RE: Outlook 2003 - Bookmark Not Valid
I have the same problem using 2003 Server, 2003 Exchange but with no 5.5's in the mix. Does not appear to have anything to do with Outlook version - tried 2000 and 2003. I'm using XP as my client machine. I have the above plus a DC in a test environment and posted the info a while back. Unfortunately there were no responses, so have been trying to troubleshoot for a while now on-and-off. Stu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 11:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 - Bookmark Not Valid I was wondering if anyone had seen this before: This is a new 2003 Server with Exchange 2003 - setup with the ADC to an Exchange 5.5 SP4 - NT 4.0 SP6a server for migration. When you migrate an account or create one onto the new server (E2003) outlook complains that the bookmark is not valid when you try and create the profile in outlook. Also, when you migrate someone you may not see that error unless you try and access the GAL. Is this an AD problem? I am not sure where to begin troubleshooting it. Any help is appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be legally privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of the contents to any other person. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
RE: Outlook 2003 - Bookmark Not Valid
Why don't you two post the complete error message, along with the Error Code? A quick search of the MSKB turned up this article: Exstensible Storage Engine 98 Error Codes 0 to -1048 http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;266361Product=exch2 003 (although I couldn't get to the referenced link of ALL ESE error codes) Are you by chance using Outlook 2003 with Business Contact Manager? When I searched that category with the error message given, I got a whole slew of results back. Jim -Original Message- From: Ward, Stuart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 9:01 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 - Bookmark Not Valid I have the same problem using 2003 Server, 2003 Exchange but with no 5.5's in the mix. Does not appear to have anything to do with Outlook version - tried 2000 and 2003. I'm using XP as my client machine. I have the above plus a DC in a test environment and posted the info a while back. Unfortunately there were no responses, so have been trying to troubleshoot for a while now on-and-off. Stu -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 11:06 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 - Bookmark Not Valid I was wondering if anyone had seen this before: This is a new 2003 Server with Exchange 2003 - setup with the ADC to an Exchange 5.5 SP4 - NT 4.0 SP6a server for migration. When you migrate an account or create one onto the new server (E2003) outlook complains that the bookmark is not valid when you try and create the profile in outlook. Also, when you migrate someone you may not see that error unless you try and access the GAL. Is this an AD problem? I am not sure where to begin troubleshooting it. Any help is appreciated. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be legally privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender and permanently delete the e-mail and any attachments immediately. You should not retain, copy or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, nor disclose all or any part of the contents to any other person. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe via postal mail, please contact us at: Jupitermedia Corp. Attn: Discussion List Management 475 Park Avenue South New York, NY 10016 Please include the email address which you have been contacted with.
RE: Outlook 2003 OST Issue
There is a known issue with using Outlook 2K3 with Exchange 5.5. Check Microsoft's KB. John Matteson Geac Corporate ISS (404) 239 - 2981 Atlanta, Georgia, USA. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of EXLIST Posted At: Sunday, December 28, 2003 4:57 PM Posted To: Exchange Discussion List Conversation: Outlook 2003 OST Issue Subject: Outlook 2003 OST Issue I apologize if this has been discussed recently. I haven't been checking this mailbox and just noticed the last message received was 10/01/03. My archive goes back to 11/2001 though. I have an issue with Outlook 2003 that I did NOT have through the Beta's. Now that I am running the RTM on my laptop I have noticed that I am missing Calendar items. This follows other folders as well, built in or added to synch. OL will report when On Line that it is in synch. I can audit a folder and see the store and local are not in synch. For example; If I am out for several days and work offline and add entries in my Calendar for billable work. I return to the office and connect to the LAN | work on line and synch. Go to another PC on the LAN in the same domain and open OL 2003 as me, some of those entries are missing. Workaround: on the laptop | open any folder | press Shift+F9 to force the folder to synch. ALL items are synched. This works for all folders. I have been doing this to make sure my offline changes are in the store. I have already removed | rebooted | re-installed Office 2003, no change. Client: WINXP PRO SP1 Server: WIN2K SP3, EX 5.5 SP4 Happy New Year to All Mark _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5 Strange Behavior
