 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussionsAccessExcelInfoPathOutlookPowerPointPublisherWordDirectoryUser Groups Related Topics Outlook ExpressInternet ExplorerWindowsMS Server ProductsMore Topics ... |
MS Office Forum / Outlook / Contacts / February 2007Outlook 2003 - Contact Nicknames
Recently purchased a new PC and installed Office 2003. I built my contact list from scratch. Contact list is set as an Office Address Book. In Office 2000, when I entered an entry in the nickname field in contacts I could enter that nicname in a new message, hit check names, and the right email address would populate. This does not work in Outlook 2003. The to address field will auto populate, but not based on what I've used as nicknames. Is this feature gone or different in Outlook 2003? Thanks. This has never been a feature in the Outlook Address Book in any version. You were probably using the short-lived IMO mode of Outlook before which was actually using the Windows Address Book engine. It would look at the nickname field.  SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > Recently purchased a new PC and installed Office 2003. I built my > contact [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > will auto populate, but not based on what I've used as nicknames. Is this > feature gone or different in Outlook 2003? Thanks. > This has never been a feature in the Outlook Address Book in any version. > You were probably using the short-lived IMO mode of Outlook before which was [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > will auto populate, but not based on what I've used as nicknames. Is this > > feature gone or different in Outlook 2003? Thanks. I have kind of the same problem. Before OL 2K3, I would click a contact nickname and the proper e-mail address would populate in the Send message and display only the nickname (ex) "John Doe" in the "TO" field. Now, with OL 2K3, the entire string appears in the "TO" field, such as: "John.Doe (John.Doe@sbcglobal.net)". This eats up a lot of memory, especially when sending a broadact message. People seeing a lengthy "TO" message field may be apprehensive about reading it! We need go back to displaying only "John Doe" and not "John.Doe (John.Doe@sbcglobal.net)". I can modify the OL 2K3 adress book to remove the "(John.Doe@sbcglobal.net)" portion for a single contact but would have to do it for the entire book to remove it from all my contacts! Is there a means to tell OL 2K "Please remove all the extensions from the Display field"...? In response to user requests, Outlook 2003 changed the Display name to include both the familiar name and the actual email address. It has no effect on performance whatsoever. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] >I have kind of the same problem. Before OL 2K3, I would click a contact > nickname and the proper e-mail address would populate in the Send message [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > contacts! Is there a means to tell OL 2K "Please remove all the extensions > from the Display field"...? Have you found an answer on how to remove that email address from the Display Name? I have been trying to figure it out too and cannot. Please let me know wha you find. Thanks! > I have kind of the same problem. Before OL 2K3, I would click a contact > nickname and the proper e-mail address would populate in the Send message and [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > contacts! Is there a means to tell OL 2K "Please remove all the extensions > from the Display field"...? Yes: I do it manually. When I click (or double-click) on a name, the address book for that name opens-up. There, in the "DISPLAY AS" field, I manually remove the E-mail address extension. That's it. It's a bother, but it doesn't cost anything, just a minute of my time. Tks. > Have you found an answer on how to remove that email address from the Display > Name? I have been trying to figure it out too and cannot. Please let me know [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > contacts! Is there a means to tell OL 2K "Please remove all the extensions > > from the Display field"...? You might want to look at Ingressor.com. > Yes: I do it manually. When I click (or double-click) on a name, the > address [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >> > extensions >> > from the Display field"...? I have been trying to find an answer to this also. I am using Office 2002 on both my computer and my wife's computer. For some reason, she can use a nickname and I cannot. I enter all my data as a contact and she enters hers through an address book entry. That may me the difference. I tried to find out how I can enter my data as a address book entry and have been unsucceful. When I select the address book, it comes up automatically as a contact entry. I know there must be a way but I cant find it. Please let me know if you found a way to do this. > Recently purchased a new PC and installed Office 2003. I built my contact > list from scratch. Contact list is set as an Office Address Book. In Office [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > will auto populate, but not based on what I've used as nicknames. Is this > feature gone or different in Outlook 2003? Thanks. Outlook