Incremental Backup of Entourage Database

[Esteban]

Version: 2004
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.4 (Tiger)
Processor: Power PC
Email Client: Exchange

Does anyone have a recommendation of backup software that does incremental backups of Entourage database?

At my company for backup we use Retrospect, which does not do incremental backups of Entourage databases. We use Entourage company-wide as an email/calendar/contacts solution, and we have enough people with huge databases that we fill up our backup drives rapidly, and it takes a very long time to back up the many gigabytes that are the total of our company's Entourage databases.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

 

[Corentin Cras-Méneur]

Does anyone have a recommendation of backup software that does
incremental backups of Entourage database?

At my company for backup we use Retrospect, which does not do
incremental backups of Entourage databases. We use Entourage
company-wide as an email/calendar/contacts solution, and we have enough
people with huge databases that we fill up our backup drives rapidly,
and it takes a very long time to back up the many gigabytes that are the
total of our company's Entourage databases.

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Well the problem is precisely that it is a monolythic database.
I'm not sure any application can do incremental updates of the database
as it appears to all of them as one big file...

Corentin

 

[Esteban]

Truly, that is the crux of the biscuit.

There is at least one software application that can do an incremental backup, but it did not quite work for my company. CrashPlan is an online backup service that offers a server software called CrashPlanPro that will do incremental backups of Entourage databases. It has been a little while since I tested it, so I can't remember exactly why my company did not choose to use it, but there were problems that were deal breakers.

At this last MacWorld in San Francisco, I spoke briefly with someone who works for Iron Mountain, and he said that they have software that will do incremental Entourage backups. Unfortunately I did not get to speak with him long enough to get the whole story, and I have not yet followed up on this, so I do not yet know all the details of their software for this. Perhaps someone out there has had some experience with Iron Mountain's software and can comment on this.

 

[Diane Ross]

There is at least one software application that can do an incremental backup,
but it did not quite work for my company.

To my knowledge there has never been any software to do an incremental back
up of the Entourage database. Surely if it worked we would have heard about
it. I've been an Entourage user from the first version.

 

[Esteban]

It may be that most Entourage users have not heard of CrashPlan PRO. It does in fact do incremental Entourage backups.

Upon further discussion with one of my colleagues it turns out that CrashPlan PRO works ok for the incremental Entourage backups, but does not have as many features as a product like Retrospect, likely because CrashPlan PRO is a relatively young product, and thus does not work as a backup solution for my company.

So at this point my question becomes: Does anyone know of a backup software with a robust feature set, such as but other than Retrospect, that can do incremental Entourage backups?

 

[Michel Bintener]

So at this point my question becomes: Does anyone know of a backup software
with a robust feature set, such as but other than Retrospect, that can do
incremental Entourage backups?

Hi Esteban,

I am actually quite surprised to hear about incremental backups in relation
to the Entourage database. Every time you add data to Entourage, or change
it, the entire database gets modified. As such, you would also have to
backup the *entire* database if you want to have a functional backup copy.
Then again, I have never heard of CrashPlan Pro, and its developers might
have a better understanding of this process than I do.

--
Michel Bintener
Microsoft MVP
Office:mac (Entourage & Word)

*** Please always reply to the newsgroup. ***

 

[Corentin Cras-Méneur]

It may be that most Entourage users have not heard of CrashPlan PRO. It
does in fact do incremental Entourage backups.

I don't see how they could do it. It sounds like a disaster bound to
happen.

Corentin

 

[Kerry]

It may be that most Entourage users have not heard of CrashPlan PRO. It does in fact do incremental Entourage backups.

Upon further discussion with one of my colleagues it turns out that CrashPlan PRO works ok for the incremental Entourage backups, but does not have as many features as a product like Retrospect, likely because CrashPlan PROis a relatively young product, and thus does not work as a backup solutionfor my company.

So at this point my question becomes: Does anyone know of a backup software with a robust feature set, such as but other than Retrospect, that can do incremental Entourage backups?