Could it be because you are using the local store cache mode with your Outlook 2003 profile? The cache does not know anything about the limit, but when it starts synchronizing things, it bumps into the online limit and then generates an NDR... Just a guess. Sincerely, Andrey Fyodorov, Exchange MVP Systems Engineer Messaging and Collaboration Spherion -Original Message- From: Barry Kuske [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 11:53 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Fw: Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5 Strange Behavior My boss currently has over 230 MB worth of Mail in his mailbox. He has asked me to bump it to 250 MB in the Private Info. Store Limits because he will be on vacation. I have done that but he is still getting bounced at 230 MB. This was working prior to the upgrade to Outlook 2003. Has anyone seen this? Also Outlook 2003 accepts the mail and tries to send it even if he is over his limit. In Outlook 2000 it would not let you send if you were over your limit. It would tell you that you were over. Outlook 2003 bounces the message on you. Anyone know how to change this behavior and make it act more like Outlook 2000. Thanks, Barry Kuske _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5 Strange Behavior
Yes it appears that the Exchange Cache Mode was what was causing the problem. I turned it off and all appears to be working well now. Is this just an issue between Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5? I would like to have this feature enabled because it really does make the end user experience pretty transparent when docking and undocking laptops. Thanks, Barry _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5 Strange Behavior
Not sure, but my guestimate is that this is how it would work with any version of Exchange. -Original Message- From: Barry Kuske [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 5:41 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5 Strange Behavior Yes it appears that the Exchange Cache Mode was what was causing the problem. I turned it off and all appears to be working well now. Is this just an issue between Outlook 2003 and Exchange 5.5? I would like to have this feature enabled because it really does make the end user experience pretty transparent when docking and undocking laptops. Thanks, Barry _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
S Actually, they are sending two of us. :) Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 2:59 PM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. And how does little old Clark County have the money to send their sysadmin to two conferences in one year? Sheesh!! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com Where do you want to ride today? http://www.davidsonbicycles.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ
RE: Outlook 2003.
Oh man. They need to fix the traffic problem to the amphitheater before they do that :) It took me nearly 2 and a half hours to get out a few weeks ago. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 9:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. S Actually, they are sending two of us. :) Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 2:59 PM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. And how does little old Clark County have the money to send their sysadmin to two conferences in one year? Sheesh!! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com Where do you want to ride today? http://www.davidsonbicycles.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED
RE: Outlook 2003.
Two and a half hours ain't bad from what I hear. :) I have yet to go there yet. I know that I left Hazel Dell a couple of weeks ago and thought that there was a really bad accident since the traffic was stopped. I hear that it is nice, but, yeah the traffic sucks from what I have seen. I am not sure what the deal is with it and the county. I know that I get shown no love when I offer to check mail connectivity for each concert. I would think that they would want to be certain that it was working!!! :) Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Christopher Hummert [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 9:53 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Oh man. They need to fix the traffic problem to the amphitheater before they do that :) It took me nearly 2 and a half hours to get out a few weeks ago. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 9:43 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. S Actually, they are sending two of us. :) Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 2:59 PM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. And how does little old Clark County have the money to send their sysadmin to two conferences in one year? Sheesh!! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com Where do you want to ride today? http://www.davidsonbicycles.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator
RE: Outlook 2003.
I was just at a office release kick off that MS had and they also said that the best path from 5.5 was a new server and Exchange 2003 Nathaniel Dean EVMS Health Services 721 Fairfax Ave 101 Norfolk VA 23507 757-446-0317 -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 6:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. And how does little old Clark County have the money to send their sysadmin to two conferences in one year? Sheesh!! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com Where do you want to ride today? http://www.davidsonbicycles.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http
RE: Outlook 2003.
Another thing we've been saying for years. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dean, Nathaniel, V. Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 11:37 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I was just at a office release kick off that MS had and they also said that the best path from 5.5 was a new server and Exchange 2003 Nathaniel Dean EVMS Health Services 721 Fairfax Ave 101 Norfolk VA 23507 757-446-0317 -Original Message- From: Darcy Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 6:01 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. And how does little old Clark County have the money to send their sysadmin to two conferences in one year? Sheesh!! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com Where do you want to ride today? http://www.davidsonbicycles.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED
RE: Outlook 2003.
