Sorry, but no, if I am running a company’s IT department, I don’t care about the official standards, I care about how well the software will work with actual reality.
And if a random hyper compliant communications software won’t work with Outlook, then it is rejected out of hand.
So, while your oppinion might be accurate in terms of idiology, but that fails to account for real life
I’m not taking the IT manager’s POV. I’m speaking from the point of view of the Outlook PM and developer. Their product has a bug because it doesn’t follow spec. They’re the ones who have a responsibility to fix it.
The question still remains, I would not use a client that the most common email client is incompatible with.
Regardless of if the most common cliebt is idiotic, it is still the de facto standard.
Incompatibility with a standard is the problem of the incompatible program, not the standard.
Sorry, but no, if I am running a company’s IT department, I don’t care about the official standards, I care about how well the software will work with actual reality.
And if a random hyper compliant communications software won’t work with Outlook, then it is rejected out of hand.
So, while your oppinion might be accurate in terms of idiology, but that fails to account for real life
I’m not taking the IT manager’s POV. I’m speaking from the point of view of the Outlook PM and developer. Their product has a bug because it doesn’t follow spec. They’re the ones who have a responsibility to fix it.