has no address book. It only has Contacts Folders. The address book is simply a view of electronic addresses in your Contacts Folder and should never be used for data entry. Your question is quite unclear. What do you mean by "use a nickname?" SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] >I have been trying to find an answer to this also. I am using Office 2002 >on [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> this >> feature gone or different in Outlook 2003? Thanks. There is a nickname field in the Contats setup page. This is the name you could (previous to Outlook 2003) use in place of an actual e-mail address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed message. Not in any standard version of Outlook. Only the long abandoned IMO mode of Outlook made use of that field. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > There is a nickname field in the Contats setup page. This is the name > you could (previous to Outlook 2003) use in place of an actual e-mail > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed > message. There seems to be a continual denial that Nickname usage has existed in anything other than peculiar versions of Outlook. I have used Outlook '98, 2000 and now 2003 in various offices and at home; all aparently standard versions. Only now in the 2003 version can I not use Nicknames in the way that I have used them before. As follows: Having set a nickname, I could hit Ctrl-K and have the relevant detail appear in the To field. The fact that this does not work in Outlook 2003 is, to say the least, extremely frustrating. It never ceases to amaze me how application advances often translate into functional deterioration. Having been unable to find a satisfactory answer to the question 'how do I use my nicknames?' I would like to re-phrase this question and put it to to the forum: What is the Nickname field for in 2003? What purpose does it serve, and how so? Rather than a repeated 'that won't work and never did' answer, it would be very useful and customer friendly to explain exactly what the field is about and how it may be used. Many thanks for any further constructive assistance with this issue. Kind regards FB > Not in any standard version of Outlook. Only the long abandoned IMO mode of > Outlook made use of that field. > > There is a nickname field in the Contats setup page. This is the name > > you could (previous to Outlook 2003) use in place of an actual e-mail > > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed > > message. > What is the Nickname field for in 2003? What purpose does it serve, and how > so? The Nickname field holds data, like any other text field, that you can edit and use in searches in the Advanced Find dialog on that particular field. That field has no other special meaning within Outlook. You could put the person's pet's name or the name of a vegetable there, and Outlook wouldn't care. For what you want to do -- enter a shortcut name for a contact when addressing a message -- a one-member distribution list is the solution. Note: Apparently you were using Outlook 98 and Outlook 2000 is its very problematic IMO mode. The functionality you recall for the Nickname field worked only in that configuration. SignatureSue Mosher, Outlook MVP Author of Configuring Microsoft Outlook 2003 http://www.turtleflock.com/olconfig/index.htm and Microsoft Outlook Programming - Jumpstart for Administrators, Power Users, and Developers http://www.outlookcode.com/jumpstart.aspx > There seems to be a continual denial that Nickname usage has existed in > anything other than peculiar versions of Outlook. I have used Outlook '98, [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed >> > message. Thanks Sue, and Russ, for your explanations. It's becoming clearer now (although I don't know what 'IMO' is or was; but that doesn't matter as it's not around anymore!). I am in the process of re-populating my Contacts after a hard drive loss and subsequent rebuild/applications upgrade. This new fangled thing is quite different and will take a little getting used to, hence the questioning. Thanks again for your comments. Frank > > What is the Nickname field for in 2003? What purpose does it serve, and how > > so? [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >> > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed > >> > message. To add even further to the confusion is the fact that there are two types of "nicknames" in Outlook and you have them confused. When you manually resolve a name in Outlook, that name is stored in the autoresolution cache and is referred to as a "nickname." The next time you resolve that name, it will use the address you previously stored for that name. That has nothing to do with the Nickname field, which as Sue points out is simply a data field in the Contact record. That field has never been used for autoresolution in the Outlook Address Book Service. The reason you may have thought it was is that you weren't using the Outlook Address Book Service in Outlook 98 and 2000 when you were using IMO mode. You were using the Windows Address Book Service. