Outlook to check for mails more than every 60 seconds..

PESolution · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:30

Afternoon Gents/Ladies,
In my old job I had an IT guy set my outlook to look for mail instantly but I can't seem to work out how to do it to check more than every 60 seconds. Any ideas? Possibly by creating a rule of some sort?

Thanks in advance

uv · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:31

keep the F9 key pressed down

Dave M · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:31

You probably had imap before.

4p · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:31

PESolution said:
Afternoon Gents/Ladies,
In my old job I had an IT guy set my outlook to look for mail instantly but I can't seem to work out how to do it to check more than every 60 seconds. Any ideas? Possibly by creating a rule of some sort?

Thanks in advance

My windows live mail checks for mail every 60 seconds because i sign in with my live ID.

peterattheboro · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:34

May I ask why you can't wait an extra 59 seconds?

Pho · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:34

Telescopi said:
You probably had imap before.

This. Either that or your constantly hammered your SMTP server

.

Paul11 · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:41

peterattheboro said:
May I ask why you can't wait an extra 59 seconds?

lol, dont know why that made me laugh....

Memphis · 23 Feb 2009 at 14:56

Absolutely no need for it to check any more frequently than every 1 minute IMO.

Dunks · 23 Feb 2009 at 15:02

Are you connecting to an Exchange server? If so, look up Push-mail.

platypus · 23 Feb 2009 at 15:04

As above, why can't you wait a minute?

Gilly · 23 Feb 2009 at 15:04

What client/server software are you using?

osc89er · 23 Feb 2009 at 15:39

Pho said:
This. Either that or your constantly hammered your SMTP server .

Why would you want to hammer your SMTP server?

Knubje · 23 Feb 2009 at 16:16

osc89er said:
Why would you want to hammer your SMTP server?

He didn't say thats what you WANT to do, he says the guy was probably using IMAP OR hammering his SMTP server; he actually doesn't specify if it's good or bad. (Obviously bad as you don't want to hammer servers that are used for specific services such as email incase they fallover).

To the OP: Deal with 60seconds, it's really not long. If you want "insta mail" hook yourself up with IMAP or an Exchange Server mailbox

csmager · 23 Feb 2009 at 16:34

Knubje said:
He didn't say thats what you WANT to do, he says the guy was probably using IMAP OR hammering his SMTP server; he actually doesn't specify if it's good or bad

Maybe the implication in the post was he wouldn't be hammering an SMTP server, as you wouldn't be checking for mail from one as it's a 'push' type protocol. He'd be hammering a POP3 server, most likely.

Knubje · 23 Feb 2009 at 16:44

csmager said:
Maybe the implication in the post was he wouldn't be hammering an SMTP server, as you wouldn't be checking for mail from one as it's a 'push' type protocol. He'd be hammering a POP3 server, most likely.

Unless he's a dirty, dirty spammer?

osc89er · 24 Feb 2009 at 00:13

Knubje said:
He didn't say thats what you WANT to do, he says the guy was probably using IMAP OR hammering his SMTP server; he actually doesn't specify if it's good or bad. (Obviously bad as you don't want to hammer servers that are used for specific services such as email incase they fallover).

To the OP: Deal with 60seconds, it's really not long. If you want "insta mail" hook yourself up with IMAP or an Exchange Server mailbox

I declare fail!

Pho · 24 Feb 2009 at 00:23

My post failed. I was doing two things at once and couldn't even word it properly into a coherent sentence

.

I meant to say checking for email every few seconds is going to hammer your POP server (especially if lots of people are doing it), and IMAP would be more suited for instant email notifications.