continues to have features and functions added? How does that make sense?
If Microsoft made cars, would they?:
- Remove power windows, because after all the function of the window is for viewing and they don't need to go up and down?
- Remove heating and cooling controls, because after all, the driver and passengers should be dressed accordingly. Vehicles shouldn't be designed to accommodate passenger comfort.
- Remove the audio system because everyone should have their own personal audio device, therefore vehicles don't need to include sound systems.
The list can probably include another 20 analogous examples.
Microsofts reasoning for striping out features might make sense if Classic Outlook was a "bare bones" application and users were demanding Microsoft to spend significant time and money to make it extravagant. Why would Microsoft ignore 40+ years of lessons learned and seemingly start from nearly the beginning? Yet they didn't "strip" Excel or other applications? Is there some unseen cost savings or other major positive financial impact?
These types of decisions are beyond comprehension, "New" Outlook is practically unusable. I might as well show up to work with my eyes blindfolded and hands bound.