Cool Solutions

GroupWise 8 Feedback…


March 27, 2009 1:17 pm





There are a few features in GroupWise 8 that we have received some push back. Let’s talk about them and work together to see if there is common ground or even a better solution!

Auto-Accept of Appointments

New to GroupWise 8 is the ‘default’ functionality that says – any appointment that I schedule AND I invite myself to – will be automatically accepted and moved directly into my calendar. As we watched end-users who schedule a lot of appointments, the feedback we heard was – “why make me accept appointments that I schedule AND that I invite myself to?” These end-users said, “This is just extra work and does not help me be productive” They further stated that, “100% of the time, any appointment that I schedule and invite myself to, I ALWAYS accept. Why can’t the software ‘accept’ it for me? It is obvious I am planning on going to the meeting, I scheduled it!”

Change can be hard :)! We understand and know that this is ‘different’ from previous versions. We are still hopeful that after end-users ‘know’ what is going on – they simply say, “Of course, that makes perfect sense. That is what I was going to do anyway. Thanks for saving me a few clicks!” In fact, one purpose of blogging on this topic is to solicit any other perspectives besides the one – “this is different and not the same as it used to be – hence I don’t like it!” If that is the ‘only’ reason, then I am not sure if it is very compelling. I promise to keep an open mind!

We also considered the view of a new user to GroupWise and how competitive products work. We have not found a single new user of GroupWise who has stumbled over this functionality.

We have also considered providing an option. I will go out on a limb and say that is what most feedback will probably be. Simply…if some users like it one way and other users like it another, then simply provide an option. In general, this is a good philosophy and in many many cases, this is exactly what we do. However, it is never that simple. First of all, we would need to ultimately provide the option in every client. Windows, Linux/Mac, WebAccess. Shortly after we provide that, the request would come that the administrator wants the option to set it, lock it and control it. Then 3rd-parties would request API support for the option so that they could incorporate it into their solutions and account for it in their products. This also has localization costs and usability costs. Some might argue we already have way too many options. Most of which are never touched by 80% of our user base.

These are all good reasons, but if the problem is simply – because it is different – then there are more pressing issues to solve and features to provide.

One semi-related feature to mention is one we call “On accept, continue to display the item in the Mailbox”. We recognized that there are some users – usually ones who do not receive/attend a lot of meetings – that never accept appointments because they are ‘moved’ to your calendar. We wanted to provide the functionality that allow a user to ‘Accept’ an appointment so that other attendees could expect their attendance while leaving the Calendar item in their mailbox. Look for this option in Tools | Options | Calendar – its on the General tab.

Next Topic…

Reply to Selected Text

New to GroupWise 8 is the capability to select some text in a message you are readying and when you hit ‘Reply/Forward’, ONLY that text is included in the new message. Some users have found this new feature to be one of the most ‘productive’ features in all of GroupWise 8. While others have told us that this is the ‘dumbest’ feature in the entire product. Sometimes you just can’t win!! 🙂

Some users struggle because they did not realize or did not remember that they had selected text when they hit ‘Reply/Forward’. Then when the new message appeared and not all of the text was included, they become very frustrated.

This is another feature that is included in most of our competitor’s products. This feature was included because it was requested by many customers and end-users. It was a relatively easy feature to implement and therefore became a feature that we have highlighted and advertised as one ‘we’ really like.

Of course, it is again – a change in functionality. Some users digest change very easily and can adapt and embrace rather quickly. Other users will resist change no matter how compelling and useful the new functionality ‘could’ be.

Many have provided feedback about how to provide the best of both worlds. Provide an option is a common theme. One idea is to provide the ‘selected text reply’ feature only on the right-click menu, once the text is selected. This has some merit. Other ideas?

Let’s first discuss these features and see if there are some insightful solutions. There may be other features you would also like to discuss or ask – What were they thinking? I would be happy to let you peek inside our design decisions and help us provide even better solutions!


2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5 (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.

Categories: GroupWise Blog


Disclaimer: This content is not supported by Micro Focus. It was contributed by a community member and is published "as is." It seems to have worked for at least one person, and might work for you. But please be sure to test it thoroughly before using it in a production environment.


