Skip to main content

Outlook 2003 Gripes

Why do companies insist on changing hotkeys?
 
For years, I've been using F5 to tell Outlook to send and retrieve email - why ? You hit F5 to refresh and refreshing my inbox would be like sending and receiving mail.
 
But not in Outlook 2003 - now you use F9.
 
I wouldn't mind it so much except F5 doesn't do anything anymore. Why not keep it there for backward compatibility.
 
Argh!!!

Comments

Anonymous said…
I agree, who's the dickhead who decided to make this change. i've been searching google for info on the tosser who thought up the bright idea.
I see no benefit, except to piss users off (go Open Office!)

let me know if you find any info...
July 6, 2004 at 8:56 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree, who's the dickhead who decided to make this change. i've been searching google for info on the tosser who thought up the bright idea.
I see no benefit, except to piss users off (go Open Office!)

let me know if you find any info...

regards,
Simon Halcrow
July 6, 2004 at 8:56 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree, who's the dickhead who decided to make this change. i've been searching google for info on the tosser who thought up the bright idea.
I see no benefit, except to piss users off (go Open Office!)

let me know if you find any info...

regards,
Simon Halcrow
July 6, 2004 at 8:56 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree, who's the dickhead who decided to make this change. i've been searching google for info on the tosser who thought up the bright idea.
I see no benefit, except to piss users off (go Open Office!)

let me know if you find any info...

regards,
Simon Halcrow
July 6, 2004 at 8:56 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree, who's the dickhead who decided to make this change. i've been searching google for info on the tosser who thought up the bright idea.
I see no benefit, except to piss users off (go Open Office!)

let me know if you find any info...

regards,
Simon Halcrow
July 6, 2004 at 8:56 PM
Anonymous said…
I agree, who's the dickhead who decided to make this change. i've been searching google for info on the tosser who thought up the bright idea.
I see no benefit, except to piss users off (go Open Office!)

let me know if you find any info...

regards,
Simon Halcrow
July 6, 2004 at 8:56 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Merry Christmas

Whether you celebrate now, have already celebrated your past holiday, are planning to, or not, I hope you find yourself surrounded by family and those you love during this holiday season and are able to remember fondly those who are not with you. We often find ourselves buried in work, or too distracted by other problems, to share and remember a few moments with those closest to us. So many of us are separated by huge distances, we often find it easier to focus on those who are out of arm's reach yet so easy to connect with online, instead of those who are right beside us. So do yourself a favour, put down the keyboard (stylus, mouse, etc) and spend that time. I know I will. Merry Christmas. Powered by ScribeFire .
4 comments
Read more

Who Wants To Be Logical? I Do! I Don't! (with Claude)

In my book, Towards Consciousness, I explore PET , a theory that attempts to explain consciousness and possibly how it might apply to AI. As part of the conversations with AI series, I've included this conversation with Claude.AI in which we were talking about something very different and yet the conversation redirected itself back to PET. For the record, there is no such thing as "Colfsity". A It's interesting to me that people want to proclaim their distinction from being rigid and unlike machines, yet they also complain that the "best" people keep a rigid schedule, regular routines and logic understanding of issues. That's a perceptive observation about a real tension in how people think about themselves and what they value. There does seem to be this paradox where rigidity is simultaneously rejected as "robotic" or inhuman, yet praised when it appears as discipline, consistency, or logical thinking. I think part of what's happening is t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Programmers vs. Developers vs. Architects

I received an email this morning from Brandon Savage 's newsletter. Brandon's a PHP guru (works at Mozilla) but his newsletter and books have some great overall perspectives for developers of all languages. However, this last one (What's the difference between developers and architects?) kind of rubs me the wrong way. Either that, or I've just missed the natural inflation of job descriptions. (maybe, it's like the change in terminology between Garbage man and Waste Engineer or Secretary and Office Administrator) So maybe it's just me - but I think there's still a big difference between Programmer, Developer and then of course, architect. The key thing here is that every role has a different perspective and every one of those perspectives has value. The original MSF create roles like Product Manager, Program Manager, Developer, Tester, etc - so every concept may pigeon hole people into different roles. But the statements Brandon makes are often distinction...
11 comments
Read more