Outlook Express?

[SteelForceX]

I have Outlook Express and I want to sync my Ipaq 3765 with my computer and have the calendar and stuff on my screen so i can use the keyboard to type stuff out faster! I have Outlook Express setup for my Road Runner E-mail! I have heard you can have a calendar in Outlook? I need to get this setup! Thanks alot!

[spursdude]

Well, by default, ActiveSync connects Outlook to your Pocket PC. So basically, if you install Outlook, which came with your PPC, you should be able to set things up. Outlook can handle calendar, tasks, contacts, e-mail, and much more. Give it a shot.

[SteelForceX]

How do you set up the calendar tho? When i look in activesync 3.6 it wont let me select calendar and stuff - reason: Not Installed!

How do I install it?

1 problem tho! I do not have the CD so i would need to get it off the internet!

[spursdude]

Well, you need the CD. It costs $$$.... so sorry.

[SteelForceX]

Can u put the cd online for me? or send the necisarry files?

[spursdude]

Can u put the cd online for me? or send the necisarry files?
Oh man, that wouldn't be anywhere near legal. Sorry...

[SteelForceX]

Don't you use Kazaa? Lol! Can you tell me like what the cd is called? Like what is the name on the cd?

[spursdude]

Don't you use Kazaa? Lol! Can you tell me like what the cd is called? Like what is the name on the cd?
Well it's Microsoft Outlook you're looking for. It comes with Microsoft Office.

How do you not have the Outlook CD? It comes with all Pocket PCs.

[SteelForceX]

Got it off ebay! No come with CD! I hasent been too much of a problem with me cause i dont use calendar to much but i am gonna upgrade to an Axim Advanced and wanna sell this to my dad who uses that stuff alot!

[blazingwolf]

Buy any copy of Outlook and you will be in business.

[Brad Adrian]

Even if trying to find Outlook on the Web WERE legal (which it ain't, by a long shot), you'd be hard-pressed to download it. The installation files are huge!

You might get lucky and find out that the original owner of your Pocket PC still has the Outlook CD, has not installed it, and will send it to you.

Presumably one of the reasons you got the Pocket PC at a discount via eBay is because some of the original items, like the Outlook CD, were not included. Hopefully, the discount was large enough that you'll be able to afford buying a legal copy of Outlook.

[SteelForceX]

Im downloading it now!

[Brad Adrian]

Pardon my harshness, but if you're obtaining Outlook in any way other than buying it from Microsoft or one of their distributors, you're doing something that I have little tolerance for. It's easy to rationalize such piracy with all kinds of arguments, but the bottom line is that it is illegal.

If I've misunderstood what it is you say you're doing, I apologize. If I haven't, I hope that the built-in anti-piracy measures keep you from being able to register and use the stolen software.

[SteelForceX]

How about we just leave it at that?

[spursdude]

Got it off ebay! No come with CD! I hasent been too much of a problem with me cause i dont use calendar to much but i am gonna upgrade to an Axim Advanced and wanna sell this to my dad who uses that stuff alot!
Well, if you get an Axim, it'll have Outlook. Then you can sync both PPC's with your on PC with Outlook on it. i.e. once you get the Axim you won't need to worry about obtaining Outlook.

[PetiteFlower]

Haven't you ever heard of a period? Not all sentences deserve to end with exclamation points you know.

/rant

[spursdude]

Haven't you ever heard of a period? Not all sentences deserve to end with exclamation points you know.

/rant
I'm sure he's just happy to have a PPC... and happy that he's cheating Microsoft. But we can all cut him some slack...

[SteelForceX]

My dad wanted to see it working with calendar first but it will only be illegal untill i get my axim and install it. <- (period) !!!!

Right now the "Illegal" version works great!

[SofaTater]

Unfortunately, I think we're seeing one of the byproducts of the Napster/Kazaa, etc. generation of computer users -- if it's online, it must be free.

It's hard to counter Microsoft's (and other software publishers') ridiculous anti-piracy approaches these days when it seems so many computer users think they are entitled to software and data free of any charges.

[PetiteFlower]

I don't know, I have trouble feeling bad for stealing money from an unethical corporate behemoth like Microsoft. I would feel bad for stealing from little mom and pop PPC developers, but that's hardly the same thing. And if you try to say that it IS the same thing, well then go ahead but I'll never agree with you.

If Outlook wasn't so overpriced, then buying it might be a viable option. But it's OVER $100!!!! to buy JUST OUTLOOK! Not even the rest of the office suite! That's just absurd to me. Now right now all my software is legit since I just got a new computer and it came with it all. But I have had illegal software in the past, and while I might not try to download anything like Outlook off Kazaa, I would get a copy from a friend who got it from work, if I needed it and it was available, or failing that I would pick it up cheap off ebay. And I wouldn't feel the slightest twinge of guilt. If Microsoft really wanted my money, they would ask a reasonable price that I could justify to my budget spending.