  1. By:salisburyk

    …the new features are fine the way they are, IMHO. 🙂

    It’s important that users are trained before rolling out the client anyway, so that these improvements can be discussed in detail *before* they start to use the new client.

    I use and recommend Brainstorm for admins who need help training their users on GroupWise 8. (And no, I’m not affiliated with Brainstorm in any way). (Now if only Brainstorm would print those OpenOffice 3.0 Quick Start training cards I need…)

    • By:dlythgoe

      Change is always difficult. I remember when we released GroupWise 7.0, we received a lot of feedback about the new Home View. We were pushing hard to have it the default view that appeared when the user first started the new client. During the BETA, we had several participants tell us that they could not roll out the new client if they did not have some options/control over how it looked.

      We listened and eventually implemented the new ‘Appearance’ options in Tools | Options.

      I would like to hear from all of you….Do you use this option? How often? For how many users?


  2. By:hnewman

    Dean – the “On accept, continue to display the item in the Mailbox” is a good solution for the users who manage their Calendar in their Mailbox. However, we were somewhat startled to find that the Auto-Accept feature kicked in as soon as we upgraded our POAs, but the clients weren’t able to set that option since they were still on GW7. I’m guessing we could work around this by logging into their accounts with a GW8 client and setting the option, but we didn’t try that.

    Regarding the Selected Text Reply: In general, it works as designed. But we’ve had reports of two occasional anomalies:
    1. It seems to ‘read’ text on the clipboard and insert that instead.
    2. It picks random-length strings out of the middle of the first line, even if they aren’t highlighted, and uses them.

    I have seen both of these but haven’t been able to duplicate reliably enough to open an SR.

    • By:dlythgoe

      Thanks for the feedback Holly. We will look at the two issues you reported with ‘selected text reply’ and will see if there is anyway to solve the GW7 on a GW8 backend issue with Auto Accept.

      One idea is not to trigger the option until a GW8 client is logged in….that is interesting idea and a possibility. Now the bigger question…would it matter?

      Looking for more posts and experiences to lead us to believe that this is a significant enough issue to address…


  3. By:burlandp

    One can argue the pros and cons of which is the best ‘default behaviour’ until the cows come home. Ultimately, folks use software in ways never envisaged by the developer. The key of providing good software is to give the user the ability to tweak it to *their* preference (not what you think it should be). The development cost is minimal (the mechanism is already there for personal setting – adding global flags for things like ‘Auto Accept Appts to Me’ is trivial). In fact, from a development viewpoint, I would expect to see this kind of allowance made for in the ‘engine’ code and then revealed in the user interface as required by the product team.
    However, as the effort now required to put this in the code is too great – I agree that other development takes priority (folks will just get used to the new behaviour.)

    • By:dlythgoe

      This is a very good argument and one that we follow a lot of the time. Options certainly make the software more configurable. How configurable is the question? Good designers would argue that if you have a lot of ‘options’, then maybe your design is not good in the first place. I would guess that the iPhone would be suggested as an example of an intuitive design that does not require as many options as other devices.

      Another argument may be – if only a small handful of users request an option, is it worth doing that work vs. doing a new feature that 95% of the users would appreciate and use?

      Maybe at the end of the day – it is about opportunity costs. As ‘burlandp’ argued both sides of the issue…’the development cost is minimal’ and then later ‘effort required to put this in the code is too great’. You hit on our dilemma. How much does it cost? Should I spend that elsewhere? Do I understand all of the costs?

      Thanks for the discussion…

      • By:RogerIThomas

        Bringing up the iPhone is a good example of the issues you are now trying to address. The current iPhone/iTouch software is a single ‘version’ release with improvements having been made over the last 2 years. In many ways the iPhone software can be compaired to the GW 5-6.5 client releases were the application did not change that much over it’s life.

        With the GW8 (and in part the GW7) client you have made major changes, which would be on par with Apple changing some of the feature set of the iPhone software. The question is would Apple force all its users to accept these changes on day one or would it allow users to pick and choose the changes they wished to use?

        GW’s ablity to have system settings to change the way it operates seems to be an under used feature at the moment, but as you add/change features it would make sense to all the user/administrator to select the old or new action.

