Link
I am both saddened and encouraged by this.

While OE was a great alternative to straight Outlook. It was not without its own faults. A lot of them in fact.
I used OE for years and was always pretty happy with how it performed as an IMAP and Newsgroup client. Lately though I have been using Thunderbird which works pretty well.
A bit slower on my machine than OE, but it has a few more features that I was hoping would eventually be built into OE.
Oh well guess thats not happening anytime soon.
Thunderbird with a little bit more work could be a nice alternative. Only one I've found worth my time so far, well besides pine...
Anyway, just my .02 US.

The actually decided to continue development of it about a week after that announcement.

Source

Well whadda ya know 'bout that.
More fickle than my cat...

I like OE, I HATE Outlook. Hope they keep OE

I don't know. They're about equal at their main function: distributing viruses.

They're about equal at their main function: distributing viruses.

LOL

Has OE always had the same holes as Outlook? I mean, aside from the address book, which I don't count due to just popularity.

Has OE always had the same holes as Outlook? I mean, aside from the address book, which I don't count due to just popularity.

Yes. Since both implemented IE to display e-mail messages, both suffered similar scripting holes. Any security home that affected IE affected these products. Plus several more holes were exposed due to the way Outlook and OE were using IE.

Of course MS's solution to security in 2003 is to piss off people. In the final beta version I had, there was no way of overriding its automatic block on "unsafe attachments". You will be forced to e-mail someone back requesting they send an attachment to you in .zip format, or renamed to avoid the MS controlled security block. It's really too bad they did this, because Outlook 2003 is actually a decent program.