Open Office Migration but Keeping Outlook

[medpracticedir]

Our medical practice is interested in migrating its user community to Open Office. We're currently running Office 2003 Standard under WIN-XP-PRO both via standard PC implementations and as Citrix clients. For a multitude of reasons we need to keep Outlook for email and calendaring which in itself isn't a problem. From a licensing perspective we avoid buying more Microsoft Office licenses and can continue to use Outlook because the Exchange CAL gives rights to use Outlook.

The biggest obstacle I see is that the end users will want to use their primary word-processor (Writer in OO) for editing email messages, just as they do today with Word (and yes I know Outlook has an editor in it, but it lacks a lot in terms of features). I haven't found a way to enable this type of interoperability (Outlook <--> Word) between these two applications (Outlook <--> Writer). Yet I've read other postings from corporate IS managers stating this same need.

Has this need been addressed and I've missed something? Or perhaps do you have a recommendation as how to address this particular user need (which as IT Director for the organization have concluded is a legitimate business need)?

Randy

[TerryE]

Sorry I started to give a very sarcastic reply about MS and its attitude to Openness. But let me give a plain interpretation of what appears to be the MS strategy here — at least judged by one individual on the basis of its actions and the various anti-competition actions filed. Microsoft has identified a list of product niches in which it wants to play, and has either developed or acquired products to cover this list. Where practical it develops interoperability between those products often using private APIs to discourage plug-and-play substitution of competitors alternatives. You can fill in all the dots. As a user as long as you want to pay the per CAL / PC / user aggregate and buy a complete Microsoft bundle then you should have a workable solution.

MS is not going to make it easy to plug another WP into its Exchange Client because that will undermine its all or nothing strategy. Exchange is a good product, but some of the Open competition is moving fast. If your practice wants to stay with Outlook / Exchange then advanced editing is going to continue to be an issue. To be fair to MS they have got a decent proprietary DCOM interface which can enable packages (mainly HTML based) to create rich HTML based emails, but OOo doesn't target this because it is MS OS and Mail product specific. To my knowledge there is no open API or mecanisms to integrate a 3rd party based word processing package in the way that Word in integrated with Outlook. Sorry.

[medpracticedir]

Terry thanks for saving the sarcastic reply and responding with the "plain" truth of the matter. That Outlook to Word integration is a huge advantage for MS. But with so much of Outlook now structured as activeX controls I'm a bit surprised someone hasn't written a web front-end that interacts with Outlook under the covers but acts as an interface to move the message data between it and Writer. Because without that functionality many mid-sized companies like the one I work for (350 PCs) will find it very difficult to justify the platform migration - no matter how much the IT staff would like to change.

[foxcole]

Our larger-than-midsized company allows only plain text email. Formatted email editing means you're passing and receiving HTML formatted messages. HTML formatted mail, or even just the ability to receive it, flings doors wide open and invites viruses into the corporate systems. I haven't seen an email application yet that's able to stop all spam because it's always necessary for employees, even just some at specific job levels, to communicate with entities outside of the corporate walls... and Outlook is a prime target!!You're just inviting trouble and putting the company at risk by using formatted e-mail.

Besides formatting, are there any features a word processor would offer over plain text, that users couldn't live without?

I realize I'm suggesting you change a heavily demanded aspect of corporate culture, but you will improve security by switching to text-only email and bouncing HTML formatted email. Email is a prime avenue for invaders aiming to damage or steal corporate data, or to damage software and hardware assets. Is formatting really worth it?

[TerryE]

Besides formatting, are there any features a word processor would offer over plain text, that users couldn't live without? I realize I'm suggesting you change a heavily demanded aspect of corporate culture, but you will improve security by switching to text-only email and bouncing HTML formatted email. Email is a prime avenue for invaders aiming to damage or steal corporate data, or to damage software and hardware assets. Is formatting really worth it?

Foxcole, my answer to this would be in three parts:

• Yes to HTML. Some form of rich text mark-up is pretty damn essential nowadays. Where this is required then HTML mark-up can fill this need and the mail client / filter / guardian products work in consort to mitigate the threats here. Its not perfect, but for more corporations then the benefits exceed the residual threat.
• Yes to XML, though this isn't used for mail at the moment. Whilst you can abuse HTML to achieve the same goals, there are situations (e.g. sending an meeting request) where the use of XML based on industry standard DTDs would be a sounder and more secure transport
• No to Microsoft proprietary (binary encoded) RTF. This adds no incremental value other than to lock companies into an internal MS exchange protocol. To assume that all of the players in your supply chain adopt Microsoft products is a big ask.

[foxcole]

Some form of rich text mark-up is pretty damn essential nowadays.

For office email? Marketing, I could understand, but what is essential about rich text in office mail? Could you elucidate, please?

[medpracticedir]

Even if we used plain text for all messages going out or coming in from the outside world, I'd want the ability to express my thoughts and share information with my co-workers in creative ways

[TerryE]

+1 Whilst I still fall back to quaint Unix conventions for *bold* etc., when talking to fellow (ex) Unix geeks, you need to remember that the rest of the world, especially in business, has never logged onto a Unix or Linux system, and expects to be able to use bullets, indents, font sizes and emphasis, tables in their emails when required.

"It's what the man wants, man"

[medpracticedir]

So back to the important question - has anyone found a creative way to more tightly integrate Outlook with Open Office?

[TerryE]

I'll give the short summary of my first post

NO