        “Good designers would argue that if you have a lot of ‘options’, then maybe your design is not good in the first place”

        As for this statement, yes I agree that lots of options for a single product is not a good idea, but with something like the GW client you are talking about a changing product that must evolve which allowing users to upgrade.


      • By:dlythgoe

        All good points Roger. These are all things we weigh and try to make the best decisions. Thanks for chiming in!


    • By:bbecken

      I agree that end users (and admins) need to be given choices for setting the default behavior for the client. Just this morning, I was asked how to turn “off” the default feature where appointments are “auto-accepted if you are a participant”.

      Another twist on the auto-accepted appointments, If someone composes an appointment (not from the calendar view) where they are a participant, the GroupWise client does not check their own calendar for conflicts and warn them before of the conflict before sending the appointment.

      • By:dlythgoe

        In general, I agree as well. But given competing demands on a product, what is the best use of our time. Providing all of the configuration capability requested or providing new/better features while limiting flexibility and configuration.

        Its been a healthy and well received discussion. I thank you for your input!


  4. By:jhaynes

    You used to be able to search all these items and find previous conversations but now that seems to be lost. So seeing as I can’t search for the outlook connector’s fate I’ll ask here. Will there ever be one that supports Outlook 2007 or any future version? As groupwise 8 has dropped this feature 🙂

    • By:dlythgoe

      Not sure why you can’t search. I will ask our ‘tools’ team and maybe they will be able to help. I was able to search the blogs and get hits for the Connector. Maybe when you tried it was having problems.

      Anyway…Outlook Connector’s fate…

      Product Management has been looking at this issue for a while. We did not ship an Outlook Connector for Bonsai. Plans have not been finalized for the next release – code named Windermere. So we are not comfortable talking about whether there will be or won’t be a next version of the Outlook Connector. However, we do believe that there are a few main drivers for customers and users who request this type of solution.

      1. Outlook lust….they have used Outlook and don’t want to change or there is some feature or functionality in Outlook that GroupWise does not support in the same way.

      This seems to be fading since we released 8.0, but this is also emotional and even if we continued to have a Connector -the experience does not seem to satisfy these users anyway. We would rather spend our time creating an experience that our end-users preferred or that was at least easier to learn/user. GroupWise 8 was a huge step in this direction.

      2. Integrations… There are so many 3rd-party products that integrate with Outlook and a Connector – in theory – would solve this problem.

      What we have found is that this is mostly a myth. Even with the Connector, most integrations did not work or did not work exactly the same way.

      We will have an integration solution soon that we hope addresses a lot of this concern.

      That is at least some of the information and thinking about this issue.


      • By:crehkopf

        We are a medium size State of Ohio Agency. This type of decision and non-committed statement is just the kind to push us to exchange even if we don’t want to. There are just too many new functions and services from other services that will integrate into Outlook and the GroupWise 8 client still just doesn’t get it. Show me how to bulk save to email from the GroupWise archive to a folder outside GroupWise. That is not a myth. Using third party is not the answer when the other product has the support native.


      • By:dlythgoe


        Your point is that there is still features in Outlook itself that the GroupWise client does not have. That is a completely different point then the integrations myth I was referring to.

        Your point is valid and where there are feature gaps, we want to address them. Besides bulk save to email feature you described – are there other native Outlook client features you would like to see in the GroupWise client?

        Thanks for the feedback!


  5. By:wigginsc

    Hi there,

    I think you should keep it the way it is – Novell has to move on with technology and users should adapt to new ways of doing things …

    I do have another question – when you reply on an email with the original message included, you can still edit the original message. Any way of changing this, according to my users it’s very risky and could result in a law dispute … the ‘system’ should not allow it. Can this be addressed?

    A question on archiving: Can another feature be added to the post office agents to limit users on the size of the archives or somehow allow users to create a new archive on a yearly basis. Reason being that our support staff is having a lot of grey hairs on transferring the huge archives to new workstations, some as big as 15 GB. And then I need to sort out the archiving problems afterwards. If there is a way that we could force users to create a new archive so that the old archive can be written to DVD, the copying part and headaches afterwards could be minimized. This will also prevent users from losing years of emails in cases where the archive becomes corrupted.


    • By:dlythgoe

      This is blog has turned into a feature request list 🙂

      Celeste – thanks for the feedback!

