It's About Data
In my Calendar post, I touched on some of the work we’ve done in our Entourage 2008 reliability focus. I’d like to continue that discussion today with some details about our efforts in another critical area, the Entourage Database. Apart from a few exceptions (e.g. Rules definitions, signatures), essentially all Entourage user data is stored in the database. Reliability and trustworthiness here are our top priority. In Entourage 2008, we dedicated a large amount of time to identifying database areas with potential for new approaches and improvements. We found new ways to better detect database inconsistencies. We’ve also implemented tighter controls on data type enforcement and are smarter about reclaiming storage from deleted items. The end result is more confidence in the integrity of your data.
For those instances when inconsistencies are detected, the Entourage 2008 database recovery tool will be a more effective solution. In past versions, recovering your database was intrusive and required additional work to get things back into shape. Metadata like Categories, Project designations, and Links were lost. Mail filtering rules were also often victims when the clearing of IMAP and Exchange caches would break links between Rules and their related folders. In Entourage 2008, these are all preserved. Categories, Projects, Links, and Rules are no longer vulnerable to the process. The recovery is now more precisely focused on correcting only problem areas.
Compatibility with Apple’s Time Machine backup feature in Leopard is a database area that has received a lot of attention recently. Because Entourage uses a single file database, over time it can become large (sometimes really large). In those cases, Entourage data will not work optimally with Time Machine. Our recommendation is to exclude your Entourage Identity folder(s) in the Time Machine preferences and use alternative backup methods. We are committed to integrating with key Apple technologies and are weighing our options here for future releases.
When the topic of Entourage and databases comes up, it’s often about compatibility with Outlook personal store files (.pst). Entourage 2008 will continue to work with the PST Import Tool for Mac. It’s important to note that this tool is used to import Mac Outlook 2001 .pst files into Entourage. Directly importing Windows Outlook .pst files is not supported in Entourage 2008. We have heard from many of you that a Windows Outlook .pst solution is important. This feedback is factoring into the database development planning for future versions of Entourage. For now, there is an AppleScript based solution that I think is worth a look.
Another important consideration here is how we interact with Exchange’s database, “the store.” We’ve made some welcome improvements to our WebDav synchronization performance with Exchange in Entourage 2008. Through code reviews, customer feedback, and working closely with the Exchange team we’ve been able to find optimizations that will make the Exchange experience better. We solved efficiency bottlenecks and implemented smarter priority and thread utilization, especially with deep folder trees. You'll also have more control over the order folders sync with smarter prioritization of selected folders. This will result in faster Exchange folder updates and Entourage responsiveness will sharpen.
To conclude, I’d like to reiterate a point from my first post, that we understand that our Exchange customers want “an Exchange client on the Mac with features, performance, documentation, and reliability on par with Outlook.” This is a goal that will be achieved in stages, through Entourage 2008, its updates, and beyond. In Entourage 2008, the Exchange focus has been weighted towards reliability, better meeting management, performance, and documentation. While we’ve added important new enterprise features like OOF, Managed Folders, and Compliance Labels, and delivered features that will help you focus you on what you need to get done, we’ve concentrated on making things right in some rough spots. We know that there’s more important work to do, notably in the area of Task and Note sync with Exchange.
I look forward to upcoming posts from our team that will reveal our security feature work and some cool things we’ve done around To Do Flags. Entourage 2008 is a big step forward and we’re all anxious for you to see it.