Retrospect has the most robust feature set for a networked business
environment with fine user controls. The new beta 8 looks fairly
impressive. However, since Entourage is a monolithic database
Retrospect will back up the whole database if any changes are
detected. This goes also with Data Backup from Prosoft Engineering
which is really designed more for individual user backups and is a bit
simpler to operate than Retrospect but not as powerful. I also use
both SuperDuper and TimeMachine. They all see the Entourage DB as a
monolithic Database and backup the entire DB on change. I also use
Crashplan mainly because I want a remote backup (offsite) in case my
place explodes (making DVD backups and storing them at some offsite
location isn't practical for me). Crashplan is excellent and it works
quietly in the background and simply does not interfere with my work.
You can set it so that it will only start backups when the computer
has been idle for a certain period of time, in my case 5 minutes. If I
look at the logs this is incremental as the data transmission in not
significant. You can go back in time just like Time Machine also. So I
can do a quick restore from the now and since I have a very high speed
internet connection it doesn't take long. It will place the main
identity on my desktop and I just have to move that into the Microsoft
User Data file folder. I can also just go back in time to get an older
version if the now version is corrupted as say my real active version.
Its a very good piece of software and costs $60 for the software and
$5 US for 50 gigs of remote storage (I backup all my critical stuff
(not music or video though) and I have barely touched my 50 gigs -
reports 6250 files backed up using 1 gig of storage (you have fine
control over what files to backup say in the user identity)). You can
also use this to backup to a peer computer across the network thus
eliminating the remote server if you want and Crashplan does promote
this due to speed and the savings on remote storage. I don't do this
as I work on my own and have no peers LOL! I just tested this and
restored a file from Crashplan and it has my current data. Its
excellent but for me remote backup provides me with added safety.
Plus, if I'm working at a location where my computer isn't connected
to my external hard drives, it is still backing up through a WIFI
connection to its remote storage via the net (this is exactly what's
going on now - I'm working on my Macbook Pro wirelessly not connected
to my external hard drives).

 

[Esteban]

Thanks everyone for the excellent input. I haven't used this forum before and am happily surprised to have people rapidly replying to the post.

 

[Diane Ross]

I also use
both SuperDuper and TimeMachine. They all see the Entourage DB as a
monolithic Database and backup the entire DB on change.

It's advised not to let Time Machine backup your Entourage database. If the
database is copied while being used, the backup could be corrupt. You can
set the Time Machine to exclude the Microsoft User Data folder and create an
iCal event to copy it over at night while not in use so you get one backup
daily in Time Machine.

Alternative method to use Entourage and Time Machine (does a once a day or
whatever time period you select)

<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/alternative_method_to_use_entourage_
and_time_machine.html>

Entourage and Time Machine (creates chronological backup of Identity can be
used by both Tiger and Leopard)

<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/entourage_and_time_machine.html>

 

[Kerry]

It's advised not to let Time Machine backup your Entourage database. If the
database is copied while being used, the backup could be corrupt. You can
set the Time Machine to exclude the Microsoft User Data folder and createan
iCal event to copy it over at night while not in use so you get one backup
daily in Time Machine.

Alternative method to use Entourage and Time Machine (does a once a day or
whatever time period you select)

<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/alternative_method_to_use_ento...
and_time_machine.html>

Entourage and Time Machine (creates chronological backup of Identity can be
used by both Tiger and Leopard)

<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/entourage_and_time_machine.html>

Diane I've seen you mention this once before about "It's advised not
to let Time Machine backup your Entourage database" and I asked in a
response who is advising this. I have yet to find this anywhere. If
this is coming from the mvps website, I checked with Microsoft and
they do not support anything that is written there. Apple definitely
doesn't suggest this and I asked Microsoft and they saw no reason why
Time Machine shouldn't be used to backup Entourage unless the DB is
excessively large thus using too much disk space and time during day
usage. I run all backups with Entourage running but Retrospect,
SuperDuper and DataBackup Pro sequentially start backups at 3 in the
morning so they don't interfere with my work. Entourage is open and
non of these systems has yet to produce a bad backup. I tested all
these extensively after 08 was released to ensure the backups were
reliable. I've frequently reverted to a Time Machine backup of the
Entourage DB and have never had a failure. The only product that ever
caused a problem was .Mac's backup system with Entourage and the .Mac
engineering team was aware of the issue. That's why I switched to
Crashplan.

I think if you're going to come out with a statement like its not
recommended then this should be referenced to the source so that
someone can verify the validity of the reference. I'd really like to
know who is recommending this and look into the why as I seriously
question the parameters around this recommendation. I'd like to know
the evidence upon which this is made - stats etc.

 

[Sue Donum]

(e-mail address removed), Kerry at

...
...