      1. Locking Replies….there is probably a way to do this, but there are so many ways around it that if someone really was going to do what you are trying to prevent – they would find a way. I guess we could ‘lock-out’ simple forward and always require the ‘Forward as attachment’…that would probably work.

      Software can encourage good behavior, but can’t foce good choices 🙂

      2. Archive size limits… This is a good idea and great feedback. Something for us to consider! Thanks!


  6. By:bbecken

    One feature I’d like to see is an “Archive Agent” that the GW client talks to via tcpip. This would provide the admin with a way to specify where archives are stored and would make it easy to relocate the archive data to different servers. Similar to the Archive agent used by the GWIM.

    This would also mean that the GW Admins could override user settings and specify different retention periods for archives by domain, post office, group or user.

    • By:dlythgoe

      Thanks for the comment and the suggestion.

      This is one we have considered and know what to do – since we did it with GWIM 🙂

      It just has not hit high enough on the priority list. I’ll count your vote!


      • By:joebrug

        Put my vote in, too! we have around 800gb of users archives on the system, and these are ACTIVE users. I have to call users and ask that they clean out their archives, then make sure they manually empty the trash or else it never gets ‘trimmed down’… yuck

      • By:bbecken

        Dean, you make my suggestion sound like it is actually on a list, yet when I go check the status of my enhancement request (#16309 – 13 Jan 2010 ) it has a status of “Not Accepted” instead of “Awaiting Release Prioritization”.

        Here is the “proposed solution” from my Enhancement request (16309) for others to enjoy:

        Create a NEW GroupWise Archive Agent (GAA).

        Agent should be Client Server based like GroupWise Instant Messenger.
        When a client archives an item, the client creates a local archive and echos the archive to the GAA.

        If the GAA is down, the archive request is stored/queued until the GAA is available (much like what caching mode does when a post office is down). Users can have a local archive that replicates to the GAA for access while they are on the road or working offline.

        Option to sync the Master GAA to your local system if a workstation dies and client desires their Archive copy back.

        The GAA is centrally administered, ConsoleOne (other).

        GroupWise Administrators can run Checks and Fixes on the GAA or events can be scheduled. (Same checks and fixes as a Post Office).

        The GAA data store can be easily MOVED to different storage media/volume. Simply install the new GAA, move the archive data, start the NEW GAA and configure the IP Address of the GAA in GroupWise.

        Can have Multiple GAA’s.

        GAA’s can be setup per user, post office or group (like a Contact Center). GAA can be assigned per user, post office or domain.

        The Users Archive can be simply copied to the GAA directory or vice versa for recovery.

        Policies can be established for Archive cleanup.

        Individual archives can be ‘locked’ from item deletion in the event of a legal discovery.

        The GAA can be globally search-able for Legal discoveries. Similar to the GWIM Archive.


        If Novell created a private forum that only registered GroupWise users/organizations could vote on suggestions/enhancement requests to help prioritize items, I certainly would participate. I’m not suggesting that you expose all 5000 requests that Alex Evens mentions ( see ), but perhaps an appropiate mixture of the GroupWise communities requests plus some of Novells. If there is no interest in exposing Novell’s own ideas, how about just the GroupWise communities?

      • By:dlythgoe

        Thanks for all of the detail and for sharing this with others so that they can comment and provide feedback. Great way to solidify design before implementation 🙂

        You wonder if your request has made it to any list….It has, it is just difficult to communicate that commitment so far in advance of any release. The new RMS tool we are using for this purpose and we continue to work through all of the requests and suggestions.

        I just don’t want to promise something until I at least see it designed/demo’d as part of one of the milestones towards the final release of a particular version.


  7. By:wigginsc

    In GW7, distribution lists had 3 visibilities (system\domain\post office) – have you ever had a request to extend it in GW8 to allow you to limit the visibility to a user/group of users as well? For our organisation, it would be a huge benefit to have this functionality enabled as you could design a group which is only visible to that group of users and not the entire department. It is senseless to setup multiple post offices as a workaround to cater for this…

  8. By:joebrug

    The Auto-accept and Reply with Selected Text are two great features. I’ve received only a few phone calls from people who are “missing text” in their replies, and once I explain it , they are fine with it. Keep making steps forward, no need to go back.. especially for these small issues which are easily solved by admins/trainers informing the users of changes. Change is inevitable, and theres always resistance to it. They’ll learn.

