<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Suggestions for Outlook 2000 upgrade</title>
	<atom:link href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 05:22:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: rechil</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/#comment-85197</link>
		<dc:creator>rechil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Dec 2010 04:14:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-85197</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@ Carlosdl, Yes, that&#039;s it ! somehow I didn&#039;t find that thread. But I remembered, the same Q I have answered earlier. Thanks for clear the confusion. 
But one thing, is miserable that, h/she asked the same question in two different ways. 
What did h/she want, either upgrade nor update, this is not clear still now. Though the word &quot;UPGRADE&quot; was used in both of the Q.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Carlosdl, Yes, that&#8217;s it ! somehow I didn&#8217;t find that thread. But I remembered, the same Q I have answered earlier. Thanks for clear the confusion.<br />
But one thing, is miserable that, h/she asked the same question in two different ways.<br />
What did h/she want, either upgrade nor update, this is not clear still now. Though the word &#8220;UPGRADE&#8221; was used in both of the Q.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carlosdl</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/#comment-85159</link>
		<dc:creator>carlosdl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 14:26:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-85159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Newby has asked another question which shows what he/she meant:

&lt;a href=&quot;http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrading-to-2010/&quot;&gt;Outlook 2000 upgrading to 2010&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Newby has asked another question which shows what he/she meant:</p>
<p><a href="http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrading-to-2010/">Outlook 2000 upgrading to 2010</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rechil</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/#comment-85125</link>
		<dc:creator>rechil</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 04:39:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-85125</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am waiting for next reply from the Question Asker ! If he clarifies clearly, what does he want, that may help to come out from confusion.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am waiting for next reply from the Question Asker ! If he clarifies clearly, what does he want, that may help to come out from confusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: technochic</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/#comment-85094</link>
		<dc:creator>technochic</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 17:54:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-85094</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Richel, there is no UPGRADE from OL 2000 to the current versions. This person was not asking how to download updates to Outlook 2000 as you suggest, they want to upgrade to a newer version and are asking the path to do so. The best path to get to the newest versions of outlook is to uninstall 2000 and install the newer version. Too much has changed to allow an UPGRADE from 2000 to 2007 or 2010, not even 2003. You could upgrade from 2000 to office xp, but beyond that, no. Uninstall and install the newest version provided your system can handle it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Richel, there is no UPGRADE from OL 2000 to the current versions. This person was not asking how to download updates to Outlook 2000 as you suggest, they want to upgrade to a newer version and are asking the path to do so. The best path to get to the newest versions of outlook is to uninstall 2000 and install the newer version. Too much has changed to allow an UPGRADE from 2000 to 2007 or 2010, not even 2003. You could upgrade from 2000 to office xp, but beyond that, no. Uninstall and install the newest version provided your system can handle it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: carlosdl</title>
		<link>http://itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com/itanswers/outlook-2000-upgrade/#comment-85092</link>
		<dc:creator>carlosdl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Dec 2010 17:25:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">#comment-85092</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Windows update will install &#039;updates&#039;.  It will not UPGRADE outlook.

How about reading this ?
&lt;a href=&quot;http://financialsoft.about.com/od/softwaretitle1/f/upgradevupdate.htm&quot;&gt;What Is the Difference Between a Software Upgrade and a Software Update?&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Windows update will install &#8216;updates&#8217;.  It will not UPGRADE outlook.</p>
<p>How about reading this ?<br />
<a href="http://financialsoft.about.com/od/softwaretitle1/f/upgradevupdate.htm">What Is the Difference Between a Software Upgrade and a Software Update?</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using memcached
Database Caching 6/9 queries in 0.012 seconds using memcached
Object Caching 324/327 objects using memcached

Served from: itknowledgeexchange.techtarget.com @ 2013-06-18 05:52:57 -->