Max # of addressees

[Panic]

My friend told me that Outlook (I have O-2000 & he has O-2002) will only
send up to 100 addressees. That it will drop out any in excess of 100. He
says that's what his computer guru told him. I have a group (150) of
Aviation Cadet classmates and it appears to have sent to all the 150
addressees.

Any ideas?

 

[Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]]

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Outlook. Those limits are set my the
mail server, not Outlook. Someone needs a new guru.

 

[VanguardLH]

My friend told me that Outlook (I have O-2000 & he has O-2002) will
only send up to 100 addressees. That it will drop out any in excess
of 100. He says that's what his computer guru told him. I have a
group (150) of Aviation Cadet classmates and it appears to have sent
to all the 150 addressees.

Your friend. He says. So why do you care about his sending problems
when trying to spew out bulk mail that exceeds the anti-spam quotas
for the *personal* email account that your "friend" is using? You
will have to find out what are the anti-spam quotas for YOUR email
account, and only your email provider can answer that question since
THEY are the ones that enforce that anti-spam quota.

 

[Panic]

in message news:[email protected]...


Your friend. He says. So why do you care about his sending problems when
trying to spew out bulk mail that exceeds the anti-spam quotas for the
*personal* email account that your "friend" is using? You will have to
find out what are the anti-spam quotas for YOUR email account, and only
your email provider can answer that question since THEY are the ones that
enforce that anti-spam quota.

Thank you for your courteous response. I don't send spam. But I do handle
the email for my Air Force pilot training group reunions. They (as I said
in my initial post) are the ones I am emailing. This is "personal" email
from my "personal" account. Russ' response confirms my suspicion that
addressee limits are only set by ISPs, not by Outlook itself.

 

[Panic]

Thanks, Russ. That's what I suspected. Perhaps his "guru" actually told
him that but he may have confused himself on what places any actual limit on
addressees. We both have "senior moments" these days.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Outlook. Those limits are set my
the mail server, not Outlook. Someone needs a new guru.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]

My friend told me that Outlook (I have O-2000 & he has O-2002) will only
send up to 100 addressees. That it will drop out any in excess of 100.
He says that's what his computer guru told him. I have a group (150) of
Aviation Cadet classmates and it appears to have sent to all the 150
addressees.

Any ideas?

 

[Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]]

Since you use Outlook, you might want to consider using a mail merge to
electronic mail instead of one message to so many recipients. That will get
around any limitations your mail server might impose.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]

Thanks, Russ. That's what I suspected. Perhaps his "guru" actually told
him that but he may have confused himself on what places any actual limit
on addressees. We both have "senior moments" these days.

This has nothing whatsoever to do with Outlook. Those limits are set my
the mail server, not Outlook. Someone needs a new guru.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]

My friend told me that Outlook (I have O-2000 & he has O-2002) will only
send up to 100 addressees. That it will drop out any in excess of 100.
He says that's what his computer guru told him. I have a group (150) of
Aviation Cadet classmates and it appears to have sent to all the 150
addressees.

Any ideas?

 

[VanguardLH]

Thank you for your courteous response. I don't send spam. But I do
handle the email for my Air Force pilot training group reunions.
They (as I said in my initial post) are the ones I am emailing. This
is "personal" email from my "personal" account. Russ' response
confirms my suspicion that addressee limits are only set by ISPs,
not by Outlook itself.

Rather than sending out 1 email to hundreds of recipients, why not
send 1 email to each of them? You can use MailMerge in Word (if you
have Word) or some bulk mailing program (several are listed at
www.slipstick.com). Outlook was designed to be a personal e-mail
client (with support for corporate features), not a bulk mailing
program. MailMerge might work but it has no control over how fast you
send those individual emails. Some ISPs restrict how many emails you
can send per minute and might also restrict how many mail sessions
every 1 or 5 minutes. This is to reduce email traffic to what would
be considered appropriate for a *personal* email service.
Alternatively, your email provider may have other plans to which you
can subscribe. Or you could check into listserver services for
sending out bulk mailings.

 

[Panic]

Rather than sending out 1 email to hundreds of recipients, why not send 1
email to each of them? You can use MailMerge in Word (if you have Word)
or some bulk mailing program (several are listed at www.slipstick.com).
Outlook was designed to be a personal e-mail client (with support for
corporate features), not a bulk mailing program. MailMerge might work but
it has no control over how fast you send those individual emails. Some
ISPs restrict how many emails you can send per minute and might also
restrict how many mail sessions every 1 or 5 minutes. This is to reduce
email traffic to what would be considered appropriate for a *personal*
email service. Alternatively, your email provider may have other plans to
which you can subscribe. Or you could check into listserver services for
sending out bulk mailings.

Those are all good suggestions. I haved saved your post to consider later.
I have Word 2007 which defaults to saving documents as .docx files. Maybe I
can use the option to Save as (older) .doc files to insure everyone can read
it.

 

[Brian Tillman]

Those are all good suggestions. I haved saved your post to consider
later. I have Word 2007 which defaults to saving documents as .docx
files. Maybe I can use the option to Save as (older) .doc files to
insure everyone can read it.

You can configure Word 2007 to ALWAYS save in Word 2003 format.

 

[Panic]

You can configure Word 2007 to ALWAYS save in Word 2003 format.

Would that cause me to lose any important features allowed by Word 2007?

 

[Brian Tillman]

Would that cause me to lose any important features allowed by Word
2007?

And what important features would those be? Frankly, were I given a choice
between my recipients being able to read what I send and my losing a couple
of features, guess which I'd choose?