POP Fiasco ever going to be fixed
CMM
the ludicrously bug-ridden POP3 engine in Outlook 2003? There's a ton of
"why do I receieve duplicate" messages in this forum going back two
years.... and NO, Office SP2 does NOT fix the problem.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
neo [mvp outlook]
know that I've seen message duplication caused by server and/or client
configuration error. Not to mention with today's security software
(antivirus, antispam, personal firewall, .etc) acting as a proxy between the
mail client and server, it adds additional twists that become more
noticeable as users become more security conscious about their PC and data.
"CMM" <c...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:e8Nd$UjMGH...@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
CMM
I'll bite.... I sure hope you can help as this is getting to be
unbearable....
First off, I'm a software developer... not an idiot. I've posted this before
as have others. Machine is very well-configured and stable. No (resident and
running) AV/antispam/3rd party firewall going on here. Server is Yahoo mail.
Account gets lots and lots of mail. Yes, I do use rules to move messages to
another folder... maybe even another PST. No, that shouldn't be matter. If
it does, it is still a bug... since the dupes don't happen 100% of the time.
Yes, option to Leave Messages on Server is turned on. No, I will not turn it
off. This should WORK.
Profile also includes Exchange account in Cached Exchange mode. If that
matters. I can't see why that should matter as the problem happens both
online and offline from Exchange.
Closest thing to slight alleviation was Diane Poremsky's [MVP] suggestion to
increase the time between scheduled send/receive. Apparently, Outlook is too
stupid to know when it's in the middle of a Send/Receive and it might start
a new Send/Receive thus confusing itself.
However, that is not the problem. The problem IS that during particularly
large downloads (large in terms of number of messages not necessarily
message size) the server may interrupt the send/receieve. Outlook flakes out
and "forgets" about every message it has download up until that point. For
instance, if the disconnection happens at message 50 out of 70 it will
download those same 50 AGAIN.
Eventually (after about a few tries) Outlook will get it right. And
everything works for a while. Then it happens again.
No matter which way you cut it, this is an OUTLOOK BUG. It doesn't happen
with other E-mail clients (tried Thunderbird... no problems... tied OE
(briefly)... no problems.... even when the server flaked out). Yes, I tried
recreating my profile and the account. Yes, it was a waste of time. Problem
still ocurred.
What now?
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"neo [mvp outlook]" <n...@online.mvps.org> wrote in message
news:exKZlkjM...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
neo [mvp outlook]
can go 2 directions. One direction being that the POP3 protocol's use of
the UIDL can still cause issues for any mail client to a very good point
because of the way Outlook might (not) be handling the interrupt when it
comes to storing/tracking downloaded items.
"CMM" <c...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:u58rM4j...@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
CMM
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;Q300479) to try and
capture the exact error and/or sequence of events tonight. I had done this
months ago to try and figure out what was going wrong... but, I'll do it
again.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
neo [mvp outlook]
and you seem to notice the duplication occurring more when a communications
interrupt happens than any other time.
The other thing I want to confirm is that you mentioned that you have 2
accounts in the profile one being Microsoft Exchange and the POP3 account.
What is your default delivery location (PST or Exchange mailbox)? Last
question, which account is set your default?
/neo
PS - I did reach Jeff last night and he is going to look into it. This
could take a bit since it is outside of normal channels.
"CMM" <c...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:O9Ue9dqM...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
CMM
> Thanks and just to confirm, you do have Office 2003 Service Pack 2
> installed
Yes.
> and you seem to notice the duplication occurring more when a
> communications interrupt happens than any other time.
When I studied the log several months ago that is the conclusion I came up
with.
> The other thing I want to confirm is that you mentioned that you have 2
> accounts in the profile one being Microsoft Exchange and the POP3 account.
Yes.
BTW, not sure if this matters:
Exchange Server at my company is 2003.
I connect to it via VPN. Use Cached Exchange Mode. VPN is not connected most
of the time.
