Outlook 2003 and speed
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
get yourself a decent email client www.turnpike.com[^] Bryce --- Publitor, making Pubmed easy. http://www.sohocode.com/publitor
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
You must have forgotten to turn on the "Tools|Options|Preferences|Go really fast" option. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
I have to agree that one the whole Outlook 2003 is pretty resource hungry. It gets in a real twist with XML Spy 2004 when OL2003 is synchronising with the exchange server and XML Spy is doing a Schema Validation on a large (more than 2Mb) XML file. :sigh: Also, I spent all of yesterday morning with the Tech Support guy at work trying to fix OL2003 because it crashed overnight and wouldn't recover. :confused: Anyway, when it works I think it is los huevos del perro* * Well, if you can have mixed metaphors then why not mixed idiomatic expressions (in other languages)
EuroCPian Spring 2004 Get Together[^] "You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "Get in touch with your Inner Capitalist - I wish you much success!" -- Christopher Duncan, Lounge 9-Feb-2004
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
humm, never had any problem with my outlook XP but still i dont allow messages to collect in my inbox, 756 message??? how many hours did you spend reading them. Actaully i like outlook over lotus notes, lotus is damn bulk.
"When death smiles at you, only thing you can do is smile back at it" - Russel Crowe (Gladiator)
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
Thunder Bird[^] No viruses, No buffer overflow gotchas No worries about a stupid vb script biting you in the butt Built in spam filtering That said I do wish it was faster and didn't use the stupid XUL crap. Aside from that I'm very happy with it. Oh, no Calendar either - but that's a non issue for me (I'll leave you to decide what that actually means) ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned
-
l a u r e n wrote: outlook blows unless u absolutely need the other crap even then it blows Come on Lauren, don't be afraid to share your feelings with us :).
Software Zen:
delete this; -
humm, never had any problem with my outlook XP but still i dont allow messages to collect in my inbox, 756 message??? how many hours did you spend reading them. Actaully i like outlook over lotus notes, lotus is damn bulk.
"When death smiles at you, only thing you can do is smile back at it" - Russel Crowe (Gladiator)
Mr.Prakash wrote: lotus is damn bulk Lotus is annoying, however it has one feature that I absolutely love: when you want to Reply to All, you can "Reply", and then *after* doing that you can "Reply to All" and it will add all the other e-mail addresses. So I get in the habit of always just Replying, and then only if I know I want to reply to all do I click the other button. And we all know that accidentally replying to all can be quite embarassing. :-O Maybe Outlook XP or 2003 has this, I haven't used any version of Outlook in ages. "I'd be up a piece if I hadn't swallowed my bishop." Mr. Ed, playing chess
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris, we all know and respect you, and you run a great Microsoft-oriented web site. You are under no obligation to use their e-mail client. :-D But if you must, try this registry hack, it might help you out: Create this value: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\EmailRetrievalOption\Speed As a "String" value to "fast". "I'd be up a piece if I hadn't swallowed my bishop." Mr. Ed, playing chess
-
Thunder Bird[^] No viruses, No buffer overflow gotchas No worries about a stupid vb script biting you in the butt Built in spam filtering That said I do wish it was faster and didn't use the stupid XUL crap. Aside from that I'm very happy with it. Oh, no Calendar either - but that's a non issue for me (I'll leave you to decide what that actually means) ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned
-
Chris, we all know and respect you, and you run a great Microsoft-oriented web site. You are under no obligation to use their e-mail client. :-D But if you must, try this registry hack, it might help you out: Create this value: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\EmailRetrievalOption\Speed As a "String" value to "fast". "I'd be up a piece if I hadn't swallowed my bishop." Mr. Ed, playing chess
Excellent - That did the trick ;) cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Excellent - That did the trick ;) cheers, Chris Maunder
Ok, that's cool. But one has to wonder, why is 'slow' the default? :confused: Stephen Owens - too few idle brain cells to create a useful sig
-
Mr.Prakash wrote: lotus is damn bulk Lotus is annoying, however it has one feature that I absolutely love: when you want to Reply to All, you can "Reply", and then *after* doing that you can "Reply to All" and it will add all the other e-mail addresses. So I get in the habit of always just Replying, and then only if I know I want to reply to all do I click the other button. And we all know that accidentally replying to all can be quite embarassing. :-O Maybe Outlook XP or 2003 has this, I haven't used any version of Outlook in ages. "I'd be up a piece if I hadn't swallowed my bishop." Mr. Ed, playing chess
I believe that is the first time in recorded history that "Lotus", "feature", and "love" have been used in the same sentence in a non-sarcastic way. ;) --Mike-- Personal stuff:: Ericahist | Homepage Shareware stuff:: 1ClickPicGrabber | RightClick-Encrypt CP stuff:: CP SearchBar v2.0.2 | C++ Forum FAQ You cannot stop me with paramecium alone!
-
No viruses, No buffer overflow gotchas Until they find one. Tim Smith I'm going to patent thought. I have yet to see any prior art.
True, there may be some. But I'd be willing to bet that it holds together a bit better than outlook, if for no other reason than it's not vb scripted to the nth degree, and doesn't have some of the default security settings turned off like Outlook does( or used to?) ¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire! Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)! SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0 0 rows returned
-
A number of people have mentioned that Outlook 2003 fixes all the speed issues that made Outlook XP unusable. I've just installed 2003 and am downloading 2 hours worth of email (746 messages). To those who say 2003 is fast I say bollocks. :sigh: [Edit: and is there a reason there is no horz. scroll in the mail folders pane? :mad:] cheers, Chris Maunder
-
I have to agree that one the whole Outlook 2003 is pretty resource hungry. It gets in a real twist with XML Spy 2004 when OL2003 is synchronising with the exchange server and XML Spy is doing a Schema Validation on a large (more than 2Mb) XML file. :sigh: Also, I spent all of yesterday morning with the Tech Support guy at work trying to fix OL2003 because it crashed overnight and wouldn't recover. :confused: Anyway, when it works I think it is los huevos del perro* * Well, if you can have mixed metaphors then why not mixed idiomatic expressions (in other languages)
EuroCPian Spring 2004 Get Together[^] "You can have everything in life you want if you will just help enough other people get what they want." --Zig Ziglar "Get in touch with your Inner Capitalist - I wish you much success!" -- Christopher Duncan, Lounge 9-Feb-2004
Colin Angus Mackay wrote: los huevos del perro Eggs of a dog? Weird.:~ Heard in Bullhead City - "You haven't lost your girl -
you've just lost your turn..." [sigh] So true... -
I just use Outlook Express too - and it largely does what I need. For contacts, diary etc. I use Lotus Organiser - which is ironic as at work we're forced to use Lotus Notes which I detest with a passion!! Anna :rose: Homepage | Tears and Laughter "Be yourself - not what others think you should be" - Marcia Graesch "Anna's just a sexy-looking lesbian tart" - A friend, trying to wind me up. It didn't work. Trouble with resource IDs? Try the Resource ID Organiser Visual C++ Add-In