Richard Kmieciak
Comments
Anonymous
December 12, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 12, 2007
So still no task/note sync with Exchange? Sigh...I guess it's Outlook in Parallels for another ?? months.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
So many things just really seem like and end run. Pointing to 3rd party Applescripts to migrate an Outlook database? Really, who is using Outlook 2001 for Mac? Is this difficult to do, or are you just purposely making it painful to switch? Must be really REALLY tough to be in the position of being told from upper management "Well, make this good, but you MUST break it in these 5 ways so we can protect our Windows products." Because, given 4 YEARS to work on this, it's really all you can offer is to point to some AppleScripts? I mean, I know it's balking to try and limit the spread of Macs into businesses, but it's painfully obvious. I guess I can see with as much time has gone into the Entourage database why you couldn't make it time-machine friendly, given you only had 1.5 years notice on that one :-/Anonymous
December 12, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 12, 2007
I've learned it's pointless to respond to posts on this blog, because I never see any followup on all the feedback coming in on past articles. It's like we live in one world, and the devs of Mac Office are living in another. (In that world "OOF" is a critical feature, but parity with Outlook? Not so much.) This blog is read-only.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 12, 2007
With a feature-set like this and the world renowned MS reliability it is no wonder my users are begging me to switch from exchange to google apps.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
It is disappointing that you are continuing to use such a limited database architecture. Mac users have been complaining about the one file system for years. To suggest that we "use alternative backup methods" is completely unacceptable. You've had four years to work on this. Will we have to wait another four years before you get this right?Anonymous
December 12, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 12, 2007
I'm sorry that Exchange support isn't more advanced. WebDav? Why not MAPI? Or is that going away on the Windows side? Still, I'm really looking forward to this release of Office. But really, you had to remove Automator and Exchange support from the Student Teacher version? Lucky for me I saw the Black Friday sale on time. :-D My school uses Exchange! I hope our overall MS software agreement for Office covers Mac Office. The LAST thing we need is that photo database. We use Portfolio and Artesia Teams for our DAMS. And we need Exchange support. Automator would be good, but I guess we could live without that. Let's hope our IT department isn't confused and buy us versions of Office that don't support Exchange. I can only imagine the hassle we'll get from them for being Mac users if that happens. I don't get the hostility here towards the MacBU. For all the little problems, and wishes unfulfilled, I really like using Office more now than ever before. 2008 ought to make it much better.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
Hello? It's been 4 years since Office 2004. Not only is M$ about 3 years late, but Office will not take advantage of the latest Leopard technologies. Leopard has been in development for 2.5 years, with countless developer pre-releases. So, we get Office with LESS functionality than Office 2004 (visual basic macros, for one). Disgusting.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
I have to agree with Lucky Lou--there are a lot of us who sincerely appreciate what you guys are doing and really want Microsoft Mac products to be top notch. But some of the decisions on where to focus development time are truly difficult to understand from the outside. Why in the world is notes and task syncing still not implemented? Any Windows Mobile phone does it. There are third party solutions on various platforms that do it. A single developer even put together an over-the-air sync of all pim databases for palm-based Treos in a couple of months, but a Microsoft product that's been in development for 4 years cannot sync with the company's own groupware server! Why is this? If you guys just explained some of the constraints that shape these decisions, we wouldn't be so frustrated. We waited for this version of Entourage for a long time. While the improvements are greatly appreciated, we honestly don't understand why such basic features as sync of all Exchange databases are still not there.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
@Lucky Lou: Hear hear!!!! I couldn't have said it any better.Anonymous
December 12, 2007
I can't get excited by this. I just can't at this point. Very little we've been asking for seems to have been addressed. Information is still lacking. And some things are just too telling... You say that database repair doesn't affect metadata as much. Yet this metadata is, in many cases, things should could (should?) be synced to Exchange anyway (Categories). So I guess we won't be seeing the required/correct/true (delete as appropriate) level of integration afterall. And do you know what the worst thing about this is? If this level of information had been given during summer WHEN PEOPLE WERE ASKING FOR IT then we would have applauded the information. As at least ti would have been in enough time to prepare for it. Half a year is enough time to get used to what's missing and decide to buy anyway. This risks people still being too annoyed when the product actually ships. "Oops" (apologies for caps, mild emphasis like italics is missing form comment field)Anonymous