  9. By:stideswe

    Hello Dean

    The description of the new features you give above can best be described by your own phrase “of course, that makes perfect sense”. All too frequently in the past GroupWise has done things in a clunky, unfriendly, time-consuming way – this is the major gripe our end users have with GroupWise and why they prefer Outlook. They don’t like the way that GroupWise forces them into extra button presses/mouse clicks that seem to be unnecessary and time-wasting. These new features are a move in the right direction. In the past GroupWise has behaved in a way that reduces user productivity and increases user frustration. It seems as though Novell are finally listening.

    The idea about putting extra options in to control this behaviour – I think it would be bad. How do Microsoft do it? They keep it simple, options just confuse most end users and they tend not to use them. As a general rule the product should just make these kinds of decisions for the users and stick with them – but that’s why they need to be well thought out and to make sense.

    We initially thought the “reply to selected text” feature was a bug!!!! But when we thought about it we decided – “that’s a really good idea”. We have some very irritating and demanding end-users who may very well complain about this behaviour. I for one do not mind explaining the benefit of this feature to every one of them – because “it makes sense”. In the past I think that GroupWise behaviour didn’t make sense and I felt that the users all too commonly had a valid reason to complain and I didn’t have any credible counter arguments. But in this instance Novell is doing the right thing and you should stick to your guns.

    I don’t know what process you follow to investigate UI design, but as I have said before, if people appear to prefer Outlook and in some instances really HATE GroupWise take that on board and go and have a look at the way Outlook does it. Microsoft make lousy, unreliable, slow, insecure, inflexible, rubbish products in general but they are absolutely the best at UI design which is why they keep winning (plus the third party integrations). If the UI designs of competing products were more like M$ they’d probably get better traction.

    The other big plus for GroupWise 8 (which was diabolical in previous GroupWise versions – and required too many button presses/mouse clicks) is the way you can reply to/forward an email directly from the archive. Cleaning that up is an example of Novell listening and cleaning up a piece of totally indefensible UI design that left me and my end users scratching our heads thinking “but surely they can’t be serious??”.


  10. By:stideswe

    As mentioned above. The iPhone UI design is clearly very popular/intuitive. If you play with an iPhone (as an IT minded person) it is striking how little you can do to configure the thing. Apple have decided on a UI design and then have left the user precious little ability to tweak the UI configuration to suit their own preferences – and yet they sell very well. I don’t believe users want to spend hours tweaking UI’s they just want to use them out of the box and they expect the product vendor to design an intuitive UI that can just be used from day one.


  11. By:dlythgoe

    I also received this feedback by email…

    I like the idea of auto-accept of appointments in the latest release. However I see another similar enhancement that can be made: any time I am sending a message to GW distribution list I am a member of I see it annoying to receive my message. It should be handled the same way you made for appointments. My messages sent to DL where I am part of it should not show up in my inbox. I have it already in my outbox! Otherwise I have to manually delete incoming message from myself.


  12. By:campbb

    On the UI issue and iPhone comparision, while I love options as an IT person, as a trainer it is often easier to train someone how to do something a particular way then to explain and train on all of the possibilities. Of course, this requires the UI to be thoughtfully designed as others have already stated.

    Now on to one of my biggest problems with Groupwise which doesn’t necessarily belong here, but bits are cheap so it’s worth the typing:

    Please encourage whatever team is responsible for ConsoleOne (or the Novell Client if that is the problem) to support C1 working on Vista at least for managing GroupWise. While being able to manage GroupWise from iManager seems like the better long-term solution, that obviously requires a lot of new development efforts that haven’t come to pass yet. As the only GW admin at my institution and as someone who has used Vista on my only computer for 9 months now (with few other problems), I now cringe every time I have to change even the simplest little GW related thing since ConsoleOne is required and it blue screens my computer. It is getting really old to have to spend 30 minutes on what would be a two minute task because I have to borrow a colleagues computer running XP or mess around with a virtual machine.

    People love to rant and complain about Vista, but the fact is that it is here and it is MS’s current OS. It came standard with the 250 Tablet PCs we deployed last summer, and it worked well enough (once we turned off some of the new security stuff like UAC) that it made more sense to use and continue to move forward with it than try to find replacement utilities and drivers and build an image from scratch on XP.