It does for SPLA. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Erick Thompson Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
And how does little old Clark County have the money to send their sysadmin to two conferences in one year? Sheesh!! Darcy Adams Sr. Exchange Administrator Getty Images Tel 206-925-6617 Cell 206-255-0169 http://www.gettyimages.com Where do you want to ride today? http://www.davidsonbicycles.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] === This email and its contents are confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not disclose
RE: Outlook 2003.
Well, if you're going to include 3rd party software: salesforce.com's outlook edition doesn't work -- unloads itself, and their won't-hold-you-to-it time line is 1Q04 for support. Synchronization (intellisync-based) works fine. Also, iHateSpam 3.x is unsupported, although I didn't have any problems with it. -Walden Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516) 627-3800 x11 (208) 692-3308 eFax [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TechSoftInc.com Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur. (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.) -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
I am using the Blackberry desktop with outlook 2003. I am using the final released Outlook (11.5608.5606) and Desktop Manager 3.6.0.54. I used to have an older version of the desktop manager which did NOT work with outlook 2003. Tom -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
Definitely third party software. Sometimes it seems like it is more important to them that their niche software works more than Outlook. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Walden H. Leverich III [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 6:44 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Well, if you're going to include 3rd party software: salesforce.com's outlook edition doesn't work -- unloads itself, and their won't-hold-you-to-it time line is 1Q04 for support. Synchronization (intellisync-based) works fine. Also, iHateSpam 3.x is unsupported, although I didn't have any problems with it. -Walden Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516) 627-3800 x11 (208) 692-3308 eFax [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TechSoftInc.com Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur. (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.) -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
Well I will be seeing you there then Ken, looking forward to what they're presenting on 99.99% uptime without clustering. Anthony L. Sollars Technology Consultant Information Technology Division, PACCAR Inc. 480 Houser Way North, Renton Wa., 98055 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ( 425.254.4845 ) 425.681.4190 2 425.793.6000 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:24 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com
RE: Outlook 2003.
FWIW, We are using the latest BES and the 3.6.0.54 Desktop manager, Blackberry is great on Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003. -Warren -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alverson, Tom Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 6:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I am using the Blackberry desktop with outlook 2003. I am using the final released Outlook (11.5608.5606) and Desktop Manager 3.6.0.54. I used to have an older version of the desktop manager which did NOT work with outlook 2003. Tom -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
We are also having a problem that the Microsoft CRM Client is also unsupported. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Walden H. Leverich III Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 9:46 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Well, if you're going to include 3rd party software: salesforce.com's outlook edition doesn't work -- unloads itself, and their won't-hold-you-to-it time line is 1Q04 for support. Synchronization (intellisync-based) works fine. Also, iHateSpam 3.x is unsupported, although I didn't have any problems with it. -Walden Walden H Leverich III President Tech Software (516) 627-3800 x11 (208) 692-3308 eFax [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.TechSoftInc.com Quiquid latine dictum sit altum viditur. (Whatever is said in Latin seems profound.) -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
You have BES running on Exchange 2003? I met with Blackberry last week and they told me it was unsupported and they do not have any ETA on support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Warren Cundy Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. FWIW, We are using the latest BES and the 3.6.0.54 Desktop manager, Blackberry is great on Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003. -Warren -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alverson, Tom Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 6:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I am using the Blackberry desktop with outlook 2003. I am using the final released Outlook (11.5608.5606) and Desktop Manager 3.6.0.54. I used to have an older version of the desktop manager which did NOT work with outlook 2003. Tom -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
I didn't talk to Blackberry support myself, but a colleague here went up a few levels of tech support with them and confirmed that it worked. We tested, and it did. We aren't on native 2003 yet. I'll be checking back with them before that. -Warren -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Finnesey Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. You have BES running on Exchange 2003? I met with Blackberry last week and they told me it was unsupported and they do not have any ETA on support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Warren Cundy Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. FWIW, We are using the latest BES and the 3.6.0.54 Desktop manager, Blackberry is great on Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003. -Warren -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alverson, Tom Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 6:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I am using the Blackberry desktop with outlook 2003. I am using the final released Outlook (11.5608.5606) and Desktop Manager 3.6.0.54. I used to have an older version of the desktop manager which did NOT work with outlook 2003. Tom -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
