Outlook file system: more reliable than OE?

[Steve Hawkins]

Hi all,

2 users on this pc one using Outlook the other OE (almost poetree!)

I've lost half my OE mail after a failed compaction. Other user still going
strong with 7000 plus in the Outlook Inbox. My stuff was filed in user
identified files but I lost it: Outlook user refuses to file!

In the OE columns I notice a lot of tales of woe re lost mail and
compaction, but a quick look down your Outlook news appears to have no
similar desperate inquiries (is this just a good day or...).

So, can someone explain the different filing and compaction
options/processes in Outlook; and should I be moving my stuff to it instead
of OE?

Regards,

SteveH

 

[BillR [MVP]]

I wouldn't move it just because of a different storage system. There is no
substitute for back-up for both applications. I suggest you look at the
differences between the two applications and if Outlook would suit your
needs. I find Outlook to be more suitable even if only using email.
There can still be corruption of data with Outlook and its storage system.

 

[SgtRich]

2 users on this pc one using Outlook the other OE (almost poetree!)

I've lost half my OE mail after a failed compaction. Other user still going
strong with 7000 plus in the Outlook Inbox.

The user with over 7000 messages in their Outlook Inbox will,
eventually, wind up with a corrupted data store, just as you did.

Inboxes should NEVER be used for storage. Once read, messages should
either be deleted or moved to other, user created folders.

Unlike OE, Outlook *never* compacts on its own but relies on the user
compacting folders on their own. It must be kept in mind that, if not
compacted, ANY message data store will become corrupted.

In OE, if compaction is allowed to finish on its own, the data store
is pretty stable, although the same advice as above applies: never use
program default folders (Inbox, Outbox, Sent, Deleted) as storage
folders. Always move messages that you want to retain to other user
created folders.