December 13, 2007
Can it be explained why the Outlook client in Mac Office was dropped in the first place? Maybe understanding the reason behind that change will allow me to better understand this journey back to an Outlook client.Anonymous
December 13, 2007
I like how you are already trying to lower our expectations. How sad.....build us up to expect nothing but a phenomenal product and then WHAM! bring us back to reality. You better rest up over the holidays because come January you'll be slammed.Anonymous
December 13, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 13, 2007
I just don't understand how you guys can sit there straight faced and sell this as a business solution. Can you simply explain to the business users why you can't make a fully meshed exchange client? It's a simple question that you keep dodging and avoiding and now you are hedging with looking toward the future statements. Give me a break. This is now officially a waste of time.Anonymous
December 13, 2007
Ever since Tiger and Spotlight have been released four years ago the main advantage of your database, allowing fast searches, has disappeared. So instead of simplifying Entourage by getting rid of the database you chose to keep it complex. If you would move Entourage to a system similar to Apple Mail (where each message is stored as an individual file) you would: A - no longer need a special Export routine to get messages out of the database B - no longer need create cached copies of every message in your database in order to get Spotlight searching to work with Entourage C- no longer need to worry about huge complex repair routines for a huge complex monolithic database that will lose ALL of your mail in one fell swoop if it gets to corrupt D- be able to integrate with cool (and VERY useful) new Leopard technologies like QuickLook to allow clients to view messages without having Entourage open or Time Machine to easily and automatically back up your hard drive. I have to say that as an IT person I am really getting tired of constantly rebuilding Entourage databases for my customers and defending you guys by telling them that maybe it will be better in the next release or even the next bug fix. This would have been the perfect time to make a big change like this since according to some of the earlier posts on Mac Mojo you had to pretty much rewrite your code from scratch when switching from the CodeWarrior development environment to Apple's developer tools in order to make your apps Universal binaries. I have to say that I am very disappointed in this news. You say you understand what your customers want but from reading a majority of the responses to these Blogs you clearly don't. A majority of comments/posts noted they want the monolithic Entourage database chucked and Notes/Tasks synchronization. I hope that when I get the new version in hand that it is better than these your Blogs make it out to be butAnonymous
December 13, 2007
Ever since Tiger and Spotlight have been released four years ago the main advantage of your database, allowing fast searches, has disappeared. So instead of simplifying Entourage by getting rid of the database you chose to keep it complex. If you would move Entourage to a system similar to Apple Mail (where each message is stored as an individual file) you would: A - no longer need a special Export routine to get messages out of the database B - no longer need create cached copies of every message in your database in order to get Spotlight searching to work with Entourage C- no longer need to worry about huge complex repair routines for a huge complex monolithic database that will lose ALL of your mail in one fell swoop if it gets to corrupt D- be able to integrate with cool (and VERY useful) new Leopard technologies like QuickLook to allow clients to view messages without having Entourage open or Time Machine to easily and automatically back up your hard drive. I have to say that as an IT person I am really getting tired of constantly rebuilding Entourage databases for my customers and defending you guys by telling them that maybe it will be better in the next release or even the next bug fix. This would have been the perfect time to make a big change like this since according to some of the earlier posts on Mac Mojo you had to pretty much rewrite your code from scratch when switching from the CodeWarrior development environment to Apple's developer tools in order to make your apps Universal binaries. I have to say that I am very disappointed in this news. You say you understand what your customers want but from reading a majority of the responses to these Blogs you clearly don't. A majority of comments/posts noted they want the monolithic Entourage database chucked and Notes/Tasks synchronization. I hope that when I get the new version in hand that it is better than these your Blogs make it out to be.Anonymous
December 13, 2007
I'm with Lucky Lou and PVK, we very much want Office to be great--we depend on it--and we're just disappointed. Compounding that is we're not getting enough of the rationale for these decisions. If the database had to be retained for specific reasons, let's at least hear a carefully-worded PR-approved reason. Because as others have said, such a fundamental issue should have been addressed over 4 years. Either that or tell us that Microsoft continues to believe that a monolithic database is the best solution. Again, I'm pulling for you all at the Mac BU. Believe me I understand all the constraints you're operating under, including the ability to discuss these issues. But we in turn are providing what we hope is valuable feedback: we don't see our needs and interests being addressed. So what is the rationale for these decisions? That's what we'd like to know. Someone made the call as to what to put in this product, let them defend the decision. Or if that person is gone and it was just too late to change direction, tell us.Anonymous