We are on native 2003 now and I have talked with two people to day at Blackberry one tells me it will work and the other tells me it will not work. We are going to do some testing this weekend. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Warren Cundy Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 2:12 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I didn't talk to Blackberry support myself, but a colleague here went up a few levels of tech support with them and confirmed that it worked. We tested, and it did. We aren't on native 2003 yet. I'll be checking back with them before that. -Warren -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ryan Finnesey Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 10:48 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. You have BES running on Exchange 2003? I met with Blackberry last week and they told me it was unsupported and they do not have any ETA on support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Warren Cundy Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:44 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. FWIW, We are using the latest BES and the 3.6.0.54 Desktop manager, Blackberry is great on Exchange 2003/Outlook 2003. -Warren -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alverson, Tom Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 6:52 AM To: Exchange Discussions Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I am using the Blackberry desktop with outlook 2003. I am using the final released Outlook (11.5608.5606) and Desktop Manager 3.6.0.54. I used to have an older version of the desktop manager which did NOT work with outlook 2003. Tom -Original Message- From: Ryan Finnesey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2003 12:21 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto
RE: Outlook 2003.
Nope. Exchange CAL for 2000 lets you use Outlook 2002 (XP). You must purchase an Exchange 2003 CAL in order to use Outlook 2003. (You can still purchase Outlook or Office 2003 separately and use that with an Exchange 2000 CAL to connect to an Exchange 2000 server). -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 4:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I don't think I was totally clear. I was wondering if the Exchange CAL allowed me to use Outlook 2003 only (not all of Office). I wouldn't assume that it would allow me to use all of office. We're on Office 2k, and will stick with that for a little bit longer, but I would like to move to Outlook 2003. Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ben Winzenz Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang= english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang
RE: Outlook 2003.
No only problem I have found is no Blackberry desktop support. Ryan -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
There has been an issue raised with the store.exe service crashing with outlook 2003 clients being used in some cases. MS has released a store.exe patch that fixes it. One exch 5.5 server out 36 we have had this issue, and the patch fixed it. Anthony L. Sollars Technology Consultant Information Technology Division, PACCAR Inc. 480 Houser Way North, Renton Wa., 98055 * [EMAIL PROTECTED] ( 425.254.4845 ) 425.681.4190 2 425.793.6000 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
OL 2003 works great with Exchange 5.5 If you use OWA, there is hotfix you will want to install to ensure compatability with OL2003 and E55 OWA users. There is also one for OL2003 rules that can cause issues with Exchange 5.5. If I could remember the KB numbers I would post them. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
Martin, Here is the one for OL2003 causing issues with the Ex5.5 store. http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=829418 829418 - XADM: Information Store Intermittently Stops Responding and an Access Violation Occurs in EcDSDNFromSz -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:56 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. OL 2003 works great with Exchange 5.5 If you use OWA, there is hotfix you will want to install to ensure compatability with OL2003 and E55 OWA users. There is also one for OL2003 rules that can cause issues with Exchange 5.5. If I could remember the KB numbers I would post them. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
I agree with checking with MS licensing rep however, I've never assumed that a license to use Outlook was a license to use Office but quite the opposite. Paul Chinnery Network Administrator Mem Med Ctr -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:10 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
http://www.microsoft.com/exchange/howtobuy/LicensingFAQ.asp This may answer some of your questions. I know it's confusing. Check with your licensing rep to be sure (and for your own legal protection). You must have the latest version of an Exchange CAL in order to use the latest version of the Outlook client. The Outlook usage rights are separate from Office (An Exchange CAL only grants the right to use Outlook, not the entire Office suite). Ex2k3 CAL = right to install and use Outlook 2003 or earlier versions Ex2k CAL = right to install and use Outlook XP or earlier versions In your situation (Exchange 2000 server, Full Office 2000 licenses) you should be able to use those purchased copies of Outlook 2000 to connect to the Exchange 2000 server. You didn't mention CALs. Assuming you also have Exchange 2000 CALs, you should be fine to use Outlook 2000. In order to use Outlook 2003 to connect to your Exchange 2000 server, you would need to do one of the following (I'm purposely excluding SA and other similar programs): 1) purchase Outlook 2003 2) purchase Office 2003 3) purchase Exchange 2003 CALs (or comparable CAL) -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:07 PM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
So true Even then I have gotten conflicting answers. I have been told that we have purchased everything. I am just dragging my feet until there is service pack released for Exchange 2003. That is how I got buy-off for skipping 2000 and going straight to 2003. At TechEd they made it seem that the best path from Exchange 5.5 was to go straight to 2003. I am going to Orlando next month and will see what they say there. Thanks again. Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 -Original Message- From: Ben Winzenz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange 5.5 List Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
I don't think I was totally clear. I was wondering if the Exchange CAL allowed me to use Outlook 2003 only (not all of Office). I wouldn't assume that it would allow me to use all of office. We're on Office 2k, and will stick with that for a little bit longer, but I would like to move to Outlook 2003. Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ben Winzenz Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003.
