How is the Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App?

[roystreet]

Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

Hello ---
I haven't been able to use the Outlook Universal app yet. I have Outlook 2013 though. I mostly use the mail/calendar Windows 8.1 app. Any thoughts on comparing what the new Outlook Universal app looks like & how it works as compared to office 2013 Outlook? It looks similar in some aspects, (Just from screen shots) but I'm sure it's much more limited. Does anyone know if apps like the Outlook Universal app will require Office 365? Part of the reason I bought Office 2013 was so I wouldn't have to pay for a subscription. Well, I guess I had more than one question.

I'm just trying to figure out if I should even really consider the new Outlook app or keep my heart away

 

[sarim_xyz]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

I use the Mail app in Windows 8.1 for emails on my personal laptop. However, my work PC has Windows 7. I use Outlook 2013 there, and I am NOT at all impressed by it. The main reason is that it is super slow!! Takes a few seconds to respond after you click on any email or any option. Freezes all the time, and is very unresponsive. I hate it. I haven't used the universal Outlook app, but I hope it is better than Outlook 2013.

 

[David Feifer]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

Do you have a link to this new app? I have not heard anything about this unless you are referring to the next iteration of the office family, 2016, that is currently in closed beta. As far as 2016 is concerned you will still be able to purchase it standalone as well as receiving it for free with an office 365 subscription.

 

[hotphil]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

I use the Mail app in Windows 8.1 for emails on my personal laptop. However, my work PC has Windows 7. I use Outlook 2013 there, and I am NOT at all impressed by it. The main reason is that it is super slow!! Takes a few seconds to respond after you click on any email or any option. Freezes all the time, and is very unresponsive. I hate it. I haven't used the universal Outlook app, but I hope it is better than Outlook 2013.

That could be symptomatic of a few things. Common issues for that might include large OST/PST files and overall system performance.

I've made a point of trying to use the modern apps where I can. Outlook 2013 still does some stuff I can't do in the modern apps (certificate signed/encrypted emails and Search Folders for example).

Looking forward to trying an Outlook universal app though.

 

[hotphil]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

Does anyone know if apps like the Outlook Universal app will require Office 365?

I would guess so as that seems to be the revenue model they're heading towards.

 

[roystreet]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

So, I'd imagine if you bought the full office suite, you won't get the universal app version

 

[hotphil]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

You should be able to run them side by side. I run Office 2013 side by side with the preview modern apps. And it's not uncommon to have multiple versions of Office running on the same PC.

 

[yihong kang]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

outlook universal app is not out yet.
Word, PPT, Excel, and Onenote are available. For me, word, ppt, and excel are OK, they are built for touch, but limited functionality compared to office 2013.
Onenote is a step backward from win8 Onenote MX. No full screen mode (a lot of wasted space), no more revolutionary radical menu.

 

[roystreet]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

I'm sure some people are using Outlook Universal and I didn't know if anyone who is able to use it right now had any thoughts on it.

I do agree about them reducing functionally on OneNote and I'm not sure why they'd remove radical menu design, but I also don't know what type of feedback they were getting back about that feature. (We don't always know why something is changed and there just may be a good reason sometimes)

I saw a major difference in Word, it's like I'm using a third party version almost (But still better than other apps). It is still way better than Google's office...
I do understand that it's to get people to pay to get more features.

I don't use the modern version of OneNote anymore. I'll only use the full 2013 version. There is such a difference in capabilities offered. Although the modern version is more touch friendly, but maybe office 2016 will also be more touch oriented than 2013. I know it's still mainly for the desktop.

 

[sarim_xyz]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

That could be symptomatic of a few things. Common issues for that might include large OST/PST files and overall system performance.

I've made a point of trying to use the modern apps where I can. Outlook 2013 still does some stuff I can't do in the modern apps (certificate signed/encrypted emails and Search Folders for example).

Looking forward to trying an Outlook universal app though.

Well I am pretty sure it's not about system performance. My PC has 16GB of RAM with an i7 processor. The Office is installed on the computer and not loaded from the network, so even that should be fine. Now that you have mentioned the OST/PST files, I will check if they are stored on the computer or on the network drive because I feel the network connection is kinda slow.

Thanks.

 

[yihong kang]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

I think the reason why they removed the radical menu is for "consistency" and lazy.
They have to keep everything in office family to be consistent (that is the vision of win 10), desktop version or touch version, word or onenote. It will be time consuming to change everything to radical menu, so they remove the best part of Onenote MX, to be "consistent" with other office product.

Maybe, after several years, once they have time (right now, they are just too busy to unify everything, no matter good or bad), they will bring back the radical menu for the entire office.

 

[David Feifer]

Re: Outlook 2013 vs Outlook Universal App

" I will check if they are stored on the computer or on the network drive because I feel the network connection is kinda slow."

Yea, Microsoft actually recommends never to run these from a network share. Besides latency issues *st's actually have a greater chance of corruption especially in larger files. If Microsoft could get away with it they would have killed PST's. The archive mailbox was a push in this direction but in my opinion if they wanted more people to use it they should have dropped the enterprise cal requirement.

Generally I see 3 reasons in my work why outlook is having issues. 1 mentioned above being ost/pst's 2 being file corruption in the office installation files and 3 an antivirus addon that is scanning messages as they come in and out.
1. I usually fix by making sure the *st's are local to the computer and verify there is no corruption in the files by running scanpst
2. go to add remove programs, select the office suite and hit change, then repair the installation.
3. We use Symantec endpoint protection in house and it has an outlook addon that unfortunately slows outlook to a crawl on most of our machines. We use postini, now google apps, as our email filter so this addon is not required in our situation so I usually just remove the addon from outlook on the machines. I figure if sep's email scanning can slow these machines down as much as they do, virtually to a crawl, then other av products may as well.