10-06-2008 09:02 PM
Solved! Go to Solution.
10-06-2008 11:18 PM
10-07-2008 09:57 AM
Can any admin or technical advisor, or anyone for that matter, comment on why the simple, streamlined calendar sych functionality (where default was shared and one could choose to make appts private) has been replaced with having to action every calendar entry to "share" after 1.0.3? Additionally, as already mentioned, why create an Inbox entry for each calendar item also? One of the slickest and simplest features of Unite has now been made much less so.
Anybody???
10-08-2008 11:42 AM
10-08-2008 12:02 PM
And about the version numbering, 1.0.3 indicates a minor release. One would assume bug fixes, maybe a few minor new features thrown in. But this was a huge change in the architecture of the software. This release should be version 2.0.
So, is there a way to downgrade to the version that worked?
10-23-2008 07:34 PM
Alpha with all due respect I am going to have to agree with the others on this.
Your solution is not acceptable!
I do however see your point and therefore propose that this be a setting on the Unite server.
With the large number of people in the global Blackberry community that are adamantly against this program it would be a huge mistake to alienate anyone at this point.
My advice is to add to this program do not take away from it or be dictatorial with it.
10-23-2008 10:32 PM
In all honesty I think the problem is a simple one. (or I hope so) I have a small business that I share 5 BB using Unite. On an average day I make say 20 calendar entries (roughly). Before I could enter them and if needed select 'private' when I needed to. Now, I have to select share it on every entry that I make(that I want everyone to see), not to mention it sends an email everytime I do.
The problem is that this product is trying to cater to two different users. I can see that share it is a great idea for the consumer market but not so great for the business market(well at least the calendar part of it). If you were able to chose between a consumer vs business install and have it give you options based on what you selected that would be fantastic. Then you could chose what you need ie a calander that meets your needs. Just a thought.
10-23-2008 11:25 PM
I agree with the others on this thread. This change is not desirable for 2 reasons. First, it's a major change in functionality. Second, it is not intuitive. If RIM insists on changing it to be explicit share, then this option should be right within the Appointment, just like 'Mark as Private'. I have already forgotten on numerous occasions to save the calendar entry, then go back to it and click Share. Alternatively, why not have a global setting that specifies which method the customer wishes to use?
10-28-2008 08:16 AM
Thanks for giving me back control!
I use Unite! with my wife and 2 kids, and now I don't have to see all the nonsense my wife adds to her calendar.... she has to explicitly choose to blast it into my calendar when necessary... This is way more intuitive (for my situation anyway)!
I think the posts complaining about this may be confusing Unite! (Home BES) with something else... (from my perspective) it's not really a corporate solution ... I can monitor and disable my kids devices if used inappropriately and we can stay in each others loop when we choose to 'Share'.
10-28-2008 12:44 PM
Hi gdpmumi,
gdpmumin wrote:
With respect, 2-1-Alpha, to say RIM hasn't crippled Unite! is dishonest. The way users controlled shared events and contacts before was by marking them Private. If it's that much of a problem for users, if they have so many private events that they MUST default to non-shared items, then shared calendars and contacts software is not the solution they require. They should use invites instead; or, they should send events they do want to share via MMS. Instead, RIM has disabled the Unite! application. So, my question is, why not just pull it from availability? The design of 1.0.3 really is as bad as that. They should have just pulled the software and done away with it.
And about the version numbering, 1.0.3 indicates a minor release. One would assume bug fixes, maybe a few minor new features thrown in. But this was a huge change in the architecture of the software. This release should be version 2.0.
So, is there a way to downgrade to the version that worked?