Diane I've seen you mention this once before about "It's advised not
to let Time Machine backup your Entourage database" and I asked in a
response who is advising this. I have yet to find this anywhere. If
this is coming from the mvps website, I checked with Microsoft and
they do not support anything that is written there. Apple definitely
doesn't suggest this and I asked Microsoft and they saw no reason why
Time Machine shouldn't be used to backup Entourage unless the DB is
excessively large thus using too much disk space and time during day
usage. I run all backups with Entourage running but Retrospect,
SuperDuper and DataBackup Pro sequentially start backups at 3 in the
morning so they don't interfere with my work. Entourage is open and
non of these systems has yet to produce a bad backup. I tested all
these extensively after 08 was released to ensure the backups were
reliable. I've frequently reverted to a Time Machine backup of the
Entourage DB and have never had a failure. The only product that ever
caused a problem was .Mac's backup system with Entourage and the .Mac
engineering team was aware of the issue. That's why I switched to
Crashplan.

I think if you're going to come out with a statement like its not
recommended then this should be referenced to the source so that
someone can verify the validity of the reference. I'd really like to
know who is recommending this and look into the why as I seriously
question the parameters around this recommendation. I'd like to know
the evidence upon which this is made - stats etc.

FWIW, the main reason I exclude the database from my Time Machine backups is
simply that since the database typically is about 2 GB, if I allowed TM to
back it up throughout the day, I'd "waste" a lot of drive space for perhaps
only a few emails.


I find that
<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/alternative_method_to_use_entourage_
and_time_machine.html>, coupled with the use of the free TimeMachineEditor
(<http://timemachineeditor.en.softonic.com/mac>) provide a very flexible and
effective way to deal with Microsoft's ridiculous "monolithic database"
design approach to Entourage.

 

[Kerry]

(e-mail address removed), Kerry at
(e-mail address removed) wrote on 1/23/09 1:17 AM:




FWIW, the main reason I exclude the database from my Time Machine backupsis
simply that since the database typically is about 2 GB, if I allowed TM to
back it up throughout the day, I'd "waste" a lot of drive space for perhaps
only a few emails.

I find that
<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/alternative_method_to_use_ento...
and_time_machine.html>, coupled with the use of the free TimeMachineEditor
(<http://timemachineeditor.en.softonic.com/mac>) provide a very flexible and
effective way to deal with Microsoft's ridiculous "monolithic database"
design approach to Entourage.

--
Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.5.4 (Leopard)
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo
Email Client: POP

Yes, well I totally agree with why you're not using Time Machine for
backups. 2 gigs would not only use an excessive amount of disk space
if it backed up every hour but also it would take a while even using a
Firewire 800 drive which I use. However, I keep my database fairly
lean (under 200 megs) by archiving my data to an archive file for two
reasons. One, I feel a database of this size is dangerous. If it
corrupts and my guess is it will, you are reliant on rebuild to
restore it to a functional database. Rebuild isn't working properly
and will often create an issue in the rebuilt database. This is a
known issue to Microsoft and although they are aware of the issue the
are not sure what's wrong and hence have no time-frame on a fix (to
test this, if your database ever fails after a rebuild, call Microsoft
tech support and ask them what to do. They won't be able to tell you
and if you are supposed to pay for the incident as you've used your
two free incidents you won't be charged as there is no solution so the
incident will be closed as unsolved but you can still call back on the
SRX number later to see if the issue is resolved and it will just be
reactivated. If they have a resolution, let us know as I would sure
love this). So now, you are completely reliant on your latest backup
and you have to hope that isn't corrupt. If it is, you will have to
move back to your most recent database, say two or three days old that
isn't corrupt. I am just moving back an hour or so to find an
uncorrupted DB. The second reason is that since this is a monolithic
database, any change to it will cause any of my backup systems and I
use four daily to spend a lot of time and use a lot of disk space to
back this up. Since I keep a robust archive database that stores data
that I might need to view but doesn't need to on the spot linked other
items or parts of projects this database only backs up when
information is added to the archive. This information though can be
found rapidly doing a Spotlight search and if Spotlight finds what I'm
looking for and its in the archive it just tells me and so I switch
identities.

There are programmers who are not so impressed with Microsoft's
monolithic database. It was actually the fellow that builds
SuperDuper! Who alerted me to this architectural schema of Entourage
ages ago and the downsides of it and this is why I implemented the
above approach which has served me well both in ENT04 and especially
08 (simply because 08 has a number of issues but for me primarily
around sync services which leads to too many problems and eventually
corruption).

