 |
 | 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 / August 2003fax numbers in address book
How do I omit fax numbers so that when I enter a name into my email there's no confusion if I want the fax number or the email address? The standard behavior for the Outlook Address book is to display all electronic addresses (both fax and e-mail). That behavior cannot be changed. The only way to prevent the display of fax numbers is to store them in a different field or to disguise them (e.g., precede them with an alpha character) so that Outlook won't recognize them as phone numbers. -- Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > How do I omit fax numbers so that when I enter a name into > my email there's no confusion if I want the fax number or > the email address? Russ, I know this isn't your fault, but this feature is one of the worst thought-out things MS has come out with. What a tremendous pain-in-the-*** >-----Original Message----- >The standard behavior for the Outlook Address book is to display all [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >. If it were really poorly thought out, as you suggest, it would not persist from one version to the next, including Outlook 2003. There is, of course, a perfectly valid reason it was designed this way--it's just not a reason that is of use to you. Many users need the ability to send to mixed recipient types, so all electronic addresses need to be accessible in the Outlook Address Book. Personally, I wish they would toggle the option so that all users could be happy.  SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > Russ, I know this isn't your fault, but this feature is > one of the worst thought-out things MS has come out with. [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > > >. Ok, maybe "poorly thought out" is not quite fair. How about "not all the way thought out"? I agree that having access to all electronic addresses is important, but I would think the ability to sort by type would be a prerequisite for that ability. We may disagree, but based on our company's personal experience and on the related topics I see on this forum and others, it sure seems like people mostly use the email function. At the very least, MS could design the addressbook window (the one that shows up when you click "To") to expandable so you can see at a glance which address entry is which. Now, one has to scroll out to the right for each and every entry to make sure he's choosing either email or fax. Even a simple solution for pleasing everyone is not that exotic. >-----Original Message----- >If it were really poorly thought out, as you suggest, it would not persist [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > >. I quite agree. We've been asking for this for years. SignatureRuss Valentine [MVP-Outlook] > Ok, maybe "poorly thought out" is not quite fair. How > about "not all the way thought out"? I agree that having [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > > > >. Is there any way to at least sort the addressbook or change how it's displayed when you click on "To" on a new email? This is absurd. One of the main points (or so I thought) of Outlook is to be able to keep as much info about a contact as possible. But to have to scroll over to the right for every contact to add to an email is silly. No more shooting off a quick email to 4-5 people I guess. Geez... >-----Original Message----- >The standard behavior for the Outlook Address book is to display all [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > >. |
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.