December 13, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 13, 2007
Have you guys NOT noticed that some colleges DO IN FACT use Exchange? Automator is one thing, that's just petty, but really not the END of the world. But NO Exchange support? I'm flabbergasted. On the plus side, I'll MAKE DO with something else, and save the couple of hundred bucks. Was that what you were hoping? Why don't teachers and students need email? No really - why don't they? Ok. You win. But F-U too. I'll save my money.Anonymous
December 14, 2007
No, it's not about data. It's about what your are told you can and cannot do to create parity between Outlook and Entourage. It's about what your are told you can and cannot do with regard to integrating Apple's technologies - specifically one database file. "One database to rule them all, One database to find them, One database to bring them all and in the darkness bind them" My company has 20+ licenses to Office 2004. As the IT director I am recommending that we not upgrade to Office 2008, switch entirely to Apple Mail, and start to migrate to Numbers. We already use Keynote for presentations, and see no reason to use PowerPoint. Every user has the ".docx -> .doc" translator, so compatibility is not an issues with Office 2007 for Windows. Personally, I prefer Entourage to Mail, but as my company migrates to Leopard, and we provide small hard drives to implement Time Machine for our mobile users (the majority), Entourage's single database makes it an unsuitable choice. Too badAnonymous
December 14, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 14, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 15, 2007
It's disappointing to learn that the new Entourage database won't be compatible with Time Machine. For all it's faults, Time Machine is an effective backup strategy for many users. I used to use other backup methods, but the simplicity and integration of Time Machine with the OS, means that it is my way of ensuring that I always backup routinely. I will still probably use Entourage. It just works better for me than Mail as an application and I use Exchange hosting mainly because I love Outlook webmail. Problem with this is that the Time Machine issue has me looking into alternatives whereas before I was a happy Entourage user. I know that for the foreseeable future I will use Time Machine and will have to exclude my Entourage database from backups. No big deal, but it is awkward to not have the same peace of mind about my local email data (server is backed up) that I do about the rest of my data. I think the frustration in the posts above comes from people like me that want to use MS Office exclusively, but feel underserved due to issues like this. I don't want to move away from Entourage as my email client, but you are making me look into alternatives when i don't want to. :(Anonymous
December 16, 2007
- If it doesn't sync with Exchange, it's useless to me. "Notes" and "Tasks" are just buttons that taunt me with their unfulfilled promises. It would be better if they weren't there.
- Lack of compatibility with Time Machine is absurd. "Alternate backup methods?" Perhaps we should print everything out and file copies? This is truly second rate software.
Anonymous
December 16, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 17, 2007
Google are getting all this tripe?Anonymous
December 17, 2007
so you have taken 4 years to sort out the database repair, and in this day of intel macs, nobody considered making entou-RAGE 100% exchange server compatible? There is only one thing worse than no updated software at all - updated software that isn't an update at all.Anonymous
December 17, 2007
Leopards don't change their spots, so why are we surprised about your stance even after both the US and EU governments have pursued successful antitrust prosecutions! There are no legitimate reasons why MS cannot offer a PIM product which is on par with Outlook in its ability to work with its server product, Exchange right now. The only logical reason is that MS is terrified that offering a comparable product on the Mac will make Vista look even more mediocre than it already is. Shame on you both corporately and individually for believing that you can continue to treat $$ paying customers in this way. The world has fundamentally changed with the Internet, open source and other disruptive technologies. MS is looking more like Kodak every day! Bloated, Arrogant and a misguided belief in its own importance to the world.Anonymous
December 19, 2007
Wow Your All Fired... Wow I was hoping that the reason this topic was not discussed earlier was that it was such an obvious feature you would rather focus on discussing more exotic and esoteric additions. Sadly this is not the case. I would rather have Office 2004 with 1. PST support. 2. Full Sharepoint Integration 3. Task/Note Sync then every other pointless "upgrade". You had 4 YEARS to complete this simple and necessary tasks. Ironically this means even more money for M$ as the alternative is Parallels with a copy of XP SP2 and Office 2007. We really need a good open source or apple created solution of I fear things will only get worse and worse...Anonymous
