Why is the "New" Outlook for Windows client so awful...deliberately???

Anonymous
2024-02-26T17:21:00+00:00

While I believe I understand some of the reasoning behind the marginally improved "New" Outlook while lamenting the overall deprecated experience - namely, an effort to normalize the look and feel across the desktop, mobile and web versions - the path taken is regressive in nature, at least for those of us who've long relied upon the desktop variant to manage much of their eMail, task and scheduling affairs.

I've been comfortable with the working knowledge that detailed work associated with eMail, tasks and scheduling has been the province of the desktop client, while the mobile and web versions offered very functional and not as detailed abilities.

Now, after having lived with the "new" Outlook desktop client for months now, I can conclude that the 'improvements' to this client when compared to its current and soon former versions is far less capable and far more mobile/web like in function - overall, a deprecated experience.

One notable issue is the mere fact that one can seemingly no longer remove attachments directly from an eMail. While this may seem trivial to some, having attachments to eMail AND the ability to download same simply increases the already arduous task of managing one's documents, while increasing the overall storage footprint (since these could now be stored in at least two places), which could represent increased subscription costs over time.

Microsoft, PLEASE revisit this intended direction for the desktop client, and instead consider introducing some of the long-favored desktop client functions into the mobile and web variants, in turn genuinely introducing "new" functionality all around.

Outlook | Windows | New Outlook for Windows | For home

Locked Question. This question was migrated from the Microsoft Support Community. You can vote on whether it's helpful, but you can't add comments or replies or follow the question.

0 comments

124 answers

Sort by: Most helpful
Most helpful Newest Oldest
  1. Anonymous
    2024-10-09T14:42:57+00:00

    Hello Kazi,

    With the slew of comments about not being able to do any of the things that Microsoft suggests (usually due to the funcitonality it says is there is just completely missing), why did you only respond to the first post?

    Every post I see about how awsful this is there is one reply and then silence, is that because MS just doesn't care about it's users/customers so why bother responding and listening to what they want?

    If you are wondering about my experience with the New Outlook desktop app, read all the rest as I agree with every single one.

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments
  2. Anonymous
    2024-10-05T15:12:40+00:00

    I have a gmail account and I have to use the new Outlook because the old one will not allow gmail use. My subscription renewal for 365 2 days ago has led me to lose about 3 hours trying to make it all work. However. the new Outlook is truly awful and is far from an improvement on what we had before. I understand the need for new features and upgrades but this version is a total re-write by people who do not know what their customers want. There are so many things wrong with it, I do not have room here to list them. Microsoft. please sort out this mess asap.

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments
  3. Anonymous
    2024-10-04T01:21:01+00:00

    Ronnie, thanks for trying to help mate.

    With New Outlook the issue seems to be that if the incoming message is in plain text then my reply, in HTML, won't attach my signature.

    Yesterday I had two messages from the same person, one sent from their work and one sent from home. The first in plain text, the second in HTML. I could attach my signature to my reply to the second, but not the first..

    My work around was to reply to the first in plain text, add my signature (which came across in plain text) and then change the font in the signature to my usual Times New Roman and 14pt.

    It may seem to some to be a pedantic problem. But as an octogenarian my tired old eyes are greatly helped by a font with seriphs and at least 14pt.

    Why do we have to go through all this? Well, because the new program was not road-tested by a global cohort of users with different technical abilities, needs and preferences. Fortunately I caught the "computer wave" through work, but not the "phone wave." Older people without family to help them are marginalised by all this stuff. They will wait patiently at the checkout queue in the supermarket because they can't cope with the self-checkout. And, of course, many have English as only their second language. Microsoft just didn't think.

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments
  4. Anonymous
    2024-10-02T06:39:45+00:00

    My next question - how do I apply one of my saved signatures to a Reply to an incoming email? This function seems to apply only to stand-alone outward emails, but not when sending a reply?

    The more I have to use this abomination of a program the more frustrated I get.

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments
  5. Anonymous
    2024-10-02T00:26:50+00:00

    Yes, that's precisely what I mean. Why take away the functionality of Classic Outlook that worked with the font I use - Time New Roman?

    Thanks for the website - I'll have a look there.

    Was this answer helpful?

    1 person found this answer helpful.
    0 comments