[SteelForceX]

Hey i usually pay for any reasonably priced program that I believe is a good product. Download the warez then buy it if its a good prog and not too expensive.

[Janak Parekh]

I don't know, I have trouble feeling bad for stealing money from an unethical corporate behemoth like Microsoft. I would feel bad for stealing from little mom and pop PPC developers, but that's hardly the same thing. And if you try to say that it IS the same thing, well then go ahead but I'll never agree with you.
It's not a matter of feeling bad or not -- it's a matter of breaking the law. You may not feel the law is fair, but it's there. Whether you choose to abide by it or not is a different matter.

If Microsoft really wanted my money, they would ask a reasonable price that I could justify to my budget spending.
That's your opinion, of course. It's all supply and demand. What MS thinks is fair is what they feel will sell well yet maximize their profit. They're not a "person", but rather a public entity intended to maximize shareholder value.

(FWIW, I'm a huge opponent of Product Activation in principle. The idea that a family might have to buy many copies of Outlook XP is a bad thing, IMHO. But it's well within MS's rights to implement it and ask for that money.)

--janak

[PetiteFlower]

Heh, I never claimed to be a 100% law abiding citizen. My point was you're not going to see me taking someone to task for stealing software from Microsoft, and you might even see me defending them(as I just did, sort of :) )

Product activation makes me want to puke all over Bill Gates, too. Not just that a FAMILY might have to buy multiple copies of software, but that *I* personally might have to if I own more then one computer, that really frikkin pisses me off and makes me want to give them zero of my dollars.

[dh]

I think one problem is that we are used to getting Outlook Express for free (bundled with IE) so we're all a bit shocked to see the price of Outlook.

Actually the price is competitive when compared with other contact managers such as Act!

Obviously the best way to get any of the MS Office programs is to get them with a new PC, it is an expensive suite if one has to go and buy the full version.

Like any company, Microsoft exists to maximize shareholder value so I can't see the prices coming down and as long people want to find free versions of the programs we will see more security features.

All goes to make life interesting.

[Jacob]

Product activation makes me want to puke all over Bill Gates, too. Not just that a FAMILY might have to buy multiple copies of software, but that *I* personally might have to if I own more then one computer, that really frikkin pisses me off and makes me want to give them zero of my dollars.

This is why activation is there :D

The license you agree to when you install Outlook states that you can only install it to one system. Allowing you to install it to every system in your household opens the door to businesses buying one license and saying that just because it's on one system in the same building then they should be able to install it on all the systems in the company.

Software companies sell by license per computer.

Also, believe it or not, I think Microsoft isn't that much more "unethical" than just about any other company. They're just an easy target because they're the biggest.

When it comes down to it, they make some pretty damn good software. They are such a bad company for wanting to make money off of it.

[Brad Adrian]

Here's a story I heard a long time ago that symbolizes how I feel about this piracy issue.

A wealthy man approached a beautiful young lady, pulled out his thick wallet and asked her, "If I give you a million dollars, will you sleep with me?"
In a flash she said, "A million dollars? Of course!"
Then the wealthy man asked her again, "If I gave you ten dollars, would you sleep with me?"
Insulted, the woman exclaimed, "Are you kidding? I'm not that kind of girl."
At that point, the millionaire said to her, "I thought we had established what kind of girl you are with my first question. Now we're just haggling over price."

My point is that what's wrong is wrong. You can justify immoral acts all you want by claiming:

It's a huge, unfair company...
They'll never miss it...
It's overpriced...
Everybody does it...
It's only a few dollars...
I don't like the color of his skin...
I'll never get caught...
My mommy never hugged me enough...
My mommy hugged me too much...

I'm no saint, but if you're intent on stealing something that doesn't belong to you, at least be honest [ha] with yourself and others by admitting that you're doing it because you lack integrity or values.

BTW, I think I deserve your car more than you do, so I'll stop by later tonight to pick it up, okay?

[Janak Parekh]

I'm no saint, but if you're intent on stealing something that doesn't belong to you, at least be honest [ha] with yourself and others by admitting that you're doing it because you lack integrity or values.
It's worth mentioning that there are a lot of these people. ;)

BTW, I think I deserve your car more than you do, so I'll stop by later tonight to pick it up, okay?
While this analogy has merit, software due to its low cost of duplication is not the same thing, of course.

I do agree that MS overprices their product -- ironically, not the single consumer, but rather their volume pricing -- it is very expensive for small-to-medium businesses. For instance, a company with 5 users has to pay over $2,000 for Office XP for those 5 users. That's a lot of money for them. The fact they also don't have a good form of of "family" pricing really turns off a number of home users.

