Outlook 2003 was not a minor upgrade. I don't know where that idea came
from.

My upgrade to vista was around $900 - including new computer with vista
preinstalled ($700 + upgrade to office standard). Everything that came on
the computer was sufficient for my needs (CD burner software, DVD playback
etc.). Oh, I had to buy a new license for antivirus too - mine was expiring
soon anyway.


--
Diane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook]
Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/
Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com

Outlook Tips by email:


EMO - a weekly newsletter about Outlook and Exchange:


You can access this newsgroup by visiting
http://www.microsoft.com/office/comm...s/default.mspx or point your
newsreader to msnews.microsoft.com.


"Michael Dobony" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 16:53:12 -0400, Diane Poremsky [MVP] wrote:

Huh? You have software that is 6+ yrs old, well outdated and insecure, no
longer supported and its Microsoft's fault that it doesn't work on their
brand new operating system? There is a lot of software that doesn't work
on
vista... and if a certain program is important to you, then you should
not
upgrade.


Outdated? It is only a generation and a half old (isn't 2003 a minor
upgrade to Office XP?). It is MUCH better than the new, user unfriendly
2007. It works fine. Why should I be forced to replace a perfectly
adequate program just to put unnecessary money in Microsoft's pockets. I
would rather downgrade to WindowsXP, a much faster and adequate operating
system. You are right, there is a LOT of software that doesn't run under
Vista. That is why computers with XP instead of Vista are going for a
premium! People hate Vista because it will not run their perfectly
functional existing programs. Upgrading to Vista can easily cost $1,000
to
many users because of software incompatibility. Before I upgrade Office I
would rather downgrade to Vista!

Vista's Mail and Calendar programs are a nice replacement for Outlook.
Try
them. You might like them a lot better.