Microsoft's Outlook.com No Longer in Preview; Bye Hotmail

Status
Not open for further replies.

victorintelr

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2010
101
0
18,630
0
I've had this service since we had 3MB for everything, how times changes!
Now, Microsoft says that they heard what the early adopters had to say..... As long as they don't neglect it like with Windows 8 (don't get me wrong, I like windows 8 but still miss the Start Button) the service should do fine.
 

jhansonxi

Distinguished
May 11, 2007
525
0
18,930
0
It's not bad but I don't see any compelling reason to switch from Gmail. I suspect that most of the "60 million" are either existing Hotmail users or companies that decided to not run their on Exchange server.

I also don't really care about the relative privacy issues between the various webmail services. If your emails are not encrypted then assume they're not private. Encryption is much more effective than ethics.
 

itchyisvegeta

Distinguished
Oct 19, 2010
134
0
18,630
0
I like my Hotmail. It is no longer no 1, so people don't try to hack it as much. My hotmail hasn't been hacked since 1998..... that I know of.
 

egmccann

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2010
24
0
18,560
0
Heh, I've had Hotmail since before Microsoft owned it. Don't really care about the interface - everything comes in via Thunderbird anyway.
 

rocknrollz

Distinguished
Nov 16, 2011
60
0
18,580
0
Outlook started out good, and I thought they had finally fixed the spam issue. My box is full of thousands of spam messages.
 

ven1ger

Honorable
Jul 25, 2012
21
0
10,560
0
Never cared for Hotmail especially since it was heavily used by spammers awhile ago. Figured best not to use an email service that gave free rein to spammers back then, may have been changed now but old habits die hard, and gmail serves readily as a personal email.
 

memadmax

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2011
538
0
18,940
3
Been using it since the dawn of time.
Haven't used webpage interface to pull mail off the server anymore, use outlook 2010 to do that. And by the looks of it, it seems like I will be using 2010 for quite a while... Oh well.. If it works good, don't fix it till it breaks!
 

dextermat

Distinguished
Sep 21, 2007
634
0
19,010
49
I think instead of forcing outlook down our throats, they should keep the look and option of hotmail and just change the name. Since they claim it's just the "look" that changed. I got a few costumers that are totally lost with windows 8 and the integration of outlook online. Deleting contacts is now weird because you have to left click in the empty space beside the name of the contact. It's just get counter intuitive.
 

puddleglum

Distinguished
Dec 3, 2008
25
0
18,580
0
I started out with hotmail and it was great. Then Microsoft bought it and it went down the tubes within weaks. Something about forcing them to stop using Linux and start using Windows. They eventually gave up on that and brought it back on BSD, but by then I was long gone trying out other email services.
 

CaedenV

Distinguished
Jun 14, 2011
532
0
18,960
16
[citation][nom]rocknrollz[/nom]Outlook started out good, and I thought they had finally fixed the spam issue. My box is full of thousands of spam messages.[/citation]
No offence, but you cannot fix stupid. Outlook.com has a great spam filter, but if you go out and put your email address out there for every gimmick on the web then you will get flooded with spam, it is just the way it is. I use Gmail as my primary acct, and even though that has superb spam filtering and blocking, I still get ~50 spam messages a day simply because I have used it for so long. I love the new outlook.com though. I may switch over to it as my primary, but for the moment I am just using it to manage a few calendars.
 

Soda-88

Distinguished
Jun 8, 2011
51
0
18,590
1
[citation][nom]rocknrollz[/nom]Outlook started out good, and I thought they had finally fixed the spam issue. My box is full of thousands of spam messages.[/citation]
That's your fault, not Microsofts. Don't click on every link you come across and you should be nearly spam-free.
 

beayn

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
429
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]Soda-88[/nom]That's your fault, not Microsofts. Don't click on every link you come across and you should be nearly spam-free.[/citation]It really only takes one, then your email address spreads across all the spam mailing lists out there. I've had my yahoo mail since 1997 and it is probably on every spam mailing list out there even though I use my hotmail for everything that might be spam.

Luckily Yahoo has a good spam filter.
 

cjlindman

Honorable
Feb 11, 2013
4
0
10,510
0
i really like outlook.com, but i refuse to switch over until they get some damn IMAP support. it's absurd that i can't use my outlook.com email in microsoft outlook. (don't even mention POP3.)
 
G

Guest

Guest
It is not absurd, if you own the MSFT stock. How else do you think they will earn money from Exchange? Because of the feature set?
 
G

Guest

Guest
K-zon,

Outlook is a program not a service, how Microsoft at anytime almost basically if at all would find the interest to say is a good one is to say the placed interest of such for that of either is left to no more of for any use to and of such to have all for any is to say any is used for all at a time.

Basically how they have come up with the idea it is a good one is anyones guess probably to say at a time. Or just a good idea to say it is, cause seems towards the interest of not of.

Sounds like some sort of scam honestly last I knew of one for what they was called, and that saying at a time Microsoft had never even say wrote the "book" for the topic of interest.

But hey, can always change what there is of use and say it is always of use for what there is for a change.

Basically I woulnd't save anything for something to say it was saved for either. But for backup least Outlook is probably feature full of in terms of for on to with in regards of a service for a use of to say at a time.

As for spam, is like saying at a time the interest of use for actually changes. Only thing thats changes is what you use at a time, probably no more and/or no less. Which probably doesn't make any sense, but with what there is to read for whatever it is is to say that does at times. How would anything for a difference not be for the same??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
E Streaming Video & TVs 4
abdabra Streaming Video & TVs 1
R Streaming Video & TVs 0
L Streaming Video & TVs 3
chilly601 Streaming Video & TVs 2
L Streaming Video & TVs 3
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 1
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 1
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
CherlynnLow Streaming Video & TVs 2
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 3
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 15
Jill Scharr Streaming Video & TVs 7
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
Marshall Honorof Streaming Video & TVs 9
G Streaming Video & TVs 5
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 4
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 10
G Streaming Video & TVs 0

ASK THE COMMUNITY