Yea, Microsoft should just automatically delete all emails that someone attempts to open once the 60-limit is reached. That will teach 'em!

Remember when your outlook.pst file going over 2Gb would silently corrupt it ?

The good old days.

Bill Gates probably told them that 60 emails ought to be enough for anyone.

While MS software is undoubtedly to blame here - because ALL MS software is utter shite and worthy of blame - a part of me is of the opinion that if you open 60 emails at once then you sort-of deserve something bad to happen

Why should it crash anyway? If it starts to run into resource issues and it knows it, just stop the opening of more emails with a "that's enough emails, deal with what you've already got before doing any more".

I think the only time I've opened now than a few emails at a time is when outlook has already ground to a halt and somehow my frustrated keyboard mashings get cached and later interpreted as "select all -> enter".

It's a reflection on people's cognitive decline - they can no longer remember what they read a moment ago, so they need to leave it open.

That's one of the consequences of outsourcing your memory to a machine.

More charitably, if you feel the need to open 60+ emails, chances are you have much bigger problems than software-related ones, and should, if you can temporarily control the weeping, urgently consult your therapist/union rep/dealer (delete as appropriate 1 ) rather than tech support.

1 Assuming these are not the same person.

Had a guy at previous company would always have loads of mails open, would get MAPI resource error messages but was senior enough to give us the brush off to our polite recommendations to perhaps not open so many mails at a time.

This was back in Exchange 2003 and 2010 days. Microsoft.Mapi.MapiExceptionSessionLimit., event 9646

Ended up having to give him View Information Store Status rights on Exchange to get around it.

It's just nature's way of telling you that reading 60 emails all at once is silly.

. . . and using Outlook is even sillier (we had to use it in the 1990s, but humanity has evolved since then, hasn't it?).

****ing top-posters!

No we didn't use Outlook in the 90s we used Eudora, Pegasus, Lotus Notes (eww!), MS Mail or one of the many other email clients that existed at the time.

We definitely didn't HAVE to use a client that was first released in January 1997 so wasn't available for MOST of the 1990s.

Hey, I was just going from memory! Eudora was great - they nailed email on the first attempt. It has all been downhill from there.

First the article says "Classic Outlook" as in Outlook.exe? Then goes on to talk about Outlook 365 chrashing.

Two different things aren't they.

I do believe Micro$oft has been sabotaging Outlook.exe every month to get people to go to Outlook365.

Screw Micro$ofr, I started using ThunderBird. I disapprove of everything 365.

And in the beginning it's opening 60 at once, and near the end it says having 60 open. Just started with an org that uses O365, Outlook misses the mark, still missing key elements. Stop now, it's early now, and I want to think happy thoughts.

First the article says "Classic Outlook" as in Outlook.exe? Then goes on to talk about Outlook 365 chrashing.

Two different things aren't they.

They could have been more precise, but Microsoft 365 installs an "Outlook.exe", which, assuming one has not clicked the "Try the new Outlook" toggle at least, is just an up-to-date build of classic Outlook. Yes, you can use Outlook 365 on the web, and yes, you can opt in to the "new Outlook", but assuming they are talking about the installable, non-new "Microsoft Outlook for Microsoft 365", I think it's fair to refer to that as either "Classic Outlook" or Outlook 365.

"Classic Outlook" and Outlook as part of Office/Microsoft 365 are the same thing, just with a different license structure.

The article refers to Classic Outlook to differentiate it from "New Outlook", which is the latest incarnation of Outlook Express - the hobbled, even less predictable, half cousin of actual Outlook.

I'm pretty sure that Microsoft have done some market research and found the Outlook is the only product that businesses deem critical to get from MS and as such everything is gradually being renamed to Outlook - hence Outlook (the latest incarnation of Hotmail), Outlook (the email/calendar/contacts app), Outlook (the mobile version that's so different to the desktop that it should have a distinct name) and Outlook (the 'new' pile of dung)

Step 1: Select 60+ email messages, preferably from your Junk folder

Step 2: Accidentally hit "ENTER"

Step 3: Profit..?

I can't think of a reason to open 60 emails at once.

Using thunderbird under thunderbird (fedora fc40) I opened 40 emails. Everything worked normally. Microsoft please qa and improve all of your software.

They have QA, it's just in this case it's the end user.....

Well, if you did the same using Outlook it would also probably be OK, as the problem only manifests itself after 60 emails....

You should test how many emails you're able to open with thunderbird and report back.

Madness. If I went around opening that many emails at once, my 'unread messages' count might risk dropping below a four-figure number

Egad Man, create rules and automatically mark that guff as read....

I have a desktop chugging away on my desk 24/7 with Outlook running just to process the rules for incoming the hundreds of alerts, ticketing system updates and other extraneous nonsense that I need to receive but rarely need to read...

You leave a machine on to do that? I just put it in a sieve script and let the server handle it all.

I wonder how many monitors they have...and I bet all the desktops are covered in files and not links too.

I have users who will open an incoming mail and if it needs action they'll leave it open until they get round to dealing with it - they then close it and leave it in the inbox.

Result, multiple open emails (although 60 would be excessive I've seen around 20 at once) and an Inbox running to thousands of messages.

I've tried educating them, if it's in the inbox it needs dealing with, otherwise it's deleted or filed, to no avail.

"Abort, Retry Fail"

option?

I'll get my coat, its the one with the floppy discs in the pocket.

Worked on some high end Windows software which detected out of memory errors and popped up a dialog box telling the user to close down apps to free up memory. I looked at the code behind this and all it did was try again and then ... crash. Turns out our software leaked memory and memory fragmentation was the real problem. No fix for that but to restart the software, which the crash forced the user to do.