Thanks! This looks really good.
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 12:05 PM, JRS <[email protected]> wrote: > Check out this Outlook converter, only 60 bucks for a site license.. > > http://www.processtext.com/abcoutlk.html > > > > -- > JRS steinie**[email protected] > Please remove **X** to reply... > > > Facts do not cease to exist just > because they are ignored. > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Steve Tomporowski <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 8:58:37 AM > Subject: Re: [H] Message format in Outlook 2003 > > A little bit of searching and I've found out that we're pretty much > screwed. If we had Word 2003, we could use that as editor and do any > conversion, since we've never upgraded, that's that. > > The whole idea of using rtf is to keep the email and attachment > together. If you save as html, then you have to save the attachment > separately or at least in the screwed up way our system is now. > > As for why, it's fit for a dilbert cartoon. Apparently if the message > is in it's native form, either still in outlook or saved as a .msg > file, our lawyers believe that it is admissible as evidence in court. > As soon as it is changed in form, it's not admissible in court. It > seems that our lawyers believe that we either are or will in the > future do plenty of stuff to get us into legal trouble, so they want > to cover their buttocks. Of course, if one of our customers knows > about this, they can screw us over royally by producing emails they > have, but we have long since deleted. We would have no leg to stand > on. > > Steve > > On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Joe User <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hello Steve, >> >> Friday, January 23, 2009, 8:20:32 AM, you wrote: >> >>> This is a question about a situation at my job. >> >>> The IT department does very strange things here. Stuff will work, >>> then they 'improve' it and then issue a workaround because things >>> don't work anymore. >> >>> Currently we are using Outlook 2003 SP3, mainly because IT got it >>> free. It broke a few processes mainly because we have an older >>> version Office. They didn't upgrade Word, Excel, etc because that >>> would have cost money. Now the Legal department has gotten involved >>> and suddenly saving messages in Outlook format for more than 1 year is >>> now against company policy. Now we have 6 months to convert all .msg >>> files to either .html or .txt or .rtf and delete the original or IT >>> will delete them for us (whether they are converted or not). >> >>> Of the 3 formats, the only one that will preserve attachments without >>> the extra step of saving them separately is .rtf. Of course you know >>> that the old Outlook always worked in rtf but the new Outlook always >>> worked in html. >> >>> My issue is with converting the html files so that you preserve >>> attachments. The IT work around forces you (or more likely Outlook >>> forces you) to convert an html file to text first, only then do you >>> have the option to convert to rtf. In the process, although you do >>> preserve the attachment but the formatting is lost. Inline responses >>> that used to be in color are now more difficult to see and God forbid >>> if you actually had a table in there. >> >>> So after all this preample, is there a way to convert directly from an >>> html format in the .msg files to rtf? >> >>> Just for reference, the IT work around is to open the .msg file, >>> Edit-Edit Message-Format-Text (the only options shown are text and >>> html), the again Edit-Edit Message-Format-Rich Text. >> >>> I've only have just over 3000 messages to go.... >> >>> Thanks....Steve >> >> >> This sounds retarded. A lot of work to save a file that could just be >> left the way it is and it would be fine. Why must they be rtf? If it's >> all about attachments and, while not mentioned, I assume these >> attachments are threaded emails or some document format, why not just >> leave them as html? Seems like this is being overly complicated. >> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> joeuser - Still looking for the 'any' key... >> >> "...now these points of data make a beautiful line..." >> >> >