However, that doesn't make it "right" to copy/pirate stuff. Instead, an increasing number of businesses have looked at alternatives over the last few years.

--janak

[PetiteFlower]

I'm no saint, but if you're intent on stealing something that doesn't belong to you, at least be honest [ha] with yourself and others by admitting that you're doing it because you lack integrity or values.

No, my values are just different then yours. I most certainly HAVE them. How's the weather up there on that high horse?

The license you agree to when you install Outlook states that you can only install it to one system. Allowing you to install it to every system in your household opens the door to businesses buying one license and saying that just because it's on one system in the same building then they should be able to install it on all the systems in the company.

Hardly. If I pay money for a piece of software, I should be allowed to install it to every computer that I, personally, own, at the very least. There are already different rules for businesses and private consumers in terms of licensing, it's not like they've ever held businesses to the same standard as private consumers. Whatever excuse Microsoft gives for it, it's still unfriendly to private consumers, and not going to give people a very good opinion of the company.

[Steven Cedrone]

Let's make sure we disagree with a little bit of respect, shall we...

As far as this issue goes: It seems strange to me that anyone is willing to spend money for multiple machines, money for an ISP, money for a Pocket PC(or multiple Pocket PC's), money for peripherals, but is not willing to pay for software...

Steve

[nice_micael]

There also exist hacks that you can use to hack the license to use it on several computers but i never used them :D heared it from a friend!(Im shure he has :devilboy: )

[Steven Cedrone]

There also exist hacks that you can use to hack the license to use it on several computers but i never used them :D heared it from a friend!(Im shure he has :devilboy: )

Odds are that these "hacks" are just well known Keys that have been distributed through peer-to-peer networks. Just try to use MS Update (specifically, the Service Pack install) when it verifies your key...

Steve

[Jacob]

The license you agree to when you install Outlook states that you can only install it to one system. Allowing you to install it to every system in your household opens the door to businesses buying one license and saying that just because it's on one system in the same building then they should be able to install it on all the systems in the company.

Hardly. If I pay money for a piece of software, I should be allowed to install it to every computer that I, personally, own, at the very least. There are already different rules for businesses and private consumers in terms of licensing, it's not like they've ever held businesses to the same standard as private consumers. Whatever excuse Microsoft gives for it, it's still unfriendly to private consumers, and not going to give people a very good opinion of the company.

When you install MS Outlook you do agree to their license agreement and their license agreement states that you can one install that on as many systems as you have license for - if you bought one copy, you have only one license. If you think you should be able to, fine, you can take that up with Microsoft and get them to change their license agreement.

The fact is, if you buy one license and you install it on two systems you are breaking the law. If you're okay with that, that's your business. You should at least know what you're doing though.

I do think Microsoft should provide better levels of pricing for additional licenses, but I don't think that's gonna happen.

[Mark Kenepp]

Doesn't Microsoft Office EULA allow for installation on one machine plus one protable computer?

I remember reading that somewhere but don't know if it was just someone justifying using the software on two computers or if it was legit.

[Jacob]

Doesn't Microsoft Office EULA allow for installation on one machine plus one protable computer?

I remember reading that somewhere but don't know if it was just someone justifying using the software on two computers or if it was legit.

Actually, I just looked that up :D

You can as long as it's for your exclusive use and that you didn't get Office from the purchase of a new system - so the OEM license does not allow you to do this.

[Janak Parekh]

As far as this issue goes: It seems strange to me that anyone is willing to spend money for multiple machines, money for an ISP, money for a Pocket PC(or multiple Pocket PC's), money for peripherals, but is not willing to pay for software...
The fundamental difference is that the duplication cost of software is near-zero -- the incremental production cost is not a tangible, metered object. Ditto for music or movies. That's why people have a much tougher time with ethics in these categories than, say, a car, a computer, or even Internet bandwidth.

--janak

[Steven Cedrone]

The fundamental difference is that the duplication cost of software is near-zero -- the incremental production cost is not a tangible, metered object. Ditto for music or movies. That's why people have a much tougher time with ethics in these categories than, say, a car, a computer, or even Internet bandwidth.

You are more open minded than I... :wink:

I see this only as a weak excuse to try to justify questionable actions. As far as I'm concerned, the cost of production should not be factored into the discussion at all. Regardless of how much it costs me to produce something, if YOU (not specifically targeting you Janak, I mean the potential customer) want to use it, You need to pay me what I deem to be a fair price. If YOU do not agree with the price, then YOU shouldn't use my product.

Notice how I didn't say: If YOU don't agree with the price, feel free to steal my product...

Steve

[PetiteFlower]

The fact is, if you buy one license and you install it on two systems you are breaking the law.