And I am saying you have to check with MS Licensing to get a straight answer. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL included a license for Outlook 2003. Personally, I would not think that an Exchange 2000 CAL covers Outlook 2003, but hey, I'm don't work for Microsoft. They have an 800 number you can call with licensing questions 1-800-642-7676. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 3:10 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. I don't think I was totally clear. I was wondering if the Exchange CAL allowed me to use Outlook 2003 only (not all of Office). I wouldn't assume that it would allow me to use all of office. We're on Office 2k, and will stick with that for a little bit longer, but I would like to move to Outlook 2003. Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Ben Winzenz Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 11:10 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Check with your MS licensing rep for exact details. I was told that each Exchange 2003 CAL includes a license to use Outlook 2003, but not all of Office. I don't believe that you can use Exchange 2000 CAL's do to this, though. Again, to be sure, check with MS. They are the only ones authorized to quote official licensing. Ben Winzenz Network Engineer Gardner White (317) 581-1580 ext 418 -Original Message- From: Erick Thompson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Thursday, October 16, 2003 1:07 PM Posted To: Exchange (Swynk) Conversation: Outlook 2003. Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Does Outlook 2003 have the same licensing setup as the other versions? That is, I have an Exchange 2000 server, and licenses for Office 2000. Can I install Outlook 2003 on workstations using the Exchange CALs? Thanks, Erick -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Arlo Clizer Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:57 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003. Sure, do it. Outlook 2003 is really nice. We are upgrading from 2000 straight to 2003. What a difference! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 7:51 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003. We are currently running Exchange 5.5 and are looking at moving to Exchange 2003 and skipping Exchange 2000. We are currently running Outlook 2002 on our client systems. My question is... Are there any reasons not to begin moving our client desktops to Outlook 2003? Does anyone know of any compatibility issues running it against Exchange 5.5 or having clients with mixed versions aside from the fact that features that are introduced in Outlook 2003 will not be available to those clients that still have Outlook 2002? I have installed it on my desk and really like it once I have figured out where everything went to. I would like to start putting it on others so that we can have a more gradual rollout. Thanks Ken Powell Systems Administrator Clark County Office of Budget and Information Services (OBIS) Vancouver, Washington [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: (360) 397-6121 x4658 Fax: (360) 759-6001 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi
RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters
I would guess that the junk mail filters are using rules, and you might need to set Continue Processing Rules But then if you've already filtered them are they junk? Harriet -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 09:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters I know this isn't an outlook support list, but I thought there must be plenty of Outlook experts in an Exchange discussion list :p The problem I'm having is that if I have rules set to move mails from the inbox to other folders for some reason, this prevents the Junk Email filters from working, and I would like to use the safe lists that are built into Outlook 2003. Anyone know a way around this? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters
Well in outlook 2003, the junk rules are replaced with a built in filter facility, a separate entry from normal rules. The email is definintly Junk, but I'm wanting to use the safe lists that are now built in. With safe lists all emails are moved to Junk Email unless the sender is on your safe list. The problem is if you have any other rules set to move the emails it prevents the Junk Mail feature from working as it should. I have already turned off stop processing other rules. Thanks for the help though :) -Original Message- From: Wood, Harriet [CCS] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 10:48 To: Exchange Discussions I would guess that the junk mail filters are using rules, and you might need to set Continue Processing Rules But then if you've already filtered them are they junk? Harriet -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 09:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters I know this isn't an outlook support list, but I thought there must be plenty of Outlook experts in an Exchange discussion list :p The problem I'm having is that if I have rules set to move mails from the inbox to other folders for some reason, this prevents the Junk Email filters from working, and I would like to use the safe lists that are built into Outlook 2003. Anyone know a way around this? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters
