Absolutely staggering

And in fact I'm rather lost for words by it.

With Outlook Express on XP, the email inbox, like all other folders, was
stored as a single chunk DBX file. It was not accessed when one opened OE
unless they had specifically chosen to do so.

Put simply, this meant OE opened extremely quickly as it only opened the
shell of the program, and did not retrieve its guts unless the user went
there of their own volition.

However, moving forward to Windows Mail and I can't quite believe the
backwards steps MS have taken here. Not only have they, in their wisdom,
converted the former DBX into an individual array of each message
individually saved as an eml file, but they have also (apparently) made
Windows Mail access this collection by default on opening the app (I can see
no option to avoid this), and for those who have thousands of messages, made
Windows Mail incredibly slow as a result.

I am really hoping I am missing something massive here, because it seems
astonishing to me that MS felt this was a better and more efficient way to
manage the email stores and email app than how OE did it.

Can someone shed light on this?

Please visit the "Discussions in Windows Mail Newsgroup"
and repost your question there:
http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...4-d4dd8dadff28

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows Shell/User

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Danny" wrote:

And in fact I'm rather lost for words by it.

With Outlook Express on XP, the email inbox, like all other folders, was
stored as a single chunk DBX file. It was not accessed when one opened OE
unless they had specifically chosen to do so.

Put simply, this meant OE opened extremely quickly as it only opened the
shell of the program, and did not retrieve its guts unless the user went
there of their own volition.

However, moving forward to Windows Mail and I can't quite believe the
backwards steps MS have taken here. Not only have they, in their wisdom,
converted the former DBX into an individual array of each message
individually saved as an eml file, but they have also (apparently) made
Windows Mail access this collection by default on opening the app (I can see
no option to avoid this), and for those who have thousands of messages, made
Windows Mail incredibly slow as a result.

I am really hoping I am missing something massive here, because it seems
astonishing to me that MS felt this was a better and more efficient way to
manage the email stores and email app than how OE did it.

Can someone shed light on this?

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:CE49C851-3960-47F4-914C-9FB9FE14BE69@microsoft.com...
> Please visit the "Discussions in Windows Mail Newsgroup"
> and repost your question there:
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...4-d4dd8dadff28
>

Thank you for the reply, I will.

A good response to avoid the obvious....YES.

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message
news:CE49C851-3960-47F4-914C-9FB9FE14BE69@microsoft.com...
> Please visit the "Discussions in Windows Mail Newsgroup"
> and repost your question there:
> http://windowshelp.microsoft.com/com...4-d4dd8dadff28
>
> --
> Carey Frisch
> Microsoft MVP
> Windows Shell/User
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Danny" wrote:
>
> And in fact I'm rather lost for words by it.
>
> With Outlook Express on XP, the email inbox, like all other folders, was
> stored as a single chunk DBX file. It was not accessed when one opened OE
> unless they had specifically chosen to do so.
>
> Put simply, this meant OE opened extremely quickly as it only opened the
> shell of the program, and did not retrieve its guts unless the user went
> there of their own volition.
>
> However, moving forward to Windows Mail and I can't quite believe the
> backwards steps MS have taken here. Not only have they, in their wisdom,
> converted the former DBX into an individual array of each message
> individually saved as an eml file, but they have also (apparently) made
> Windows Mail access this collection by default on opening the app (I can
> see
> no option to avoid this), and for those who have thousands of messages,
> made
> Windows Mail incredibly slow as a result.
>
> I am really hoping I am missing something massive here, because it seems
> astonishing to me that MS felt this was a better and more efficient way to
> manage the email stores and email app than how OE did it.
>
> Can someone shed light on this?
>

"Danny" <me@there.com> wrote in message
news:6wfqh.60517$UC.11357@newsfe5-win.ntli.net...
> And in fact I'm rather lost for words by it.
>
> With Outlook Express on XP, the email inbox, like all other folders, was
> stored as a single chunk DBX file. It was not accessed when one opened OE
> unless they had specifically chosen to do so.
>
> Put simply, this meant OE opened extremely quickly as it only opened the
> shell of the program, and did not retrieve its guts unless the user went
> there of their own volition.
>
> However, moving forward to Windows Mail and I can't quite believe the
> backwards steps MS have taken here. Not only have they, in their wisdom,
> converted the former DBX into an individual array of each message
> individually saved as an eml file, but they have also (apparently) made
> Windows Mail access this collection by default on opening the app (I can
> see no option to avoid this), and for those who have thousands of
> messages, made Windows Mail incredibly slow as a result.
>
> I am really hoping I am missing something massive here, because it seems
> astonishing to me that MS felt this was a better and more efficient way to
> manage the email stores and email app than how OE did it.
>
> Can someone shed light on this?

The DBX storage format was extremely fragile and prone to loss of the entire
messages store. The present storage is much more robust and much less apt
to lose messages. I find Windows Mail opening just about as quickly as
Outlook Express but, as with OE, it's a good idea not to use the Inbox to
archive your messages but to move them to other folders as you read them (or
use rules to move them as they come in).

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM
http://www.fjsmjs.com
Answer in newsgroup. Don't send mail.