    – Bill

    P.S. I tried this Cool Solutions article, which got it to start but C1 now blue screens my computer when I change an object property:

    Lastest doc for C1 I can find still just says Vista is not supported:
    I could accept that in 2007 when the latest version of C1 was released and Vista was new, but it is time to move forward now, and C1 is obviously not dead since we have to use it to manage GW.

  13. By:ecyoung

    To add, I agree with the ConsoleOne on Vista (and Windows 7 when that rtm’s), especially considering that Windows XP Professional is now unsupported without an extended support agreement. Yes it’s just a technicality to *some* folks, but *some* org’s have weird/insane/[insert word that fits here] things like service-level agreements that state that OS’s and app’s will be under support agreements if they are in a production environment.

  14. By:stideswe

    I know this is way off topic but …

    As regards C1/iManager – I don’t really care. I don’t have problems with using C1. C1 runs like lightening on Linux and I tend to run it on the server itself over FreeNX (that way there is less need to share out the domain DB’s with the consequent risk of DB corruption that that incurs).

    One aspect of GroupWise administration that really irks me though is the lack of transparency in dealing with the message store. The gwcheck/POA log error messages are unhelpful and frequently not documented or poorly/superficially documented. As an administrator if emails within the message store are corrupt/missing attachments etc I’d like to know a bit more about them (e.g. timestamp, sender , recipient, subject) as they were being deleted/reported. And I’d like to have a much clearer idea about what the appropriate DB repairs were to run (or whether I needed to run any) in response to a POA log/client/gwcheck error.

    There have been long-standing issues with the GroupWise expire/reduce scheduled jobs leaving tons and tons of debris in the OFFILES directory. Because of this, despite a weekly 90 day expiration job and a weekly empty trash job on all our post offices the OFFILES directory continues to swell out in size with files that are in excess of three years old existing in there. This is, to my mind, a seemingly intractable Novell bug that you show no ability or inclination to resolve but it would be really nice to have better tools to explore this issue. To, for instance, to be able to open up a blob file and view it (as an administrator) so that you could determine what it belongs to. To be able to query “what message does this blob belong to” and to subsequently delete the message and confirm that the blob has also gone. That’s the kind of stuff I want. I’d also love for the core issue of the bloating OFFILES directory to be ultimately remedied too. With respect to the latter, I repeat the offer I have made before, I will give you a copy of our main post office on tape (with blobs more than three years old and all of that) for you to explore this issue with (provided you agree to respect the privacy of the data therein). Having some good example data to work from might help you to resolve the issue. Giving the admins better “lenses” to look at the data with might give you more eyes to work on the problem from outside of Novell?

    I have recently explored the possibility of a third party archiving solution. During this process I found that having the data stored in a database (e.g. MySQL) that I can write simple queries against, and having the blob files unencrypted and stored as flat files on the server was a real boon, it allowed me to see all the data and be able to manage it accordingly. I know that GroupWise developers will want to protect user privacy from the eyes of a snooping, nosey administrator but to have better visibility of the inner guts of the message store would be really really helpful to assist administrators in managing their systems (such as with the OFFILES debris issue).


    • By:dlythgoe


      Thank you for your input and feedback. Engineering and product management have been working on these issues from a technical as well as priority stand point. There are things that we can do to either address or alleviate this problems. We will certainly take another look.

      Thanks again – your input is very valuable!


  15. By:bbecken

    I really do not like the GroupWise 800hp1 installer. I just ran the installer with the intent of creating a local SDD that would later be copied to the server (prep work for updating a remote system on a slow wan link).

    My complaints:
    1) the interface is not intuitive as it was in previous versions.
    2) trying to figure out what options to select just to install the SDD was not intuitive at all.
    3) When I wanted help and clicked on the Installation help, it download a copy of the entire gw8_install.pdf from the internet… pretty ugly over a slow internet link (why not bundle the pdf in the package?).
    3) I tried researching exactly what was copied if I selected the “install administration” (which refers you to the gw8_install.pdf) and could not find an explanation of the option. I did find a screenshot on Page 260.
    4) the installer forces me to use a network drive for the SDD.
    5) the installer forces me to use 8.3 formats. Previously I could create a directory named something like “software.800hp1” which would later be renamed or the contents copied into the “software” directory.

