Michael - that's so true - all of Office has basically disappeared. I guess it's time to memorize hot keys for Microsoft stuff. (Only being slightly facetious.)
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:57 PM, Michael B. Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > The only major change (IMO) between 2010 and 2013 is the metro theme and > lack of contrast in the new colors. > > > > For old people like me, the lack of contrast is a pretty damn big deal. > > > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *J- P > *Sent:* Thursday, May 29, 2014 7:20 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [Exchange] OST larger than box > > > > So your users have transitioned from 2010 to 2013 fairly easily? > > Did you do a complete Office upgrade or only Outlook > > > ------------------------------ > > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: [Exchange] OST larger than box > Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 21:02:52 +0000 > > I’ve found that Outlook 2013 works better with larger mailboxes, and you > can also limit the number of months/years of data to cache, so that can > help keep the OST file size low. > > > > I forgot to mention that in Outlook 2013, it compacts the OST for you (at > least from what I’ve observed, but someone can correct me otherwise). The > “Compact Now” feature has worked well for me in the past on Outlook 2010 > though, so you may want to consider running that to see if it helps lower > the OST file size in Outlook 2010 (until you upgrade to Outlook 2013). > > > > -Aakash Shah > > > > *From:* [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On > Behalf Of *J- P > *Sent:* Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:54 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: [Exchange] OST larger than box > > > > Well, I just got our new 2013 CALS maybe its time to upgrade my offenders > (10GB+ users) > > Also has the transition to 2013 been smooth, I don't want to get bombarded > on office support calls like I did during the office 2003-2007 transition > > > Jean-Paul Natola > > > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: RE: [Exchange] OST larger than box > > Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 20:47:42 +0000 > > > > +1: Caching other user's mailboxes/calendars in one source. > > > > Also, I've found that Outlook 2010 is not as good about cleaning up > after itself as Outlook 2013 is. You can try to use the "Compact Now" > option in the Data File area to reduce this space (assuming the space isn't > related to shared mailboxes/calendars and is just related to deleted emails > no longer in the mailbox). > > > > -Aakash Shah > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [ > mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > On Behalf Of Dave Lum > > Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 1:37 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Exchange] OST larger than box > > > > I see that frequently but never dug into it. Is this user caching other > > users shared calendars? > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > I have user that has a 15.5 GB mailbox and the OST on her computer is > > > around 18gb > > > what gives? > > > > > > Ex2010/Outlook 2010 > > > > > > TIA > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
