Re: Not ONE adequate calendaring program for Macs
From: Bill Weylock (bill_at_nospam.net)
Date: Mon, 31 May 2004 08:56:24 -0700
You should definitely check out Now Up To Date and Contact.
It's not perfect, but I think it does everything you need. I believe it will
let you send emails as well.
Another program to sniff at is DayLite.
You can easily check out both on VersionTracker.
For the record, I have not looked at the Projects feature in Office. Looks
very complicated at first glance, but it could be the answer. I think you
will find NUD/C more direct.
On 5/28/04 4:08 PM, in article
firstname.lastname@example.org, "Tim Capps"
> A little over a year ago, I made the decision to switch from PCs to
> Macs for my law practice. Everyone liked the the stability the new
> computers brought. We were way ahead in things like producing
> chaptered DVDs for trial. (Being able to go to exactly where you want
> when it comes to video in a trial is wonderful.) Appleworks was okay,
> Word and Excel were better. There was MYOB or Quicken to handle
> accounting tasks. Things like Circus Ponies notebook and Omni
> Outliner proved perfect for organizing information in cases.
> There was one thing missing: group calendaring.
> In the PC world, we had had it made. Time and Chaos, for instance, or
> Agendus. Relatively cheap programs that were true groupware, stable,
> easy to use.
> So here we are, with brand-spanking new Macs, and asking the question:
> how do we schedule various hearings, appointments, etc. for a couple
> of lawyers plus assorted paralegals and clerks?
> iCal? Pretty, but it lacks categories (which we use to be able to
> tell what lawyer has responsibility for what event). No linking to
> clients, either. Worse, when we tried it, every once in awhile,
> appointments would just disappear. Plus, Address Book is entirely
> separate, which doesn't help. Oh, and forget about automating any
> Fine. There are all of, what... TWO groupware solutions for calendar
> and contact management. Now Contact / Up to Date and Group Organizer.
> We tried both. Bought multiple licenses for both. I can't imagine
> NUTD being used to handle critical data. When it didn't just quit
> right after making an entry, 75% of the COURT DATES and other
> important stuff simply disappeared one day three months into using it.
> Now, that might be a great program for people who really don't throw
> a lot of critical data at it, but it wasn't great for us. It was a
> Group Organizer? Maybe, in some alternate universe, there are beings
> that can solve the puzzles (i.e. "features") presented by Group
> Organizer. However, in my office, when we need to sync a Palm or
> consult a calender, we don't want to start a three-hour session of
> Myst or some other puzzle-solving game. People hated it. You
> couldn't sync a Palm without getting duplicates, triplicates,
> Time and Chaos? Everyone loved it. It "just worked" (sound
> familiar?) Agendus for Windows? It just worked with style. Oh, but
> those don't run on Macs.
> So what's left? Why, Entourage. I liked Entourage X a lot. In my
> island universe, where I didn't have to share anything, and didn't
> care about what anyone else was doing in my office, it was great. Oh,
> but, unfortunately, I didn't live in that island universe. We are all
> working on the same projects, or handling different things at the same
> time, and I needed to know what was going on. Exchange support was
> long-awaited, and finally came to Entourage X, and then after reading
> what that really meant, NOT WORTH THE EFFORT was imprinted on my brain
> in 100-foot high letters.
> Finally, there was Entourage 2004. With "new and improved" Exchange
> support. Well... turns out there is some mystery about that. The rep
> at Microsoft that I spoke to on the phone said it was complete, "just
> like Outlook." I had already read enough to be sceptical, so I was
> upgraded to a "grace" technical support call. To be fair, the guy I
> spoke to was very nice, and seemed more familiar with the product. He
> said I could download Outlook 2001 for free, and use it to set up
> something that would allow Exchange Server to display one calendar for
> everyone, which could be viewed, written to, etc. Assuming this
> complicated "solution" was indeed accurate, it was not only over my
> head (an admitted small leap when it comes to Exchange 2003), but the
> people who installed my network greeted my inquiries with blank
> I guess it's my fault for (a) not being well-versed in Exchange 2003
> as well as OS X, Office 2004 for Mac, and criminal procedure and (b)
> living in southern Illinois, where Mac experts are a little thin on
> the ground. But, unless I have misinterpreted everything I have read
> about Entourage 2004, this program will STILL not give me the
> functionality I need, and could obtain in my sleep for (God forgive
> me) Windows XP. Even if I am entirely wrong, and Entourage 2004 will
> allow all of us to share calendars and contacts, the functionality is
> STILL inaccessible unless you have access to people who are experts in
> both Exchange 2003 and Entourage 2004 (and, if the Microsoft guy was
> to be believed, Outlook 2001 as well).
> So the utility to "small businesses" of Macs remains a cruel joke
> until someone produces a stable, easy-to-use program that allows a
> handful of people in a single organization to reliably manage a shared
> calendar, shared contacts, and projects. Until then, as much as I
> hate to say it, Macs should be relegated to the graphics department,
> and allow PCs to handle the serious work of making the trains run on
> I love my Macs. That's why we switched. I just feel that I -- AND MY
> BELOVED MACS -- have been let down by software producers who cant' be
> bothered with writing programs that are worthy of the platform and
> fulfill the actual needs of real businesses. Simple question: does
> the Entourage+Exchange combo offer the same features and useability of
> what is available on the PC? If the answer is "no," how are small
> businesses supposed to react? Does anyone really think it is okay to
> provide less usability for Macs because Mac-users are all a bunch of
> graphic artists who don't live in the real world, or what?
> So here I am, contemplating exiling my Macs to some sort of
> graphic-arts ghetto, and bringing in PCs to handle the real work of
> running a business. That's a shame.