Duh. I was talking about how things SHOULD be not how they are. Hence the word SHOULD in my post. I don't even have 2 computers, and I got my copy of outlook 2k legit with my Axim. I don't even use it. But when I looked into upgrading to Outlook 2k2, I couldn't believe the cost. I didn't need it all that bad in the first place, and I've since decided that syncing email is more trouble then it's worth, since I can check my email without having to sync it. One of my points was that if it had been cheaper, I might have bought it, but $110 was too much, so MS got nothing. I'm sure they don't care since I'm only one person, but I'm sure I'm not the only person who came to this conclusion. Now whether or not I chose to steal the software(which I didn't, just to be clear!), MS still doesn't have my money just the same. You'd think that would be enough incentive to get their attention, but since they make most of their money from business sales and pre-installed stuff on new computers, seems to me that MS doesn't really give a crap about providing for the needs of the private consumer.

If software worked the way I personally think it should, then buying a piece of software would entitle you to install it on any and all computers that you own for your own personal use. Short of that, even allowing you to install it on 3-5 computers that you own for personal(not business) use would be reasonable. Of course MS would rather make more money and charge you for multiple copies, but I personally don't think that's fair or right. I am PERFECTLY aware that it doesn't actually work that way.

And honestly there are some laws that I am totally willing to break. "Civil disobedience" anyone? If I don't feel that a law is just, then I may not follow it. If I get caught, I'll still have to pay the consequences. That's the risk I take. But simply "it's against the law" isn't much of a deterrent to me. If it was legal for me to kill someone, I still wouldn't do it. My moral system isn't particularly influenced by the government, sorry. I'm a thinking person and I make my own decisions about what's right and wrong.

[Jacob]

The fact is, if you buy one license and you install it on two systems you are breaking the law.

Duh. I was talking about how things SHOULD be not how they are. Hence the word SHOULD in my post. I don't even have 2 computers, and I got my copy of outlook 2k legit with my Axim. I don't even use it. But when I looked into upgrading to Outlook 2k2, I couldn't believe the cost. I didn't need it all that bad in the first place, and I've since decided that syncing email is more trouble then it's worth, since I can check my email without having to sync it. One of my points was that if it had been cheaper, I might have bought it, but $110 was too much, so MS got nothing. I'm sure they don't care since I'm only one person though.

If software worked the way I personally think it should, then buying a piece of software would entitle you to install it on any and all computers that you own for your own personal use. Short of that, even allowing you to install it on 3-5 computers that you own for personal(not business) use would be reasonable. Of course MS would rather make more money and charge you for multiple copies, but I personally don't think that's fair or right. I am PERFECTLY aware that it doesn't actually work that way.

And honestly there are some laws that I am totally willing to break. "Civil disobedience" anyone? If I don't feel that a law is just, then I may not follow it. If I get caught, I'll still have to pay the consequences. That's the risk I take. But "it's against the law" isn't much of a deterrent to me. If it was legal for me to kill someone, I still wouldn't do it. My moral system isn't particularly influenced by the government, sorry. I'm a thinking person and I make my own decisions about what's right and wrong.

Wow.. there was a "holier than thou" rant if I ever heard one :P

I fully understood the word "should" - no need for condescention.

Good for you on the whole moral code thing, apparently all of us(except you of course) are just un-thinking idiots who just look to the government for any moral decision :D :roll:

[Janak Parekh]

The fundamental difference is that the duplication cost of software is near-zero -- the incremental production cost is not a tangible, metered object. Ditto for music or movies. That's why people have a much tougher time with ethics in these categories than, say, a car, a computer, or even Internet bandwidth.
You are more open minded than I... :wink: I see this only as a weak excuse to try to justify questionable actions.
I didn't mean to imply that ethics should be based on this; I was just pointing out that strictly, economic speaking, the marginal cost to Microsoft of a pirated copy of software is less tangible than the marginal cost of stealing a car from a dealership. Stealing intellectual content is a very different concept than stealing physical property.

As far as I'm concerned, the cost of production should not be factored into the discussion at all.
Agreed, but I'm just explaining why people who may never steal a bottle of soda, let alone a car, feel less concerned about stealing a bunch of bits from one hard drive or CD and putting it on another. In theory, there's a one in a (googol^googol) chance that if you take a magnet and scramble the contents of a hard drive, you'd get Windows XP and Office XP on your computer. :D

Regardless of how much it costs me to produce something, if YOU (not specifically targeting you Janak, I mean the potential customer) want to use it, You need to pay me what I deem to be a fair price. If YOU do not agree with the price, then YOU shouldn't use my product.
Absolutely, that's how laws are structured in our world and we are obligated to abide by them. Nevertheless, people feel this is unfair. Perhaps it's a cultural thing (the classical notion of exchanging money for physical goods), or perhaps it's an open source thing ("information should be free"). Be it one way or the other, the sentiment exists.

--janak