Thanks for the reference. I see no reason, should you implement a
strategy wherein if you reduce the size of your DB that you can't
effectively use Time Machine and in fact if you use any other type of
backup system such as Retrospect or Data Backup these will work more
efficiently if you keep a smaller DB. Further, DB's of this size are
just generally more prone to corruption (again, if you phone Microsoft
tech support and tell them you are wondering whether its safe to have
a DB of this size, depending on the level of experience of the rep
they will definitely recommend against this (I am finding Microsoft is
being, at least with me, more candid around the issues with Entourage
and thus more forthcoming which doesn't resolve the problems but at
least I'm not sitting here wondering what's going on)). Finally, the
mvps knowledge base is useful but bear in mind this is not supported
by Microsoft. I referenced this at least once and was clearly told
they support nothing referenced to this but that also goes with
anything say at Macfixit etc. So, one of the things I have expressed,
on many occasions, to Microsoft is they really need a good online
support system on Mactopia in terms of both a proper Knowledge Base
and a moderated forum similar to the method almost all software
vendors use e.g. Apple, MacFixit, Markspace etc etc. They have
actually told me that I can always use www.microsoft.com/support and I
then said there's nothing Mac there (OH!). So to be a bit political,
no wonder Microsoft, for the first time, is being hit financially and
I don't think its all to do with the financial crisis but that they
don't listen (they, I would say, are really desparate to get Windows 7
out the door and are happy the tech reviewers are spending a lot of
time discussing their next version of Windows and not so much on Vista
(a slight disaster) ((see CNET etc)))). So I feel sorry for the poor
people who are being layed off due to management's blunders and you
don't have to look far to see how management can ruin a company (e.g.
Nortel (bankruptcy), Palm (almost defunct) etc.)).

 

[Diane Ross]

Diane I've seen you mention this once before about "It's advised not
to let Time Machine backup your Entourage database" and I asked in a
response who is advising this. I have yet to find this anywhere.

First, there are many things about Entourage that are not officially
documented in Entourage Help. It's a work in progress. The MVPs are working
with the Microsoft crew that is trying to make Help more comprehensive.

Next the issue of backing up the Entourage database:

Even before Time Machine the issue of quitting Entourage for a good backup
came up with Retrospect. When Time Machine came out this was discussed with
the developers. I can say that this advice has been approved by the
Entourage team.

Time Machine is the most likely to produce corruption since it happens
hourly, if you use the default which most people do. Even if it worked, you
would have the huge space taken by backing up hourly( say a typical 2GB
drive would result in a ten hour period of 20 GB) and the fact that your
system CPU is being hogged by the backup and for users with slower computers
this is not even an option.

If you're looking for a clickable link on the Microsoft website then I'll
have to disappoint you, but there are many features that are not documented
there.

If
this is coming from the mvps website, I checked with Microsoft and
they do not support anything that is written there.

Microsoft can't support anything that's not their site. I can say that they
must appreciate the Entourage Help Page because they award me MVP status
every year. I've been an MVP since Entourage was released.

I run all backups with Entourage running but Retrospect,
SuperDuper and DataBackup Pro sequentially start backups at 3 in the
morning so they don't interfere with my work. Entourage is open and
non of these systems has yet to produce a bad backup. I tested all
these extensively after 08 was released to ensure the backups were
reliable. I've frequently reverted to a Time Machine backup of the
Entourage DB and have never had a failure.

I see a lot of "I" statements there. The advice to not to backup to Time
Machine is based on the advice of the developers. If you want to support and
advise users this works, please add that it's not advised by the developers
and MVPs.

I think if you're going to come out with a statement like its not
recommended then this should be referenced to the source so that
someone can verify the validity of the reference.

When possible, I give links, but if it's going to take me an extra 10-20
minutes to find the link for info that I already know then I can either
verify everything that I say or answer about 1/5 of the questions asked.

Hope this helps and have a nice day!

--
Diane Ross, Microsoft Mac MVP
Entourage Help Page <http://www.entourage.mvps.org/>
Entourage Help Blog <http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/>
YouTalk <http://tinyurl.com/bzcrjy> <-- Entourage mailing list
Twitter: follow <http://twitter.com/entouragehelp>

 

[Kerry]

Diane, I guess we're getting different information from Microsoft.
I've specifically asked them, after I saw a post a while back, where
you said its not recommend to use Time Machine to backup Entourage
they told me there isn't a problem but that a large database would be
unweildy in terms of disk space used and cycle time. However, they
also said they don't recommend that users have large databases for
more than one reason. Thus, if the database is not excessive in size
it isn't much of an issue and one has to carefully ask whether backups
and storage are worth the safety of not losing data or having to spend
a lot of time putting one's Entourage identity back in working order.

