Microsoft Prepping Outlook 2013 for Windows RT

Microsoft has reportedly created a version of Outlook for Windows RT but isn't sure if it will release it

Mary Jo Foley reports this week that Microsoft has developed a version of Outlook 2013 for Windows RT, the ARM-based version of Windows 8. And sure enough, one of my sources confirms that this application has indeed been created internally. The question is how or whether it’s even released.

As it does with all of its mobile operating systems, Microsoft bundles a version of Office, in this case Office Home & Student 2013 RT, with Windows RT. But unlike on other mobile systems, this version of Office comes sans an Outlook client, relying instead on the built-in Mail, People, and Calendar mobile apps.

Office RT does include full-featured versions of Word, Excel, PowerPoint and OneNote. These are the only major desktop applications that have ever been developed for Windows RT, as Microsoft doesn’t allow third party developers to create desktop applications in this environment.

But the missing piece, for many, is Outlook. And while I don’t personally use or recommend this desktop application, many rely on it and spend much of their day in Outlook.

According to Foley, Microsoft has in fact developed a desktop version of Microsoft Outlook 2013 for Windows RT. But it hasn’t decided when or if it will release the application. My source confirms this and tells me that should Outlook RT be released, it would not be free, or bundled with Windows RT.

Frankly, I’d almost rather see Outlook developed as a Metro-style mobile app, alongside the Metro versions of OneNote and Lync. But if Microsoft has in fact already made a desktop version of Outlook for Windows RT, it doesn’t make sense not to release it. Many would gladly pay for such an application.

Of course, that would open a can of worms, too: If Microsoft can release Outlook, why can’t Adobe release a desktop version of Photoshop for Windows RT? Where will it end? Hopefully, it ends with Microsoft opening up Windows Store—which currently only offers Metro-style mobile apps for download—to desktop applications too. Heck, I recently made this very suggestion.

Discuss this Article 20

Rev
on Jan 25, 2013

While this is good news, I'd much rather see a Metro version of Outlook released. That, plus Metro PowerPoint, Excel and Word. Seems like they're wasting time to me by porting the desktop version when they should be working on a nice Metro version.

zombiebacchus
on Jan 25, 2013

I would like to see Outlook released as a Metro-style app. I do not want to see the desktop when using RT. The more apps that rely on the desktop environment the less likely we are to get rid of it in a future version of RT. Killing the desktop in RT should be a priority.

InfoDave
on Jan 25, 2013

If Microsoft is serious about RT (and I can't understand why it wouldn't), why wasn't this available day one?

The future is mobile. It is not the consumption environment, it is the default environment. If it doesn't exist on mobile, Microsoft is ignoring an increasingly large part of its potential users.

Waethorn
on Jan 25, 2013

Paul, it's not just as simple as saying "Ok, we're now allowing desktop apps"....

Microsoft would have to completely redesign their toolchaim in Visual Studio to port Win32 API's over to ARM, and to include support for them in the compiler. There is a lot of legacy stuff in Win32 that is designed to work exclusively on x86 though, so I doubt this will ever see the light of day. Office 2013 RT isn't even a user-UNinstallable app in Windows RT, so I suspect that the source code for Office 2013 RT and Windows RT are actually part of the same package, since the API access needed for desktop applications would need to be compiled on a per-chipset level anyway, and we already know that Microsoft only supports specific ARM chipsets with different builds (those being OMAP, Snapdragon, and Tegra, although Tegra is the only one being used in production hardware). I'd like to see if there are any alternate chipset Windows RT tablets out there and do a file compare of the Office binaries against the version on Tegra devices.

pmbAustin
on Jan 25, 2013

If they just made the "Mail" client as good as the WP8 mail client, that'd be a start. And probably sufficient.

Boots
on Jan 25, 2013

"Hopefully, it ends with Microsoft opening up Windows Store—which currently only offers Metro-style mobile apps for download—to desktop applications too."

Would Microsoft charge 30% on top of the price of these desktop applications? If so, why would you hope for that?
If Microsoft made 30% of the sale price of every copy of Photoshop, then they would make more money for every Photoshop copy sold than every Window 8 copy.

pthurrott
on Jan 26, 2013

Microsoft doesn't charge 30 percent "on top of" anything. They get 30 percent of the price of any app sold through the store. Not only is that common to mobile apps stores, it brings other requirements that would hugely benefit consumers, including the right to install that app on up to 5 devices. Today, you can install Photoshop on only two PCs. Why wouldn't I want that?

More to the point, it doesn't have to be full Photoshop. It could be Photoshop Elements.

Anyway, I already made this argument in the linked article. There's no reason to go over this again. This one is a no brainer.

Boots
on Jan 26, 2013

What will stop the developers increasing the price of their applications to compensate for the 30% loss in their profit?
If applications sold through the store can be used on 5 devices, it is likely that developers will sell less copies of these applications. That is good for the consumer, but what's in it for the developers?

Albion
on Jan 25, 2013

Just to be a little technical, the versions of Excel, Word, and Powerpoint that ship with Windows RT are *NOT* full featured.

Those versions of the office applications do not support macros. That's a huge deal to a lot of organizations, and it makes them non-starters for a lot of purposes.

pthurrott
on Jan 26, 2013

They are very much "full-featured." They are not 100 percent feature-by-feature identical to the x86 versions. But they're not stripped down either.

roncerr
on Jan 25, 2013

"But if Microsoft has in fact already made a desktop version of Outlook for Windows RT..." I used to understand that "desktop" apps were another way to refer to x86 apps. Instead, apparently, there are two kinds of RT apps (desktopRT and metro) and one type of x86 app (desktopx86). If you are using a full Windows 8 computer like Surface Pro or any Windows 8 upgrade, how can you tell the difference between a desktopRT program and a desktopx86 program?

