> The bad news is that all versions of OUTLOOK EXPRESS; and MICROSOFT
OUTLOOK
> 1997, 2000 and 2002 all have MAXIMUM SIZE LIMIT of TWO 2 GIGABYTES for the
> SUM TOTAL ALL OF THE MESSAGES in the local e-mail client.

Not quite. That is a 2 GB limit per PST file in Outlook, not a maximum total
of 2 GB of e-mail.

> As I stated above, Outlook 1997, 2000 and 2002 completely change the
manner
> in which data is stored on the local user's machine, storing that data in
a
> PST file.

Well, that is a little misleading. Changed it from what? Besides, there are
performance reasons for not using such large files. I tell all my clients,
and I myself practice this, that once a PST file gets over 1 GB, split it.
You can create and use additional PST files.

> Outlook 2000 also started using an OST file to determine the last
> synchronization with the mail server running in "exchange mode".  Again,
> this file is ANSI based and, as such, has a size limitation of 2 gig,
> although for all practical purposes, if an OST file is over 1.87 gig,
users
> will begin to experience difficulty.

Again, not quite correct information. The OST file is only created/used if
Outlook is configured as an Exchange (corporate) client AND is configured
for offline. And gee golly wilikers if the PST has a limit of 2 GB
(practicle 1.75) then I would think the OST would be the same. Now your
posting this is making me think about this and I will add this to my check
list for workstations, as some user, and especially those with laptops that
may have big mail boxes also may have big OST files.

> While I am not normally an MS proponent, Outlook 2003 not only allows a
much
> larger database of messages, but is much more stable than any previous
> version of Outlook.  We've upgraded about 5,000 workstations for corporate
> customers so far.  Even though there are alternatives out there, many
people
> prefer to stay with Outlook.

While I agree with your assement of Outlook 2003, I still recommend that PST
files not be allowed grow larger than 1.5 GB as file fragmentation will
still occur and the larger the file the harder to defrag. (We do defrag our
workstations from time to time, don't we?)

John T
eServices For You

"Seek, and ye shall find!"



To Unsubscribe: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
List Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
Knowledge Base/FAQ: http://www.ipswitch.com/support/IMail/

Reply via email to