    Don’t get me wrong, I love using GroupWise, I just found these items annoying.

    • By:dlythgoe

      I am finding it interesting that this blog has turned into a place to dump all comments 🙂

      That is ok – just more difficult to find/sort – but works the same.


      I don’t know if this will completely address all of the concerns of bbecken…but here goes…

      1. We have changed the interface and we hope it will become more intuitive as we finish moving all of the agents to this new version. We updated to the latest set of tools and moved several of the install programs to this new version. We still have a few to go.

      2. See #1.

      3. We have discussed better ways of delivering the ‘help’ at this point in the install. We will continue to evaluate.

      4. When you say network drive – do you mean ‘mapped’ drive? Or do you want to put your SDD someplace other than on the network?

      5. This is a limitation of NetWare and will eventually change as our customer base upgrades to Linux.



  16. By:emsandberg

    In my (humble) opinion, I think serious users of previous GroupWise versions who didn’t want to receive appointments or emails sent to themselves simply set up rules to handle these items. This being said, I think it’s a good idea to have self-sent appointments auto-accepted, but perhaps make it a default rule that can be turned off? That way people (and my company has several) who rely on the messages showing up in their inboxes can have it their way too.

  17. By:dennisbarber

    Since almost the beginning of time, I have had a rule that accepts appointments and tasks from me and to me. I am a somewhat serious user and have over 40 active rules to manage my appointments, tasks, checklist and email based upon category, priority, sender, etc.

  18. By:itangast

    I am all for the change but have received one complaint. If you schedule an appointment and did not check your schedule first, it will auto accept and not notify you of a conflict if one exists. Has anyone else seen this? Is this something that can be fixed?

    • By:dlythgoe

      We are kicking around some UI changes that brings your schedule and others directly into the appointment interface. This should make it easier. As part of that redesign, we will consider options for letting the user know that they are double-booking themselves.

      As much as I want to blame things on the end-user, software should be smart and helpful whenever it can and compensate for the user’s busy life. 🙂


  19. By:hamline

    i’m sorry to respond to a thread that’s a bit old, but we just upgraded to groupwise 8, and ran into the issue with the appointment auto-accepts. it’s created a lot of confusion for our users, and we have some people that use it as a means of tracking who’s accepted an appointment.

    so, my vote, is change it to a user configurable option, at least for this release, to allow people to ease into the transition.


    • By:dlythgoe


      I think you mis-understand the change. There is absolutely no change in behavior with being able to track who has accepted an appointment.

      This change is simply this:

      Bob schedules an appointment, he includes himself. We auto-accept for Bob only. NO ONE ELSE on the distribution list is auto-accepted. Only the sender/scheduler who included him/her self as part of the invitee list.

      What we found is simply this: Every time Bob schedules an appointment and includes himself, the very next thing he does is ‘accept’ the appointment he has invited himself to attend. Almost 100% of the time, we observed this behavior – without exception. The thinking was – ‘if the obvious next step for Bob is to accept his own appointment, then why not accept it for him?’….so we did.

      This is obviously not the case if someone else schedules Bob for an appointment. We NEVER auto-accept for Bob if someone else besides Bob scheduled the meeting.

      – You can still track who has accepted/tracked the appointment in the exact same way as always – no change here at all – open up the sent items – go to properties.
      – You can still decline the message – it is simply done from the calendar instead of the mailbox. We observed that this rarely happens right away and usually only with recurring appointments.

      Let me know if you have further questions…


  20. By:dougdeden

    Please count me as a vote for a feature request. While I can see how selecting text before replying could be handy to those who find it difficult to just hit Reply and then edit the text they are replying to, it needs to be optional. I don’t even mind if it is the default — just give us a way to turn it off. I often select and copy something from a message for other uses, and when that text is still selected when I hit Reply, it is either noticable, causing me to cancel, unselect, and reply again, or I don’t see it, which changes the context of my composition without my being aware of it. We’ve got lots of users calling our Helpdesk to report “a problem”. We’ll probably end up making a wide-spread announcement to explain it, but it would be oh-so-much nicer if we could tell them how to turn it off.

