Just what we need, the EU running American corporations.

Michael -

I'm a long-suffering Outlook user; having had it inflicted on me from the very top of the organizational tree.

I'd like to summarize some hard learned lessons in a response to your spot-on blog post which I will call "The Market-ics of Microsoft products";

Hard-learned lesson #1; End-users are busy with their 'real jobs' and won't be bothered learning an application unless forced to from the top-down.  Since they use Office and outlook at home (even if it is express), they will not learn another product for work unless it is a condition of employment.
Hard-learned lesson #1b; Executives are busy running businesses and won't be bothered learning an application - period  They use Office and Outlook at home; ergo it is what will be used at work.  Rule #1 what I believe Microsoft has abstracted from hard-learned lessons # 1 and 1b - Just market your application as 'intuitive'; respond to any security concerns with 'marketecture' claims such as 'comprehensive', 'bullet-proof';   Marketing Tactic #1, abstracted from Lessons 1 and 1b, and Rule #1 - your target market is NOT IT.  IT is the enemy.  Your target market is: Executives and Management; you messages are 'easy to use!',  'meets your needs' and 'is secure'
Hard-learned lesson #2; Having been circumvented in the decision-making process by Marketing Tactic #1; IT is left to account for its own inability to manage the most excellent solution that was purchased on the decision of Executives and/or Departmental Managers.  (ie. why is it that you have configured Outlook in such a way that it is blocking and junking email I want to receive?) Hard-learned lesson #2b; If 'everyone' is using it, then it must be the best thing for us as well.  Apparently, unlike me, Executives and Departmental Managers never had a parent that asked them 'If everyone were jumping off the Empire State building, would you do that as well?'.  So, the logical conclusion is that if everyone buys it, it is the best, therefore any problems must be because IT is not up to the task of managing 'the best'.

Summary of hard learned lessons - the market works very much like a democracy, and as we like to say in the States, 'the terrible thing about a democracy is you get what you deserve'.  The terrible thing about Outlook is that business is getting the flawed email system it deserves.

I can never understand why companies will invest months and months and months examining competitive offerings for say, an ERP system, but will just make a knee-jerk 'buy Microsoft' decision on other things like Office productivity and eMail.

I once was given the marching order to find an email system that 'does everything Outlook does, but doesn't cost as much'.  Well, those products are out there.  The one I found did everything Outlook did at the time, plus much more and was less expensive to boot.  It provided deep and manageable heuristics for junk mail as well as BOTH black and white lists that could be managed at a global level and expanded/modified at individual mailbox level; it had calendaring and tasks, etc.  In short it worked perfectly and met the requirements given IT by management.  In less than a month, it was rejected by the President, because... wait for it -

It is not Outlook.

Which leads me to Hard-learned Lesson #3; As a defense tactic, always document the requirements for any IT solution.  Get the top of the organizational tree to sign off on it as the 'contract' between IT and the company.  When the requirement consists of 'we want Outlook' then the response can be - you wanted Outlook, you have Outlook, and Outlook's deficient junk email handling is defacto a stated requirement in the contract.

It is not the most ideal response; but in a world where some acquisition decisions are really not based on the best of breed solution to a set of requirements, rather they are an acquisiton based on brand, then the answer must perforce always be 'You have exactly what you asked to have; warts and all.  I cannot expend my few and precious budget dollars trying to fix Microsoft's deficiencies.'  I always try to end this type of response with a polite 'Is there anything else I can do for you?'