Waethorn
on Jan 26, 2013

No, you don't have that right. There is only 1 kind of WinRT (the runtime) app, although it can be compiled to run on different architectures - those being x86, x64, or ARM. Windows RT runs WinRT applications and the bundled copy of Office 2013, along with the Windows accessories like Notepad and Paint. Developers can't create desktop apps for Windows RT (see my comment above for my prediction as to the real reason for it).

Only x86 and x86-64 (nicknamed "x64") systems support third-party desktop apps.

If Microsoft wanted third-party developers to have access to develop desktop apps, they'd have to come up with some way to translate/emulate/virtualize x86-specific optimizations in low-end C++ and C components in Win32 to work on ARM, and that means completely reinventing the wheel. I'd rather they work on fine-tuning the hover-jet.

roncerr
on Feb 3, 2013

Thanks for the explanation. If I understand it correctly, WOA, WinRT, and Windows RT, and Windows 8 are four different things. WOA runs "bundled office", Notepad, and Paint, as well as WinRT which is the component of Windows RT used to run apps. Windows 8 combines Windows RT with "the ability to run legacy apps". Is that correct? Do we need a name for "the ability to run legacy apps"? What is the difference between WinRT and Windows RT?

Harry Buttle
on Jan 26, 2013

The logical path would be to sell it via the store, as an interim release, and follow it up with a full metro version when it is ready.

Bryan
on Jan 26, 2013

Paul, if Microsoft is serious about RT then a decent touch friendly Mail client is a must along with a host of other touch friendly re-writes that are almost impossible to navigate or use when switched to the desktop environment on WindowsRT. What they heck was Microsoft thinking?

The Mail client in RT is included is nothing short of "juvenile" in a world very well designed apps. Heck it would be understandable if MS had never been involved in the design of Mail applications - but seeing what they shipped with RT made me wonder if this was an April Fools joke - in December!!

Paul, with all the really great products that MS has in its armoury, they do so little to extract the greatest benefits out of each of them. Many of these products don’t work well together on the various platforms ie; Phone, Tablet, PC and Xbox. It would do MS a lot of good if they were to hive off a number of these products (so they were kept away from the bureaucracy of Microsoft HO) and allow these groups or companies (that are leaner and hungrier)to focus on each product and bring it to its FULL potential.

Some suggestions Windows Movie Maker, Windows Photo Gallery, Paint, Windows Media Player maybe even Skype and Internet Explorer.

letsplaynicely
on Jan 26, 2013

The Outlook desktop app is all about the corporate market. It's the standard email client for those businesses.
Many people in these environments only use the Office suite, intranet apps and occasionally Adobe reader. A Win RT tablet with these apps could become a very strong business tool. And it's clear that Microsoft need to offer something strong to counter the rise of the iPad in this space.

Lewk
on Jan 26, 2013

Instead of Outlook for RT, I wish Microsoft did one of 2 things:
a) Bring the bundled Mail app up to the wonderful state of the web client.
or
b) Bring live-tile and notification functionality to the web version of outlook.com.

I currently have and only use the web version of outlook on my RT, but keep the mail app pinned as well to get the notifications. It's so silly. I seriously thought Microsoft would have at least brought across some of the web version's functionality to the Mail app by now. Not one thing has been improved on that front, and that kind of scares me.

I thought that separating all of those services to apps would bring more frequent updates. And sure we've seen a handful of updates for a couple of their apps, but I was drawn in by a fools hope that we would see a faster moving Microsoft on the app front. To me it has been as fast as their yearly cycle of windows live essential updates. But then again, we're only 3 months after the release of Windows, and I have been spoiled lately by third party developers iterating their apps so frequently (on the mobile phone space that is).

dalestrauss
on Jan 27, 2013

The absence of a true email client for the RT version immediately disqualifies RT for many of us. Boost the ARM performance and throw in Outlook RT, and you'd have an iPad killer in the enterprise. Only the AutoCAD/Photoshop/Adobe Acrobat XI crowd would need the Surface Pro at that rate.

warrensutton
on Jan 27, 2013

As a technology coordinator in a school I've been interested in trialling an RT Surface Tablet. The Mail App has presented a range of challenges. In particular the way security settings are applied when a connection is made to an Exchange server was very annoying and unclear. I have subsequently got it to work in a way that I am comfortable with only but after considerable effort. I've documented some of this in my blog at http://warrensutton.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/windows-rt-and-8-security-w....
As a general comment I'd find it hard to recommend Windows RT to anyone in an education environment because accessing things as simple as email are simply not clear when your needs are non-trivial. Providing access to Outlook may improve this situation - however there's a long way to go before RT will rival the simplicity of an iPad.

kingpcgeek
on Jan 28, 2013

Oh good the "new and improved" crummy Outlook 2013. I tried to use to for a week and had to go back to 2010. Why oh why Microsoft did you take away/cripple the to-do bar?

Please or Register to post comments.

IT/Dev Connections

Las Vegas
September 30th - October 4th

Paul ThurottYou'll have the opportunity to experience:
• 120 Technical
Sessions
• Networking with Peers
• Expert Speakers


Come See Paul Thurrott & Mary Jo Foley in Person!

Register Now

Office 365 InfoCenter

Get the latest insight and info from Paul

Read Now!

What I Use