In terms of the I statements around my own usage, it is simply that
I've found this to be the case and have had no issues with any backups
and restores including Retrospect. And I have not seen any reports
from anyone on any of the forums (Retrospect's, Data Backup Pro's,
Apple's etc) that anyone has had some issue. I am very religious about
employing a solid backup strategy for both my own use but it sometimes
has to be a part of my work along with security issues and tons of
other stuff. The only product I ever used that did create an issue
specifically with Entourage was .Mac's Backup but this was a .Mac
issue which their engineering was attempting to correct. Finally and
this isn't part of my work but I get asked to beta test software. I've
done this for probably 20 years so I am quite adept at the methodology
that has to be utilized to safely do this, identify issues (replicable
and transient), input back to the software engineering teams and then
retest potential fixes. Currently, I'm working with 3 different
software products but one seems to be ready to go Gold. So I am very
used to pushing a system from all angles to determine if it is a bug
and really what one is looking for is something that is replicable -
steps taken to produce the bug. In terms of backup I use sound
industry standard practices for backup strategy deployment which is
utilized in my work (that is it might be part of the work that I am
doing for company in my consulting practice) and I use these
techniques in my own work function and since I employ extensive backup
functionality I have yet to find any problems with backing up
Entourage using any of the above systems I mentioned other than .Mac's
Backup program.

So, the two things that remain the most significant I would say for
myself anyway is sync and rebuild. In both of these cases backups have
proven critical. I rarely though need to recover anything other than
my Entourage databases and that in and of itself says a lot.

I'm very curious about all this though so I think I'll call Microsoft
and Apple and run this by them again. I always like to call Microsoft
every so often anyway about the sync issue and its about time I call
them . I'll slip this question back in that this sync issue requires
all these backups and oh by the way is it alright to backup Entourage
in the way I do it. I'm guessing they'll just answer the way they did
the last time (I'm actually just re-reading my call-log notes when I
talked to them) but if they tell me different I'll post that here. And
in fact, I just thought I know a guy who is a top Mac software
engineer who specifically does backup so I'm going to run this by him
- no harm in getting an outside source other than Microsoft and Apple
who actually builds backup software that has to deal with their
software. I'll let you know what I find out.

 

[Diane Ross]

I guess we're getting different information from Microsoft.

I'm getting the info from the MacBU developers. I trust them over phone
support.

I'm done with this discussion.

 

[Kerry]

I'm getting the info from the MacBU developers. I trust them over phone
support.

I'm done with this discussion.

Sorry to say this but you have a very odd attitude. I'm just
expressing a reasonable concern over users having data properly
protected. Entourage 08 increases the need for this due to its various
problems. Yet, you seem defensive and I've come across this in my 25
years of work in IT, however, frankly I take it for what it is and
dismiss it.

Your comment that you trust the MACBU developers over phone support
is, well, defensive. They (the developers) are the ones who brought us
the problems in 08 requiring more significantly a robust backup
strategy, workarounds and even getting off the software entirely.
Also, I find the comment demeaning to people who work hard to support
us at Microsoft and who are frustrated with the MacBU as they
constantly have had to go through their liaison to the MACBU to get
answers that don't resolve a user's problems. The Tech Support people
and their superiors are doing the best they can with what they're
given and frankly I find them as helpful as they can be but if
something doesn't work and they're not told how to resolve an issue or
told that the issue can't be resolved there is nothing they can do
about it, only the MacBU.

Anyway, so don't participate in the discussion as I'm concerned that
your input is putting users at risk regarding this issue.

 

[Ed Kimball]

Sorry to say this but you have a very odd attitude. I'm just
expressing a reasonable concern over users having data properly
protected. Entourage 08 increases the need for this due to its various
problems. Yet, you seem defensive and I've come across this in my 25
years of work in IT, however, frankly I take it for what it is and
dismiss it.

Your comment that you trust the MACBU developers over phone support
is, well, defensive. They (the developers) are the ones who brought us
the problems in 08 requiring more significantly a robust backup
strategy, workarounds and even getting off the software entirely.
Also, I find the comment demeaning to people who work hard to support
us at Microsoft and who are frustrated with the MacBU as they
constantly have had to go through their liaison to the MACBU to get
answers that don't resolve a user's problems. The Tech Support people
and their superiors are doing the best they can with what they're
given and frankly I find them as helpful as they can be but if
something doesn't work and they're not told how to resolve an issue or
told that the issue can't be resolved there is nothing they can do
about it, only the MacBU.

Anyway, so don't participate in the discussion as I'm concerned that
your input is putting users at risk regarding this issue.

