Blogs
CrashTestChixBlog Authors: Marie L Scott |
Shouldn't we "own" the REAL TRUTH about Lotus Notes?
Marie L Scott |
|
Comments (10)
|
| IBM Lotus Connections | Help | Tools | About |
|---|---|---|---|
Tags
A tag is a keyword that is used to categorize an entry. To view the entries with a particular tag, click a tag name or enter a tag in the box.
The tag cloud indicates the frequency of tag use. Popular tags appear darkest. The slider control adjusts how many tags are displayed in the tag cloud.
1 Ben Langhinrichs Permalink We should coordinate elsewhere (here in comments perhaps) so that different people aren't making contradictory changes. Also, anybody who has a login to Wikipedia should make the changes, not anonymous. Rich Schwartz and I certainly do, but others must as well. It is important that have clear, verifiable references for information or attributed opinions as possible, as there are people out there who love to revert back when they just don't want something to change.
2 Richard H. Schwartz Permalink I used to check on the entry regularly, and did quite a lot of editing for both readability and accuracy. But in the past year I've done a lot less. One reason was that really doing a proper job with the article requires citing published references for each factual statement you make, and finding published references for all the things that I "just know" became quite a tedious job.
I could be convinced to get back involved in editing the page,
though, if a coordinated team effort could be made not just for
creating the content, but also for finding and entering the
citations.
3 Thomas Duff Permalink I could help out also...
4 Richard H. Schwartz Permalink BTW: It would be helpful if you would list the inaccuracies you've found.
5 Richard H. Schwartz Permalink Just went in and did a little bit of cleanup on the criticisms section, but that section is badly in need of citations. The point about CSS is a great example of how to do it right. (And no, I didn't do that one!)
6 Marie L Scott Permalink as far as criticism section:
Prior to Release 8.0, the out-of-office feature was designed to
limit traffic by sending out-of-office messages at 2 am (by
default) instead of immediately after messages are received, giving
the initial impression that it did not work at all. Recent releases
have increased the frequency of out-of-office messages to once
every few hours. As of Release 8.0, administrators can configure
the system to send out-of-office messages immediately.
(if memory serves me I don't think this is the case regarding
firing at 2 am..)
It is difficult to read your Notes email from a standalone NSF file
with any other software. (this needs to be addressed as a security
feature and as part of the reason by Domino servers can be restored
faster than other types of mails servers that store mail as
separate objects)
It is hard to get the regular email address of someone that has
sent an email to you if this person is from your Organization (in
the Notes directory), because Notes does not display email
addresses, but rather specific Notes addresses like "Mike Smith/San
Jose/ABC Company".
(this can be customized based on your Domino requirements)
7 Richard H. Schwartz Permalink The criticism section is the most sensitive section in the article. I put a lot of effort into it a few years ago, making a huge effort to try to be objective myself, and to set a tone of objectivity for others to follow. I had not looked at it in a while though. The section is there for a purpose -- to provide a place that deflects every Notes-hater who stumbles across the article from marking it up with references to the Notes Sucks site all over the document. Nevertheless, there have been a bunch of mini revert-wars in that section. The mere mention of the Notes Sucks site itself has been controversial. The consensus of active editors had been to allow legitimate gripes, including fairly general ones, and to note when newer versions made specific gripes obsolete... but to avoid using this section to deny problems or claim that Outlook/Exchange is worse, etc.
Re out of office: I believe the default configuration in some
releases was in fact daily at 2 AM.
Re the difficulty of retrieving data from NSF files: this is a
legitimate complaint. Minor, but legitimate. It is most often
brought up by people who have left a company that uses Notes, and
want a way to access their old mail. There are no programs that can
do this without making use of the Notes core APIs, so it is always
a requirement that a Notes client or Domino server is installed in
order to get data out of NSF files. This is not true of most other
mail systems. (Someone added a comment to this recently saying that
PST files have this problem but there are in fact quite a few
programs out there that can read PST files without having Outlook
installed. I deleted that comment from the article earlier
today.)
Re the business about finding the "regular" address, that should be
edited to at least refer to the Internet email address instead of
"regular". If current versions give you an easy way to click on a
sender or addressee address and get their info, including
InternetAddress, this should be noted. But older versions didn't
give you this, so at worst the criticism should be re-worded to
refer to "older versions" like some of the other ones are.
I've already gone in and taken care of some of this, but not all. I
also did some other cleanup in that section, including removing a
comment that tried to deflect the blame from Lotus for poor error
messages by saying it was an industry-wide problem.
-rich
8 Marie L Scott Permalink @Rich - did the original author include the criticism section? The Exchange and MS Outlook wikipedia pages do not include such a section...
9 Richard H. Schwartz Permalink Wikipedia maintains full history of the page. You can see the original version of it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=IBM_Lotus_Notes&oldid=109680
The History and Talk pages can give you lots of information about
what was put on the page when, by whom, and why. The criticisms
section was created by Nathan Freeman in April 2006. That revision
is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=IBM_Lotus_Notes&oldid=47805017
Various criticisms were on the page much earlier than that, though.
We're all aware that feelings about Notes run very strongly in both
directions. The fact that the Lotus Notes article has a criticisms
section is reflective of the fact that many people have wanted to
include criticisms, and they were scattering them around the
articke, while other contributors have endeavored to avoid stifling
fact-based criticisms but have worked to keep them objective and in
one place near the end of the article in order to avoid detracting
from the main points that are made.
The fact that other products' pages do not have such sections may
reflect the fact that emotions don't run as strong pro or con other
products. And it probably either reflects the fact that fewer
people have ever wanted to put criticisms on those pages, or that
the regular contributors to those pages have not been as
even-handed about dealing with them when they have been added. You
are certainly welcome to try adding a criticisms section elsewhere
if you want, but if you do you should probably add an explanatory
note to the Talk page explaining why... and you should still expect
resistance. Wikipedia is an anarchy with only loose standards that
are loosely and inconsistently applied.
10 Marie L Scott Permalink @Rich - Thanks for the followup on the Criticism section. I'd like to see a section added about server features - like clustering, partitioning, operating systems, upgrades, portability of applications from one server version to another. Again, I know we need the sources to describe that. So will work on gathering what I have available. For those of you reading this....come on now...chime in...what are your comments?