I HAVE to always start up Outlook in Classic Work Offline Mode (which OL2003
was supposed to make obsolete) because if I dont, my Rules that act on the
POP account never run. ALL my rules are client side rules.
> What is your default delivery location (PST or Exchange mailbox)? Last
> question, which account is set your default?
Exchange is the default all around.
A rule moves the POP messages to a local PST.
CMM
large"... eventhough it's only a little over 100K (zipped). It is concise
and very easy to read. Here's my summary of it:
There are only two downloads in it. While both these downloads where
manually initiated, I can say with 100% confidence that that doesn't matter.
The problem seems to be exactly as I described it in a previous message.....
The first Receive session starts at 11:14.
After comparing blobs and all that jazz and determining new messages to
download, it proceeds to download new messages and at some point encounters:
<rx> -ERR problem retrieving message.
during a RETR.
The second Receive session starts at 11:16
It completes successfully.
You'll notice that the section
"========= Updates to blob ========="
Only occurs on the SECOND Receive Session... presumably because there was no
error during dl'ing one of the messages.
The result? Dupes!... A LOT of them! There is no way this can be by design.
Even if there is an error during a RETR, Outlook has the Id's of the
messages it has successfully downloaded up until that point. Why can't it
update its local "blob" with them?
:-)
P.S.
Your help is very much appreciated. Thank you.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
CMM
http://www.cmoya.com/temp/OPMLog.zip
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
"CMM" <c...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:eccNI5xM...@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
neo [mvp outlook]
not been addressed. Jeff mentioned that he would bring the issue up again.
I'm thinking if you open a incident with Microsoft via the web (i think its
free), it might help bolster the argument to help get it fixed in this
version. However with all things being equal, it doesn't mean it will be a
done deal if they determine the fix would introduce other gotchas.
"CMM" <c...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:%23B5y9gy...@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
CMM
fix in my head. But, I guess since it's such a specialized thing (who uses
POP with Outlook anyway?!)... there's no "marketing glitz" to it. I've
really gotten to hate Microsoft in the last few years.
I mean, who uses POP with Outlook? Not many people I would guess.... but
then again who uses WordMail either (In Ol2003, and even 2002 they
should!).... not many... and that's my point... once something gets a bad
*rep*, it's tough to shake down.
Microsoft's Marketing-Driven development cycles sure doesn't help.
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
Brian Tillman
> I mean, who uses POP with Outlook? Not many people I would guess....
I suspect that more people use it with POP than with Exchange, although I
have no proof. Exchange costs more and if a small business has sprung for
Office, they may be loathe to shell out even more for Exchange, even though
the Small Business version if more affordable than the Enterprise version.
> but then again who uses WordMail either (In Ol2003, and even 2002 they
> should!)....
I certainly don't. It adds nothing. Of course, I never need Mail Merge,
either.
--
Brian Tillman
CMM
> either.
> --
> Brian Tillman
You're missing out. I like my sqigglies... to tell me when I've spelled
something wrong. Plus, Format Painter is one of the best features of any
productivity software ever (actually, Lotus AmiPro invented it before MS
Word back in 1994). Every now and then I like to insert pretty formatted
"tables" into my msg in order to convery some tabular information (I'm a
developer). Oooh, and inline images (as opposed to attachments) are awesome
too.......
and, everything gets neatly and awesomely translated into HTML for anybody
(everyone!) to see.... even inline images! Ingenious!
Whoever isn't using "WordMail" in 2002 or 2003 is truly missing out. Those
guys at MS did do something right. Gone are the slow, weird, awkward
integration and slow startup. Truth is (especially in 2003!) you wouldn't
even know that you were using Word unless you really looked!.....
But, that goes back to initial point. Once something gets a "bad rep" it's
hard to shake off.