December 20, 2007
It is unbelivebel! We get no *.pst Import for Entourage 2008 from windows I bought a new iMac with entourage 2004 and ordered yet the 2008 version. I worked with a windows pc for years and I am using there offive 97, 2000, 2003 and now Office 2007. I thought it is claer that we will have an pst Import form office 2003 ore 2007 into entourage 2008. But I was wrong. MS had 4 ears time to develope this tool. We should quit working with mircosoft application. MichaelAnonymous
December 20, 2007
The comment has been removedAnonymous
December 30, 2007
Sorry to echo what others have said, but I can't believe that after years of development, Entourage doesn't have the functionality in Outlook. Why does MS think that Mac users want different Office features and functionality than Windows users? They made the same mistake with IE and finally abandoned it. Look at Adobe CS3 apps. They have identical feature sets across platforms and ship on the same date. Even Firefox is able to do this. So my dream of not needing to run XP in Parallels is not going to be realized anytime soon. Hey Mac Office Team: It would be nice for you to respond to these posts in some fashion so that it at least seems like you're listening.Anonymous
December 31, 2007
How about a straight answer.... will Office 2008 Mac allow scheduling of a RESOURCE? I have seen more posts on this topic then anything, it would really be nice to know that Microsoft makes sure to build in essential functionality into this product that is used DAILY. I saw all the Out of Office buzz, OK that could be helpful, but do I use this daily...NOP! Do I book resources and would like to make someone optional, yep DAILY! Not that there are not other functions or shortcomings of Office on the MAC, but frankly I can live with all of them if I can just do my essential work without switching to the web interface. Oh well with Leopard the new Mail client and calendering allows scheduling resource, given not easily...but you know....Anonymous
January 02, 2008
What's really the point of having an Exchange sync based email, task, and calendar tool if you can't categorize the data. Good luck on getting Entourage users to upgrade. Apple users are already using iWork and just keeping your guys around for Entourage Apple beat you guys down again. Knowing the Exchange flaws in Exchange Office 2004 they release iWork. All us Exchange Office2004 users bought it and fell in love. All the while using Entourage 04 to keep things sync'ed and forgetting about Word/Excel/PP. Now Office08 comes out, and without a true Exchange sync I am going to use iCal/gCal a Blackberry. At least I can sync different Calendars that way (business/personal). I can manage tasks with a wired plug-in sync tool. Tossing my Exchange Server and my WM6 Tilt will be hard, but not that hard. Just to think, I could have been saved with task/note sync and category sync. Too bad really.Anonymous
January 03, 2008
Franz and others - Please take a look at these links. I think they'll help. http://blogs.msdn.com/macmojo/archive/2007/10/15/it-s-about-time.aspx http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2007/05/14/438944.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa996338.aspx http://msexchangeteam.com/archive/2006/02/22/420275.aspxAnonymous
January 04, 2008
I loved reading these comments and remembering that Macbu's "love letter to Entourage" is still posted on this site. Same planet, different worlds.Anonymous
January 04, 2008
The comment has been removedAnonymous
January 07, 2008
Hmmm. so many features in the new Office for the PC like the Business contact manager and now the new Accounting program. We use Mac for our mobiles but I am really disappointed to see the lack of transparency and ability to use Entourage like Outlook. I don't have any answers or criticism as this could go on and on for months and years (look like it has..) just a big sigh and a question to MS of why? Why is is it so hard to make this application an extension of the mothership product(s)? Why is compatibility such an issue? Why are the templates for the PC version so much better and more professional than the MAC ones? The MAC ones are really really bad. Look they were made by 7th grade students. I mean as much as I would love to see iWork become something it is really painful to use in a consulting business setting. Maybe it would be a great chance for some open source office or other vendor to throw their hat into the ring and make something happen. I would pay $100s for a license if it could work the way we need no matter the platform. Our business is in reselling and consulting in the mapping and GIS field, and so far the PC version of everything seems to have most of the answers I need. Its really too bad, but I will hold out and "try" the next MAC office and see if it has improved to be a business tool and not some college dorm-like program. I'm in business not school. Good luck, I hope this time it works out ...better.Anonymous
January 08, 2008
I cannot believe that Office 2008 will not have a tool to import a .pst file from Outlook 2007. Can someone at MS please explain this fault? Why can we not have Outlook for Mac? Using Entourage is akin to dental surgery. It is a horrible experience. This is forcing me to convert to Apple Mail. Once I convert, I am never coming back!Anonymous
January 08, 2008
PS: PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PST PLEASE GIVE US .PST COMPATIBILITY!!!Anonymous
March 08, 2008
I need Outlook for my job, and I am an Mac type person, but it looks like I'll have to purchase a PC. So Sad!