Re: From the other side of the fence...
Entirely Correct - and well put.
For a replacement to Exchange/Outlook to gain traction it has to be better. Cheaper would help, but not as much as better.
Better to a user does not mean "standards compliant" or "plays nicely with stuff I've never heard of". It means in this case.
1. Does 100% of what Outlook does
2. Some whizzy features that demo well (but will probably never get used)
3. Prettier than Outlook
4. Faster than Outlook.
It's only the beancounters and people holding the IT budget that care how much it costs.
Note that Exchange isn't on the list - users don't know what Exchange is. All information comes from Outlook in the same way that milk comes from a supermarket.