Microsoft warns of Google Apps Sync for Outlook issue

There is more in the msdn blog now, with second issue discovered as well: "The Outlook team has been made aware of a second issue that affects users of the Microsoft Office Outlook Connector which syncs Windows Live Hotmail with Outlook." Solution is quite easy, but I'm wondering if Google did that on purpose. Disable Microsoft's search, and disable access to Microsoft's mail... kind of weird isn't it? Coming from company that is most known by it's own SEARCH and MAIL services..

Be interesting to see how fast Google fix the issue as it sounds like something in their MAPI integration that they could fix pretty easily, not an inherent issue in their architecture. I reported a bug in the Google Apps Sync plug-in with a problem it had with the Microsoft Live Meeting plug-in. As it is usually impossible to get hold of a human at Google I wasn't expecting much joy, but they fixed the problem and pushed out a new public version of the Google App Sync plug-in with in a week! It's also amusing that Google's beta testers didn't notice that desktop search was no longer working - nor did I. The truth of the matter is that if I need to search email then it is quicker for me to fire up a browser, go to the Gmail web client and search for it there than it is to use Outlook. Additionally the web client search will search your entire archive rather than the 1Gb or so that the Google Apps Sync is storing locally. (Google Apps Sync, by default, only downloads the latest 1Gb of your mail into Outlook to keep the performance of outlook acceptable as we all know the issues it has once your PST files get big)

"Just look at Photoshop in a web page. Something like that used to be thought of as impossible." When the web app offers the same functionality, offers CUDA or other GPU processing, 64-bit support, and the lag for parsing AJAX and HTML is reduced to 0, we'll see people switch. Until then, web apps aren't even close.

As a frequent critic of Paul's comments, its important to note when he gets something right: http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/102306/google-rains-on-microso... "In many ways, this technology transition resembles the rise of PC-based computing two decades ago. The only difference this time is that Microsoft is on the wrong side of the equation. " The whole thing is worth reading, and there were similar comments on Windows weekly.

@ken, I’m not saying it will never happen, but it hasn’t happened yet. I’ve heard this promise, that soon web apps will be just as functional as client side apps, from the late 90’s on, and just doesn’t happen. I guess I’m just old fashioned. ;-) I still buy CDs and rip them into a lossless format because I hate the sound of compressed music. I still have a land line phone because I think cell phones and voip make you sound like you’re talking under water. I don’t understand the rush to give up quality and functionality for the perception of convenience. Again, don’t get me wrong, there are plenty of great web apps that wouldn’t work or would be pointless as client apps. I’ve just never bought into the idea that web apps can replace all client apps.

Hey Mike's got my back. Is this a good thing? ;-)

With the exception to Gmail on the Chrome browser most G apps I've tried suck. I ended up using Thunderbird on one machine and Outlook on another for my Gmail. Most IT people I know think this new Exchange substitute is not ready for prime time. But it's new and will be improved over time, although Gmail still isn't all that hot, and this new Wave is a yawner as well.

whiplash, the fundamental problem with Google is that it thinks enterprises are going to forego the security and predictability of their "offline" (figuratively speaking) services for the relative insecurity and privacy issues that are inherent in web-based, browser-based solutions. It's just not going to happen. Regardless of what Google thinks, Microsoft has been in the enterprise market for decades longer and has an intimate knowledge of the needs of businesses. I suppose you could argue that Microsoft has a vested interest in keeping businesses reliant on their "offline" software. But that is still a weak argument. Why would any business want to place their mission-critical services in the hands of Google?

Mike, plus they give you that 'wonderful' Google tool bar with it! ;)

pmcgrath, I completely agree... there's no way in hell I'll give up the Outlook client for Outlook Web Access ... nevermind some functionally sterile environment like Gmail. Especially since any competent Exchange admin can turn on Outlook Anywhere functionality and shut off POP/IMAP/VPN requirements to allow fully secure and functional Outlook client access from ... anywhere.

@chuckb84 http://windowsitpro.com/article/articleid/102306/google-rains-on-microso... I think the best part of this post is the reply at the bottom by Michael Geiser that list all the things the Google solution does not support when compared to Exchange.

@pmcgrath forget my previous statements, the limitations are to many for any company over 10 employees to consider. 10 and under probably would just use the web interface and not Outlook at all.

@rr0de74 While it is absolutely not necessary for SMB's to use any version of SBS (which is really quite good) - many great hosted Exchange services do exist and each offers a great deal more than Google, one cannot discount the things in MS SBS/Essentials that small companies really do want. Remote access is a big one, which SBS handles so well that all users can access it. Point is, there is a lot more in SBS than simple *nix based file and print sharing and I have not seen one small business with requirements limited to "simple file and print sharing" - ALL OF THEM want to do more. For example, enterprise search services across the enterprise - yep... Outlook, too, remote work spaces hooked to Exchange, VoIP, and Fax systems (discount that one and you've clearly never been in a shop during an intense bidding process where dozens of contractors and subs are gaining new business... hint... it happens all day, every day!). This "me only" centric view of the world, or "me and others like me only" is so silly and so confining, that no business person I have ever seen would do anything but laugh at the notion that Google's interpretation of cloud computing comes within a mm of what is already out here and in use. As things are headed (federations in everyone's cloud at the same time), Microsoft is years ahead of all others - even without SL3 and Azure! Sorry... I know that only a few guys will get what I am saying (based upon such a short post), but this is all just so silly, it's hard not to jump out of my chair and flog Paul for this utter nonsense. Google may one day get there, but not until they walk a few thousand miles in the shoes of people who stare down the barrels of payroll, payroll taxes and benefits costs day to day. Out here where the bills get paid, we need information upon which we can make decisions and we need it all; all of it all the time - not some deprecated presentation of it as defined by a company with obvious difficulty defining far simpler things – like the word “evil,” for example. Finally, for anyone suggesting that: “all they need is this simple… or that simple…. (fill in your own blanks)” be careful! Business is not simple and it is very subtle and an extremely complex balance of many things. Start telling people that they only need x, or y and that their needs are not more sophisticated and you’ll very quickly lose that customer to someone very interested in helping them do more, for less and from wherever they wish, or need to be. Small business people especially, are very sensitive to anything that allows them even one hour away from their business. Deny them something as simple as remote access for their employees and suggest that all they need is a *nix they don’t understand and “simple file and print” services and you’re going to lose that customer (most likely to a company like my own!).

pmcgrath/Mike: Like I said, I think web technologies are evolving pretty rapidly. I don't think web-based apps need to run as fast or be as feature-rich as desktop apps in order for them to become acceptable to most users. They merely need to support most of the commonly used features and perform at an acceptable level. Personally I think Outlook is a terrible example of a desktop app that can't be replaced by a web-based version. In my experience, Outlook has tons of features but it performs like a pig and PSD files are evil. But that's just been my experience.

Why is Mike green? This have something to do with envy?

I should probably just put this in a .sig file... My avatar is green to show support for the students calling for free elecitons in Iran (and who are using the Personal Computer for just what we had in mind when we ex '60s New Left types created it in the mid to late 1970s.)

chuck Check out the comparison of retentionm privacy and data anoymization policies between Microsoft, Yahoo! and Google here: http://microsoftontheissues.com/cs/blogs/mscorp/archive/2009/02/10/compa...

@kenny: OWA doesn't have BCM or Dynamics CRM support. It also doesn't work with my Simply Accounting address sync. It's fine for access via Remote Web Workplace at home or elsewhere, but it will never take the place of the full version of Outlook running on my business desktop.

Robertsjoe, go to school you intractable dolt that continuously parrots pointless Apple talking points.