Ah, you want to use the White list capability. May I suggest instead you just set Junk E-mail to High and use your usual rules. That works exceptionally well for me; I get maybe 2-3 spam in my mailbox a day. I get more than 150 in the Junk e-mail folder that I never have to deal with. -Ben- Ben M. Schorr Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neil Doody Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 00:00 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters Well in outlook 2003, the junk rules are replaced with a built in filter facility, a separate entry from normal rules. The email is definintly Junk, but I'm wanting to use the safe lists that are now built in. With safe lists all emails are moved to Junk Email unless the sender is on your safe list. The problem is if you have any other rules set to move the emails it prevents the Junk Mail feature from working as it should. I have already turned off stop processing other rules. Thanks for the help though :) -Original Message- From: Wood, Harriet [CCS] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 10:48 To: Exchange Discussions I would guess that the junk mail filters are using rules, and you might need to set Continue Processing Rules But then if you've already filtered them are they junk? Harriet -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 09:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters I know this isn't an outlook support list, but I thought there must be plenty of Outlook experts in an Exchange discussion list :p The problem I'm having is that if I have rules set to move mails from the inbox to other folders for some reason, this prevents the Junk Email filters from working, and I would like to use the safe lists that are built into Outlook 2003. Anyone know a way around this? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters
Yah, but the problem is, even with my Junk E-mail set to High, my usual rules are over-riding the built in Junk Filters of Outlook 2003. So if I have my normal rules turned off, the Junk Mail filter works well an moves mail from the inbox into the Junk Mail folder and leaves none-junk in the Inbox. If I have my rules turned on, these take precedence and the mail is moved via the rule and the Junk is no longer sorted out. i.e. the rule moves the junk into the folder the rule has specified, preventing the built in junk filters within outlook 2003 from working. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 11:06 To: Exchange Discussions Ah, you want to use the White list capability. May I suggest instead you just set Junk E-mail to High and use your usual rules. That works exceptionally well for me; I get maybe 2-3 spam in my mailbox a day. I get more than 150 in the Junk e-mail folder that I never have to deal with. -Ben- Ben M. Schorr Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neil Doody Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 00:00 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters Well in outlook 2003, the junk rules are replaced with a built in filter facility, a separate entry from normal rules. The email is definintly Junk, but I'm wanting to use the safe lists that are now built in. With safe lists all emails are moved to Junk Email unless the sender is on your safe list. The problem is if you have any other rules set to move the emails it prevents the Junk Mail feature from working as it should. I have already turned off stop processing other rules. Thanks for the help though :) -Original Message- From: Wood, Harriet [CCS] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 10:48 To: Exchange Discussions I would guess that the junk mail filters are using rules, and you might need to set Continue Processing Rules But then if you've already filtered them are they junk? Harriet -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 09:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters I know this isn't an outlook support list, but I thought there must be plenty of Outlook experts in an Exchange discussion list :p The problem I'm having is that if I have rules set to move mails from the inbox to other folders for some reason, this prevents the Junk Email filters from working, and I would like to use the safe lists that are built into Outlook 2003. Anyone know a way around this? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters
This was an explicit design decision based on client feedback during the beta. The overwhelming response was, that if I have rules touching my mail, it is for a reason, don't treat it as spam. Unfortunately it appears that you are in the minority on this one, it's unlikely that the behavior you see now will change anytime soon. -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Posted At: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 3:51 AM Posted To: swynk Conversation: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters Subject: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters I know this isn't an outlook support list, but I thought there must be plenty of Outlook experts in an Exchange discussion list :p The problem I'm having is that if I have rules set to move mails from the inbox to other folders for some reason, this prevents the Junk Email filters from working, and I would like to use the safe lists that are built into Outlook 2003. Anyone know a way around this? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters
