But your argument of logic is based on the developer's perspective, not the user's.
Imagine yourself a brand new user to Method. You know absolutely nothing about it. You are an outside sales rep who calls on a print shop you've never called on before. So now, you want to create a lead. Without any prior knowledge, are you going to think to click on advanced search? No, because advanced search <> new lead. So you'll go to the "customer center" and create a new customer there. Now if you are unlike most sales people I've worked with and you're thorough, you may go to the additional info tab, but if you're like most sale people I've worked with, you won't "because it's just a lead and you don't need to record additional info right now."
I'm just reporting to you what our users said. And it is a known principal in development that you should be consistent. And the fact remains that it's inconsistent to have it checked in Outlook, but not in the HTML interface.
And besides, I've been customizing and supporting Microsoft CRM now since version 1 and I've evaluated other popular packages such as Salesforce. I was trying to provide feedback from someone who has used the "big dogs" quite extensively . . . and let's face it, products like Microsoft CRM are easier to use in some ways. They don't have the QB integration that Method provides, but there are things Method could learn from some of the higher end CRM packages when it comes to features and usability. I guess I was trying to give an "outsiders" perspective. Sometimes when we get too "close" to our development, we don't see it like others see it.