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > There seems to be a continual denial that Nickname usage has existed in > anything other than peculiar versions of Outlook. I have used Outlook '98, [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >> > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed >> > message. I, too, am trying to figure out how to turn back on this apparantly defunct "feature" as I loved it and depended on it heavily in my 2000 version of Outlook. Is there a way to reinstate the ability to have Outlook both "Find" a contact and "Resolve a name" by using the Nickname Field in the Contact record? I am willing to hack the registry. Thanks, Vicki > To add even further to the confusion is the fact that there are two types of > "nicknames" in Outlook and you have them confused. When you manually resolve [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > >> > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed > >> > message. No. Outlook never had this ability. You were using Outlook Express when you did this. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > I, too, am trying to figure out how to turn back on this apparantly > defunct [quoted text clipped - 71 lines] >> >> > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed >> >> > message. I'm not sure why you keep telling me "my memory is failing me" and I must have been using "Outlook Express" when clearly I was using Outlook 2000 AND when I have read other posts about this capability working in the "defunct IMO mode". When a previous "feature" (that users grow to depend on) gets removed from a "defunct" version of Outlook (NOT Outlook Express), it's frustrating being told you are incorrect in your memory and use of that said feature. If it doesn't work anymore, it doesn't work, but please don't insult my intelligence by telling me I am wrong about the use of the feature. > No. Outlook never had this ability. You were using Outlook Express when you > did this. [quoted text clipped - 73 lines] > >> >> > address in the "To" field, or the other fileds in a newlwy composed > >> >> > message. I already explained all that in my previous post. You weren't using the Outlook Address Book in IMO mode. You were using Outlook Express'. No full version of Outlook ever had this feature nor can it be configured to do so. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > I'm not sure why you keep telling me "my memory is failing me" and I must > have been using "Outlook Express" when clearly I was using Outlook 2000 [quoted text clipped - 105 lines] >> >> >> > composed >> >> >> > message. Hello Russ, I have just spent almost an hour reading people's queries and problems with Outlook and must say that your posts are often rude and supercilious. Take this problem with the loss of the, obviously, very useful nickname functionality in previous versions. What does it matter that it was only available in IMO mode (whatever that means)? The fact is that it WAS available and a lot of people found it useful and now it is no more. Why can't you just acknowledge this? It is exasperating when an updated version offers a reduction in service, and this exasperation is compounded when people like you do not recognise this, or worse still, tell us that we are mistaken and that what we are missing was never actually available to us in the first place! A little more understanding and appreciation of the human condition wouldn't go amiss. > I already explained all that in my previous post. You weren't using the > Outlook Address Book in IMO mode. You were using Outlook Express'. No full [quoted text clipped - 108 lines] > >> >> >> > composed > >> >> >> > message. It's a common misconception that Outlook once had this feature and therefore might have it again. Only Outlook Express has this feature, and Outlook 2000 IMO was Outlook Express in disguise. The point is that Outlook never had this feature and won't, which is what people need to know. People who need that feature can use Outlook Express if it's important. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > Hello Russ, > [quoted text clipped - 152 lines] >> >> >> >> > composed >> >> >> >> > message. Moreover, if it makes you feel better to post that Outlook's developers removed a popular, useful feature from Outlook and should be taken to task for it then be my guest. You would be wrong, of course, and the distinction is not, to use your term, "supercilious." Outlook's developers never put this feature in Outlook. This was and is a feature exclusive to Outlook Express. Simply "adding it back" to Outlook is not possible--it never existed. These two programs are in no way related and use different transports. The code required to add this feature anew to Outlook's transports could not be justified. In my opinion, it is very worthwhile for users who long for the features of Outlook 2000 IMO to know that they were actually using Outlook Express' transports, not Outlook's. Indeed, those people may actually prefer Outlook Express and should know they can return to it at any time. If conveying that information is "rude" then I stand justly accused. Otherwise, holster your weapon and be more circumspect when you take aim at others. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > Hello Russ, > [quoted text clipped - 152 lines] >> >> >> >> > composed >> >> >> >> > message. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.