Hi Everyone,

Well just when I thought that the completion of the Office 2007 package was near, I had to re-think again as during the pilot test, I noticed that after the upgrade of Office 2003 and launching Outlook 2007, the synchronisation was performing again and creating another ost file in the default path of :
<profile name>\local settings\application data\microsoft\outlook

I thought, ok thats fine..let it do it but then I had to think again as this package will be deployed to sites with limited bandwidth. I checked the prf file which was originally imported into the patch file but could see no sign.
To cut a long story short, I found through comparison, that a snapshot comparison is in the path of:
HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows Messenging SubSystem
I checked online and the hex values do not make sense to me?????

I tried to modify the Office setup via /admin and use Cache mode in modify Outlook setup - I know there is the selection for slow connections (128kb or lower) check box but that darn ost file keeps getting recreated.

My desired result is when Outlook loads for the first time after upgraded from 2003 to 2007, to pickup the ost file that was originally in the profile folder and utilise that file...and not perform another synchronisation with the exchange server and dump another ost file named outlook0.ost etc.

Has anyone found an answer for this as I am just guessing at the moment (big time!)
0 Comments   [ + ] Show Comments


Please log in to comment

Rating comments in this legacy AppDeploy message board thread won't reorder them,
so that the conversation will remain readable.


When using the Office 2007 Customization wizard isnt there a setting in there about using OST files?

If not I would suggest a support call to Microsoft.

Answered 06/23/2009 by: Inabus
Second Degree Green Belt

Please log in to comment
Hi Inabus,

Yeah there are settings in concern to OST creation cache mode etc and works great. (sarcasm...) :-)
Have you/anyone heard on an Office upgrade that Outlook synchronizes and creates another ost file in the Outlook folder?
I might get in touch with Microsoft and see if I can post the answer ASAP.
Answered 06/23/2009 by: tron2ole
Third Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
It dosen't work that way by design. As soon as you start the new version, it recreates the OST.
If you use the usmt to migrate across machines and capture the OST, it comes up as invalid and must be deleted and recreated before the sync will work.

I had a site like that with Exchange on the other side of the world. The customer wanted to migrate OST files to save the bandwidth, but it was a non-starter (unfortunately).

I don't imagine a support call to Microsoft will yield any results for you
Answered 06/23/2009 by: DeployTech
Orange Senior Belt

Please log in to comment
No news from Microsoft as yet....
I noticed in the PRF file, I have added these lines in the general section:
This PRF file is used with the custom admin install of Office 2007 - Outlook config.

This helps when I upgrade Office from 2003 to 2007 as in, if the OST exists, the synchronisation does not occur or at least only the updated changes between the client's OST and the exchange server.
This takes a lot of testing and not very exciting either....
I have 3 VMs running....synchronising Outlook 2003 with a test account that is just under 2Gb (I think that is more than sufficient) and synchronising all folders....check the properties which tell me the server vs offline files.
Then upgrade or reinstall (uninstall/install) and found that the Outlook client now picks up the OST file with no "Updating folders" etc. Great as this is what I wanted - I am not too fussed about moving OST files...just upgrading existing user machines.
Now I testing the movement of OST files between machines for fun and see...the trick is that if roaming profiles are in use...do not leave that account logged into another machine (hard to explain).
Answered 06/24/2009 by: tron2ole
Third Degree Blue Belt

Please log in to comment
Answer this question or Comment on this question for clarity