    I’m not a fan of the

    Notice: something just happened.
    [ ] Don’t tell me this again.

    -style messageboxes, but at a minimum, you should pop that up whenever this “feature” triggers, so people know what’s happening until they get used to it and turn off the messagebox. Changing default behavior with absolutely no communication is just rude. If this isn’t the right place to make a formal request, please let me know the proper channel.


  21. By:wrodrigu

    We upgraded in December 09 and this change caused a lot of confusion/problems for most everyone. i agree with everything Doug states above. When you reply and either no text or just portions of the email appear in the reply, you think it’s a bug because it’s not at all obvious that you selected text. you just think groupwise malfunctioned. Users were complaining that they had to reply/close several times before the text was in the reply (it was not obvious to them what was happening). Also, many didn’t report it to MIS.. they were just grumbling to each other.
    When you added this to all the random crashes, people are getting really frustrated.. I know I am. I just happen to stumbled on this I thought I’d join in.

    • By:dlythgoe

      We are reconsidering this interaction. We think this feature is probably better on a rxght-click menu once you have selected text.

      This allows for a more explicit action when you just want to reply to selected text.

      Thanks for your input…this is excellent!


  22. By:ttoepp

    GUI Request: Allow users to sort their emails by categories so you can keep your urgent and follow up items at the top of your email list, similar to calendar requests when you have it sorted by date. Sure you can convert them to tasks and then convert them back to emails to reply to, but if the email isn’t necessarily a task doesn’t always apply.

    Management Request: Make it easier to add an external email account to your GW system or DL’s. With adding vendors and outside contractors to DL’s to increase communication, it becomes a pain to have to create a PO for each of the vendors just to keep them in the know. It should be just as easy as creating a user in NDS, maybe even easier!

    • By:dlythgoe

      Thanks for the ideas. Let me see if I understand them properly.

      1. Allow users to sort their email by categories. We provide today, in the
      Windows Client, the ability to ‘Filter’ by category. Emails, tasks, notes, whatever and everything. You can then deal with the item based on that category. You can create your own categories and give them colors to help identify them. In addition, any item can be ‘treated’ like a task without having to convert it to a task by simply displaying item items with the ‘Show in Tasklist’ options.

      In addition, the ability to ‘sort your emails by categories’ has been a feature of GW since GW7 or GW7.0.1 – whenever we first introduced categories. Once again, I am referring to the Windows Client. Other clients have some of this functionality, but not all of it.

      Am I understanding correctly what you want to be able to do? Please clarify if the current functionality is falling short.

      2. External email account. Great suggestion! Its one we have in our enhancement database and now we have another vote for it! Thanks,


      • By:ttoepp

        Not filter exactly, I know how we can do that. More where you can have in your inbox view almost a section at the top that you could tag emails as hot topics. The same way that when you see Calendar events that are in the future that you haven’t accepted. Since they are dated the date of the event/appointment they are on my top most list of emails (since i sort by date). Would also be nice if you could keep messages that you really need to keep in touch with at the top of the list regardless of their date sort so they don’t get lost in your other emails. Granted if I could find the time to better manage my inbox this wouldn’t be an issue, but when receiving more requests then I can fill during peak times of the year, bigger requests sometimes gets lost.

    • By:jhaynes

      That is how I have had my email setup for a long time. In your main inbox go to view, display settiings and choose tasklist. Then I drag an email up there and set a category. Dont have to do anything regarding replying etc. When finished I drag it back to the email area below. If you want a picture I can email you.

  23. By:ttoepp

    What if Novell would just pay a software developer to start from scratch and build the GroupWise Apple Client in a Native Language like cocoa or something native to the MAC. I bet there are some software developers out there that would take the job for say $50K and Novell would say here is the PC Client, this is everything that it can do and we would like for you to develop for the Mac Client with the same features and similar look. Sometimes it is just easier to write a check to someone to get something done that you don’t have the time and resources to do yourself…

    Also have the ability to lock the Inbox at the root level. Either it is a bug or problem with the GUI, but at least once a week I’m logging in as a user on a PC to drag their Inbox out from under their Calendar. Granted it is that often because we have about 600 Mac Users, but I don’t have the same issue with the PC client/users.