Kerry,

Diane has proposed what she believes is a satisfactory backup solution:
<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/alternative_method_to_use_entourage_
and_time_machine.html>
Even though it's not the solution I use, I believe Diane's position is quite
reasonable. You may choose a different solution, but I think it's a mistake
to characterize Diane's postings as defensive. They seem no more defensive
than your own.
Since you seem unwilling to accept the validity her position after several
postings, I also think it's reasonable for her to withdraw from further
discussion on the topic.

 

[Kerry]

Kerry,

Diane has proposed what she believes is a satisfactory backup solution:
<http://blog.entourage.mvps.org/2008/01/alternative_method_to_use_ento...
and_time_machine.html>
Even though it's not the solution I use, I believe Diane's position is quite
reasonable. You may choose a different solution, but I think it's a mistake
to characterize Diane's postings as defensive. They seem no more defensive
than your own.
Since you seem unwilling to accept the validity her position after several
postings, I also think it's reasonable for her to withdraw from further
discussion on the topic.

That's fair Ed. If someone doesn't want to continue in a discussion
well that's totally understandable. However, when I no longer want to
continue with input I just stop - I don't announce I'm going to stop
however, I might continue to read the discussion as it might interest
me (somewhat like a good TV series). In terms of Diane's input on
this, maybe you've seen more posts around this than myself. I just saw
a post a while back where she mentioned its not recommended to use
Time Machine and I certainly understand the thinking around DB size
but I was curious about Entourage being open and was there something I
wasn't aware of that might jeopardize a backup of a lean Entourage DB
(say 200 megs) but I didn't get a response to who was recommending
this. So I scanned the Apple forum and saw many references to
Entourage and say other large files like Parallels virtual machine
file backing up to Entourage and this chewing up too much disk and
using way too many cycles if Time Machine was backing up. I definitely
have Parallels and some other things excluded in Time Machine and my
other backup systems except Superduper! But, since Entourage has some
nasty bugs that cause data loss, corruption and sometimes DB
corruption, I've just found that my Time Machine backups have been
invaluable. They've said me tons of time and there is so much work
that I put into Entourage in terms of categorization, projects,
linking all over the place that if I lost this it would be too much.
If say rebuild were reliable then I wouldn't concern myself with all
these backups except my daily backups (and if closing is necessary
with these daily backups, since they start at 3am this is easy as I
would just have Quickeys close Entourage at 2:58am which I might just
do anyway to be on the safe side). Additionally, I wouldn't worry
about my Entourage DB getting too large although if it were to reach
say 1 gig I'd then start archiving. As it is, I archive and then
compact it to keep it at a modest size so that my Time Machine backups
are relatively current and when I do have to revert due to a data
loss, corruption etc issue so I don't loose too many entries (however,
all the keystrokes are recorded in Spell Checker's Ghostwriter so at
least that is there for me)).

In all this I don't want to loose sight though of the big picture and
the big picture really is Entourage 08 does need to be fixed. If the
Apple apps say had worked for me when I used them for about 3 weeks
I'd be happy to just use these as I found no sync'g issues, data loss
etc issues and they sync'd perfectly fine with my BlackBerry and Palm
TX. Backups of these is totally efficient with Time Machine and any of
my other systems. A couple of other platforms I tried also were fine
but it is Entourage that definitely works best for my needs. Prior to
ENT2008 and probably from the beginning when I used Office, which is a
long time ago, I never phoned tech support and I never, I don't think,
was on this forum. I never posted questions on anything to do with
Office or Entourage anywhere that I can remember. And I like it this
way as I don't really want to fuss with this. But I have no choice.
ENT08 changed all this and Microsoft can't seem to fix it. Some would
say though get off of it until Entourage is fixed and just deal with
the lack of functionality for now in some fashion and there is good
rationale for this recommendation. However, when I do go to say write
what is really my product, that which I get paid for, its not so hard
for me to find the relevant material I need in Entourage but it is a
bit of a challenge to find it in the Apple apps but not so much with
Outlook. I suppose I've just kept thinking that even though I knew it
would probably take Microsoft a long while to fix these issues
especially sync I didn't think it would take this long. But, I have
the feeling its going to take quite a while longer so.... I don't
know?

A software engineer wrote me yesterday with his thoughts, which was
nice and just concluded I can understand your dilemma. I appreciated
this and told him so.

You might ask why I come to this forum. I like it. I find it
interesting. I love reading so if I find something interesting that's
enough reason for me.

Anyway, peace!