Is it the order your rules are firing off in? Since I don't have OL2003 yet, I'm not sure how this is configured yet, but can you move the Junk Filters rule to the top of the list, so that it fires off first? -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 3:31 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters Yah, but the problem is, even with my Junk E-mail set to High, my usual rules are over-riding the built in Junk Filters of Outlook 2003. So if I have my normal rules turned off, the Junk Mail filter works well an moves mail from the inbox into the Junk Mail folder and leaves none-junk in the Inbox. If I have my rules turned on, these take precedence and the mail is moved via the rule and the Junk is no longer sorted out. i.e. the rule moves the junk into the folder the rule has specified, preventing the built in junk filters within outlook 2003 from working. -Original Message- From: Ben Schorr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 11:06 To: Exchange Discussions Ah, you want to use the White list capability. May I suggest instead you just set Junk E-mail to High and use your usual rules. That works exceptionally well for me; I get maybe 2-3 spam in my mailbox a day. I get more than 150 in the Junk e-mail folder that I never have to deal with. -Ben- Ben M. Schorr Director of Information Services Damon Key Leong Kupchak Hastert http://www.hawaiilawyer.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Neil Doody Sent: Wednesday, September 24, 2003 00:00 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters Well in outlook 2003, the junk rules are replaced with a built in filter facility, a separate entry from normal rules. The email is definintly Junk, but I'm wanting to use the safe lists that are now built in. With safe lists all emails are moved to Junk Email unless the sender is on your safe list. The problem is if you have any other rules set to move the emails it prevents the Junk Mail feature from working as it should. I have already turned off stop processing other rules. Thanks for the help though :) -Original Message- From: Wood, Harriet [CCS] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 10:48 To: Exchange Discussions I would guess that the junk mail filters are using rules, and you might need to set Continue Processing Rules But then if you've already filtered them are they junk? Harriet -Original Message- From: Neil Doody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 24 September 2003 09:51 To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 Junk Mail Filters I know this isn't an outlook support list, but I thought there must be plenty of Outlook experts in an Exchange discussion list :p The problem I'm having is that if I have rules set to move mails from the inbox to other folders for some reason, this prevents the Junk Email filters from working, and I would like to use the safe lists that are built into Outlook 2003. Anyone know a way around this? _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
Actually it comes out to be about twice the size of the mailbox. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 6:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
Only the initial synchronization would take time. After that, only the deltas are synched. And 225MB? How much time would that take to transfer over a typical corporate network? 100Mb/S? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
Well, I don't have 100Mb/S to my house (assuming you are talking about MAPI/HTTP, however it is a very cool feature and 225MB is not a huge mailbox. So, yes the whole 225MB is brought down, and depending on your new-mail traffic (ie. how many of these lists you are on) you may see some initial sync delays each startup. -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 Only the initial synchronization would take time. After that, only the deltas are synched. And 225MB? How much time would that take to transfer over a typical corporate network? 100Mb/S? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
-Original Message- From: Mark Rotman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 12 June 2003 14:28 To: Exchange Discussions Well, I don't have 100Mb/S to my house (assuming you are talking about MAPI/HTTP, however it is a very cool feature and 225MB is not a huge mailbox. So, yes the whole 225MB is brought down, and depending on your new-mail traffic (ie. how many of these lists you are on) you may see some initial sync delays each startup. But of course if you are working from home with O2002 using an OST you still have this problem when sync-ing a large mailbox for the first time, and so on, so its not like its going to get worse. -- Robert Moir Microsoft MVP Senior IT Systems Engineer Luton Sixth Form College print chr(66) chr(79) chr(70) chr(72) _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
is that because it accounts for both the .edb and .stm files? :) -Original Message- From: Martin Blackstone [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:15 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 Actually it comes out to be about twice the size of the mailbox. -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 6:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
I wasn't thinking of the bandwidth side, that's not a problem. Is the local copy enabled by default? Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good design. I was just thinking about using different profiles on the same PC. If you can disable it, then no worries. -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Only the initial synchronization would take time. After that, only the deltas are synched. And 225MB? How much time would that take to transfer over a typical corporate network? 100Mb/S? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
