| Wednesday,
May 10, 2006 I need to figure out how to partition the
archive.pst file. It has become enormous, and takes too long to copy, and
since Outlook opens it each time it opens, it gets a new date. What I want
is to partition it into a chunk that will not be opened and closed by
Outlook and thus will not be updated, and a more current archive that is
treated in the usual way. In other words, a "deep archive" and an archive.
It would help if Outlook had any kind of "viewer" or translator so that
one could examine .pst files and see just what the heck is in them.
I am sure all this is simple stuff for Outlook experts, but it's driving
me nuts. The problem is that archive.pst has grown to 2.5 GB, and it takes a
LONG time (over 8 minutes) to copy it from one computer to another over a
100 MB/second net (my older TabletPC only does 10/100). For that matter it's
not fast at 1000 MB. Since I usually copy the whole Outlook folder to the
TabletPC when I am about to go on the road, I don't really want to have to
copy the archive file each time I do that.
Suggestions? There has to be some way to partition all that stuff
into active and truly archived files, but I don't know what that is.
-===========
Well, they went to school, got good grades, can't pass a 9th grade level
test, but they are entitled to a high school diploma. The lawyers and courts
have spoken, and everyone is demonstrating.
The thing to do is issue diplomas a birth. Then employers can go back to
using job skills and IQ tests for hiring since all will have the
"credentials".
Entitled to a diploma, without regard to ability or skill or having
learned anything.
And we want to export democracy to the world.
Liberalism is a philosophy of consolation for the West as it commits
suicide.
The Tree of Liberty is THIRSTY.
================
I have a whole bunch of mail taking me to task for
using Ross Perot's phrase in the debate "I'm all ears" in commenting about
him. It wasn't malicious. He said it of himself to good effect in one of the
debates, back when he was a -- to me at least -- credible candidate for
President of these United States. A candidate I supported, in fact. Truth in
advertising: I was asked by a firm what worked for Perot to help plan
implementation of some of the measures described in Take Back Your
Government. I was never paid, but it was understood that I would be if the
campaign was successful. And of course I wrote the introduction and notes to
Take Back Your Government.
From Wikipedia:
One reason Perot was so much more successful
than typical third-party candidates was that he was allowed to participate
in all three
debates. At one point in June Perot led the polls with 39% (versus 31%
for Bush and 25% for Clinton). Just prior to the debates, Perot received
7-9% support in nationwide polls (a level that would not have met the new
standard of 15% imposed by the bipartisan
Commission on Presidential Debates in 2000); it is therefore likely that
the debates played a significant role in his ultimate receipt of 19% of the
popular vote. Although his answers during the debates were general, Perot's
wit, folkisms, and straight talking were so impressive that even many
Democrats and Republicans conceded that Perot won at least the first debate.
One question Perot was continually asked was
whether he, as an independent, could govern.
Perot responded:
- "Can we govern? . . . I love that one. The
'we' is you and me. You bet your hat we can govern because we will be
there together and we will figure out what to do and you won't tolerate
gridlock, you won't tolerate endless meandering and wandering around,
and you won't tolerate non-performance. And believe me, anybody that
knows me understand I have a very low tolerance for non-performance
also. Together we can get anything done."
Then he imploded. I have often wondered just what happened. Suddenly he
seemed irrational; he had not been so before. I had truly hoped that he
would build a new party along the lines of Heinlein's Take Back Your
Government (to which I wrote the introduction). I had a peripheral
involvement with the campaign until it came apart. Bush had eliminated all
the Reagan people (at least all those I knew) when he took office, so I
didn't have much residual loyalty in that direction.
Perot opposed our first imperialist adventure in Iraq, as had I. I am
quite certain that had he become President he would not have encouraged
revolts against Saddam, then leave the rebels hung out to dry. I am
convinced that guilt for that action had and has great influence on Bush II;
as indeed it does on me. We left many friends to face the music in Viet Nam;
our actions in Iraq after Gulf I were inexcusable; and we certainly need to
plan on what to do to protect those who cooperated with us in Iraq this time
if we cut and run.
Precisely what happened to Perot I do not know, but his campaign came
apart, and he became obsessively paranoid. There are those who believe that
his paranoia was justified. I don't know. I know little about real
conspiracies in the US. I do know something about how covert operations have
worked in other places. See Indonesia and the abortive communist uprising
for an illustrative example. If you can find good sources on Cuber and the
original Bay of Pigs plan as opposed to what Kennedy approved, that might be
instructive as well. I have heard stories about Perot and the threats to his
family and such like, but I haven't heard anything that isn't common
knowledge. I do know that he was a great disappointment; perhaps the last
chance we had to restore normal politics to the Republic.
In any event, my remark about his being "all ears" was taken directly
from one of his own statements in one of his more successful moments in the
debates.
===================
ON OUTLOOK:
I have a pile of older Outlook archives on another computer (Anastasia,
which used to be the communications machine). That, it turns out, is why my
archives file, huge as it is, still doesn't seem to have the old email.
That, I think, is on another machine.
I am uncertain about what Microsoft Index does. If I put the old archive
files into an Outlook folder here (but NOT the one that Outlook itself looks
for pst files in) will those be indexed by the Microsoft Windows Desktop
search function or must they have been opened by Outlook first? I begin to
think what I must do is wait until a day when I have all day, import all
those files into Outlook, then sort them into annual archive files, and
finally close them in Outlook so it won't be opening those each time. This
is really more complicated than it ought to be, but I do seem to be on the
trail of finding ways to automate...
Wednesday TOP
Current Mail
|
