Patrick Schmid said:You can't. Microsoft got rid of the Outlook 2003 native editor and
replaced it with a new native editor that happens to be based on Word.
You are not actually using Word, but a special DLL that contains the
Word functionality needed for writing emails in Outlook.
Why don't you like the new editor?
I agree that the Word editor of 2003 was a slug, but the one from 2007business app. Outlook is a just a sometimes use app that is now so bloated
that I can't afford to keep it open. At least when I could use a tight native
editor instead of the Word bloatware editor I could minimize the issue.
Unfortunately Microsoft thinks their apps are the center of my universe, and
they are not. Major bummer.
I agree that the Word editor of 2003 was a slug, but the one from 2007Patrick Schmid said:Because it is a slug when I am also using Revit, which is by line of
business app. Outlook is a just a sometimes use app that is now so bloated
that I can't afford to keep it open. At least when I could use a tight
native
editor instead of the Word bloatware editor I could minimize the issue.
Unfortunately Microsoft thinks their apps are the center of my universe,
and
they are not. Major bummer.
...and at the same time they reduced the complixity for the end user and the
developers of Outlook add-ins.
--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
Coauthor, Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
-----
I agree that the Word editor of 2003 was a slug, but the one from 2007Patrick Schmid said:Because it is a slug when I am also using Revit, which is by line of
business app. Outlook is a just a sometimes use app that is now so bloated
that I can't afford to keep it open. At least when I could use a tight
native
editor instead of the Word bloatware editor I could minimize the issue.
Unfortunately Microsoft thinks their apps are the center of my universe,
and
they are not. Major bummer.
really should not be. As I said, it is basically a built-in Outlook
editor just with more functionality.
How does the behavior you are describing manifest itself? And when does
it happen?
Are you saying that Outlook just uses too much memory in general? If
that's your complaint, then I doubt that the editor switch really did
anything much to increase Outlook's memory footprint. They just replaced
one built-in editor with another. The main reason they did that was
because it didn't make much sense for them to develop two editors at the
same time. So they decided to save development resources, went to one
editor and invested the development resources into other features.
Roady,
The reason I turned off the Word editor is because it causes two
problems. The first is that it vertically repeats the background image
in a stationary, which offcourse should only be in the left corner of
the mail message. The second problem exists in Outlook 2003 & 2007 (not
2000) for so far I know), which is that when you receive mails with the
stationary as I'm talking about it will crash (hang) Outlook when you
have turned on Word as the primary editor. When you close Outlook and
start it again it shows the new message and you can open it without any
problem.
I looked for a solution to this problem but Microsoft doesn't have any
article for so far I could see about this problem (either the
stationary or crash problem). Do you have any idea?
Greetings,
Mark Wolters
MCDST - MCSA - VCPBE
Roady [MVP] schreef:
...and at the same time they reduced the complixity for the end user and the
developers of Outlook add-ins.
--
Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook]
Coauthor, Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003
http://www.howto-outlook.com/
Outlook FAQ, HowTo, Downloads, Add-Ins and more
-----
I agree that the Word editor of 2003 was a slug, but the one from 2007Patrick Schmid said:Because it is a slug when I am also using Revit, which is by line of
business app. Outlook is a just a sometimes use app that is now so bloated
that I can't afford to keep it open. At least when I could use a tight
native
editor instead of the Word bloatware editor I could minimize the issue.
Unfortunately Microsoft thinks their apps are the center of my universe,
and
they are not. Major bummer.
really should not be. As I said, it is basically a built-in Outlook
editor just with more functionality.
How does the behavior you are describing manifest itself? And when does
it happen?
Are you saying that Outlook just uses too much memory in general? If
that's your complaint, then I doubt that the editor switch really did
anything much to increase Outlook's memory footprint. They just replaced
one built-in editor with another. The main reason they did that was
because it didn't make much sense for them to develop two editors at the
same time. So they decided to save development resources, went to one
editor and invested the development resources into other features.
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.