I dont believe its enabled by default. - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:07 AM Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 I wasn't thinking of the bandwidth side, that's not a problem. Is the local copy enabled by default? Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good design. I was just thinking about using different profiles on the same PC. If you can disable it, then no worries. -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Only the initial synchronization would take time. After that, only the deltas are synched. And 225MB? How much time would that take to transfer over a typical corporate network? 100Mb/S? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
The local cache file would be associated with the user profile. Are you concerned that if I log into your PC I can get to your email by searching under C:\Documents and Settings\Mwoodruff\Juicy_OST_File ? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:08 AM To: Exchange Discussions I wasn't thinking of the bandwidth side, that's not a problem. Is the local copy enabled by default? Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good design. I was just thinking about using different profiles on the same PC. If you can disable it, then no worries. -Original Message- From: Erik Sojka [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:18 AM To: Exchange Discussions Only the initial synchronization would take time. After that, only the deltas are synched. And 225MB? How much time would that take to transfer over a typical corporate network? 100Mb/S? -Original Message- From: Woodruff, Michael [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 9:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode= lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchanget ext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
It could be a lot bigger - public folder favorites are also stored locally. -Original Message- I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. Reviewing GFI Mail Essentials v8 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
'tis too, at least in current builds. AFAIK, it will remain default in later builds too. - Original Message - I dont believe its enabled by default. - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:07 AM Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 I wasn't thinking of the bandwidth side, that's not a problem. Is the local copy enabled by default? Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good design. I was just thinking about using different profiles on the same PC. If you can disable it, then no worries. Reviewing GFI Mail Essentials v8 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
That is where the OS2k3 resource kit comes in. Build a custom installation and you have the ability to turn it off as the default. Best Regards, Dan Bartley -Original Message- From: Diane Poremsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:27 To: Exchange Discussions 'tis too, at least in current builds. AFAIK, it will remain default in later builds too. - Original Message - I dont believe its enabled by default. - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:07 AM Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 I wasn't thinking of the bandwidth side, that's not a problem. Is the local copy enabled by default? Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good design. I was just thinking about using different profiles on the same PC. If you can disable it, then no worries. Reviewing GFI Mail Essentials v8 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=; lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
Yer right. I just created a new profile and the box is checked. At least you can uncheck it if desired before you actually finish creating the profile g - Original Message - From: Diane Poremsky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 12:26 PM Subject: Re: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 'tis too, at least in current builds. AFAIK, it will remain default in later builds too. - Original Message - I dont believe its enabled by default. - Original Message - From: Woodruff, Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Exchange Discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 10:07 AM Subject: RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 I wasn't thinking of the bandwidth side, that's not a problem. Is the local copy enabled by default? Don't get me wrong, I think it's a very good design. I was just thinking about using different profiles on the same PC. If you can disable it, then no worries. Reviewing GFI Mail Essentials v8 _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Outlook 2003 Beta 2
I love the feature and I think your remote users will too. I was getting way tired of having Outlook hang when I accidentally selected a message with a large attachment and Oulook tried to retireve it for viewing in the preview pane. Ed Crowley MCSE+Internet MVP Freelance E-Mail Philosopher Protecting the world from PSTs and Bricked Backups!T -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Woodruff, Michael Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2003 6:13 AM To: Exchange Discussions Subject: Outlook 2003 Beta 2 I have a question about the whole cached mode deal. Does it keep an exact replica of your mailbox that is stored on the server? If mine mailbox is 225MB then the local ost would also be 225MB? If so, that sucks. Thanks. _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang =english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _ List posting FAQ: http://www.swinc.com/resource/exch_faq.htm Web Interface: http://intm-dl.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=exchangetext_mode=lang=english To unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Exchange List admin:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