With Thunderbird snipping at its heals, and "WebMail" AJAX type online apps
impressing everybody, Outlook (IMHO) doesn't have much of a shelf life as a
"messaging application."..... MS should have tried to get the "Universal
Inbox" RIGHT instead of abandoning it. Truth is.... Outlook ain't that good
at e-mail in general (all it takes is to compare how fast Google GMAIL
searches your archives VS. Outlook's slooooowwwwwwwwww and horrid "Advance
Find").
The whole POP "fiasco" is a symptom of that. Man, I love Outlook... always
have. But, MS needs to fire their entire marketing department and "head
Office idea guys." I've actually grown to HATE (in a lot of ways) Outlook
nowadays.... I never thought I would say that!!!!!
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
Brian Tillman
> You're missing out. I like my sqigglies... to tell me when I've
> spelled something wrong.
When I care, I click "Check Spelling", which is also available in Outlook's
editor.
> Plus, Format Painter is one of the best
> features of any productivity software ever (actually, Lotus AmiPro
> invented it before MS Word back in 1994). Every now and then I like
> to insert pretty formatted "tables" into my msg in order to convery
> some tabular information (I'm a developer).
I use fixed pitch fonts. It's just as tabular.
> Oooh, and inline images
> (as opposed to attachments) are awesome too.......
I still think that type of thing should be in a separately-attached Word
document.
> and, everything gets neatly and awesomely translated into HTML for
> anybody (everyone!) to see.... even inline images! Ingenious!
HTML is the bane of Email. So much added to the message size for so little
benefit.
> Whoever isn't using "WordMail" in 2002 or 2003 is truly missing out.
I'm missing nothing. Everyone undersands the word I send them, since
everyone to whom I send mail knows how to read.
> Those guys at MS did do something right. Gone are the slow, weird,
> awkward integration and slow startup. Truth is (especially in 2003!)
> you wouldn't even know that you were using Word unless you really
> looked!.....
> But, that goes back to initial point. Once something gets a "bad rep"
> it's hard to shake off.
My desire to eschew Word has nothing to do with "reputation". It's simply
that I find it adds no value. It goes without saying that this is just my
situation and has no bearing on what other people find useful (but I said it
anyway).
> With Thunderbird snipping at its heals, and "WebMail" AJAX type
> online apps impressing everybody,
I don't allow any active content on my PC either. I never vist web sites
requiring cookies and ActiveX controls more than once. Those features are
proof to me that the authors don't know how to write decent HTML.
> The whole POP "fiasco" is a symptom of that. Man, I love Outlook...
> always have. But, MS needs to fire their entire marketing department
> and "head Office idea guys." I've actually grown to HATE (in a lot of
> ways) Outlook nowadays.... I never thought I would say that!!!!!
I do find many of Outlook's features, like the calendar and task management
to be quite useful and I like the ability to drag a message to the calendar
to create an appointment or to the tasks folder to create a task.
--
Brian Tillman
CMM
really make sense. I can see that if the majority of your communications is
with external people. Mine is all internal.
p.s. AJAX isn't "active." Unless you consider JavaScript to be active
content. In which case, you're better off using Lynx... or maybe you pine
for the days of Gopher. ;-)
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
Brian Tillman
> p.s. AJAX isn't "active." Unless you consider JavaScript to be active
> content.
I do, because it is.
> In which case, you're better off using Lynx... or maybe you
> pine for the days of Gopher. ;-)
I do use Lynx for many things. It's fast and friendly. It's also a great
web crawler if I need one.
--
Brian Tillman
CMM
--
-C. Moya
www.cmoya.com
DW
updates (just today in fact). Since I want to be able to get at email from
any one of them, I leave a copy of email on the server (POP3). The desktop
doesn't download any duplicates (knock on wood), but both lap-tops do. One of
them started doing it after the updates today (which I might take off), the
other (the XP home machine) has done it from day 1. They only download
duplicates when they hibernate and start up again, though. It's pretty
annoying.