Re: Outlook more efficient in storing mails?
On Sat, 18 Dec 2004, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 15:27 -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > On Saturday 18 December 2004 1:50 pm, Ron Johnson wrote:
> >
> > > However, disks are measured in 10s of GBs. If your mbox file is
> > > getting so big as to fill up /home, you have a problem. After all,
> > > even Outlook has File->Archive... functionality, so that the .PST
> > > file won't get so huge.
> >
> > I think this has more to do with the fact OE and Outlook are incredably
> > slow on mailboxes larger than a megabyte and tends to hang entirely on
> > any mailbox over 4MB. Or individual messages larger than a few hundred
> > kB.
>
> That's just pure hogwash.
No. As with anything Microsoft, Outlook behaviour depends extremely heavy
on just *which* Outlook you're using, and *which* version of it (plus what
security patches you have applied). And there's Outlook Express as well,
which is an entirely different beast (with entirely different bugs).
Outlook is a nightmare to support server-side, unless you can force your
users to a single particular version of it.
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
Reply to: