 |
 | 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 / New Users / May 2008The infamous unread email flag bug
Anyone know if Microsoft is planning to fix this bug? I'd imagine it shouldn't take that much code to fix it. It's been several years that people have been complaining about this on the web. Basically if you have a Rule that automatically marks certain mail read, the task tray notification icon (little yellow envelope) stays there. It is supposed to disappear. This bug forces the user to continuously open and sort through the inbox to see what arrived, when there is nothing there - it was already processed and marked read. This often affects spam plug-ins. The bug existed in Outlook 2003, and still there in Outlook 2007. Now it's 2008. So at least it's been 5 years. > Anyone know if Microsoft is planning to fix this bug? I'd imagine > it shouldn't take that much code to fix it. It's been several years [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > The bug existed in Outlook 2003, and still there in Outlook 2007. > Now it's 2008. So at least it's been 5 years. The design was to trigger the tray icon when new items were received in the Inbox. Has nothing to do with rules. The trigger occurs before rules are ever exercised against any e-mails. The tray icon doesn't trigger after the rules are applied to see what might be left as marked unread in the Inbox. So, by design, the tray icon is doing what it was supposed to do. That it doesn't do what you want is different than it doesn't work as designed. Rather than use the tray icon, and because you want to see what is *left* AFTER the rules have executed, disable the tray icon and add a rule at the end of the list that pops open an alert window. If all the prior rules failed to trigger then the catchall rule at the end will fire to let you know there was a new item delivered to your Inbox. If some of the prior rules should also fire off an alert and also use the stop-clause, you'll have to add the alert clause to those rules. You end up using the rule-fired alert window to let you know of new e-mails rather than the tray icon that wasn't designed the way that you want it to work. Vanguard, that does not sound correct. (a) When a message is marked read in the preview pane, the flag disappears from the task tray. (b) When a message is marked read because of a rule, the flag stays around. So your argument that I'm coming up with some new feature doesn't make much sense to me. It only makes sense to sync up (a) and (b) behavior. There is interaction between mail being marked read and the flag, because this is the behavior in the preview pane. By default this is set to mark the mail read when the selection changes. I like to set mine to mark the mail read after 1 second. In any of these cases, the task tray flag disappears. The programmers could use the same communication mechanism to get rid of the flag during the mark-read rule processing. When a message is marked read in the preview pane, the software talks to the task tray flag somehow. Why is it so hard to talk to the flag in the same way for a rule? Did the programmer use some highly unconventional technique? > Vanguard, that does not sound correct. > > (a) When a message is marked read in the preview pane, the flag > disappears from the task tray. And once you commit the manual action through the GUI, the status gets updated. Whether you read (or mark as read) a message that would or would not have triggered a rule is irrelevant when manually marking the message as read. > (b) When a message is marked read because of a rule, the flag stays > around. That was the premise of your original post, that the tray icon did not reflect the results of the Inbox items and their read-status AFTER the rules had been executed. > And once you commit the manual action through the GUI, the status gets > updated. Whether you read (or mark as read) a message that would or would > not have triggered a rule is irrelevant when manually marking the message > as read. In the first sentence it sounds like you're essentially saying that manually marking read works ok, which is no surprise. I don't understand the second sentence. > That was the premise of your original post, that the tray icon did not > reflect the results of the Inbox items and their read-status AFTER the > rules had been executed. It's when the rules is executed when this bug manifests itself, not sometime after. When a rule specifically executes to mark the item read, the new message flag does not go away. But there is no more new message anymore because the user made it so via the rule. Microsoft saw this logic when items are manually marked read, and clears the tray icon. Why is this logic not clear when using a rule? Ok so then I should ask this question instead, Does a mail filtering rule to mark read deserve to be disconnected from normal UI (tray status) behavior because it is automatic vs. someone clicking to mark read? >> And once you commit the manual action through the GUI, the status >> gets updated. Whether you read (or mark as read) a message that [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > from normal UI (tray status) behavior because it is automatic vs. > someone clicking to mark read? Personally I'm with you that a rule that marks as read should update the tray icon. Microsoft decided otherwise. As a user in a peer community in a Usenet newsgroup, I have no way to change what Microsoft did and discussing it here will not alter code. Marking as read is not the same as actually reading it. The same distinction is lost on users when they permanently delete a message and then wonder why they have to compact their message store to actually get rid of the already permanently deleted message. *Marking* a message to have status "deleted" does not physically remove it from the message store. It merely tells Outlook not to *display* that item anymore. Compaction is the action of physically purging the delete-marked item from the message store. For example, you might use a rule to move certain mails into a folder and also mark them as read. Okay, but you are expected to read those mails in that special folder whether they are *marked* as read. That is, you are still supposed to READ them regardless of the read/unread status. There is more than one use for the read/unread status of an item, just like there can more than one use for a flag. Marking a message as read really only has the effect of unbolding that item in the list. Say you are responsible for code compiles during the day. You are supposed to update a table on a web site used by developers and QA folk to let them know when the compile is done so developers can proceed to the next compile and QA folk can begin testing the new code. You don't want those items bolded in your Inbox because they are less priority. You are already using the low/high priority flag for some other purpose so you rely on the bolding to indicate other priority. You are still responsible for *reading* those "marked unread" e-mails to update the web site but the bolded messages are more important for you to look at first. I doubt we would be discussing this problem if the clause had been written "make item bold" or "make item unbold". Well, it can have other effects if you are using Exchange and why it is not important about the state of the tray icon. I believe, for example, that you manually clicking on a message which changes its status (and updates the tray icon) can also be used to trigger events back in the Exchange or RM servers. So YOU reading the message is very important whereas whether or not you happen to use a rule to change its bolding is unimportant to others that need to know status of you reading that item. > Personally I'm with you that a rule that marks as read should update the > tray icon. Microsoft decided otherwise. As a user in a peer community in > a Usenet newsgroup, I have no way to change what Microsoft did and > discussing it here will not alter code. OK so we agree then it should be fixed. Anyone from the Microsoft development team reading this? > I doubt we would be discussing this problem if the clause had been written > "make item bold" or "make item unbold". Yes it is misnamed for what it does. I suppose Microsoft could make two different rules, (1) "make the item unbold" which does the same thing as the rule that is currently named "mark as read." (2) "mark as read" which really marks it as read (including updating the flag status). >> Personally I'm with you that a rule that marks as read should >> update the tray icon. Microsoft decided otherwise. As a user in a [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > (2) "mark as read" which really marks it as read (including updating > the flag status). Actually I only really agree that we Outlook users are attempting to use a *corporate* designed e-mail client as a *personal* e-mail client. There are a ton of features in Outlook that make sense in a corporate environment when using Exchange and RM servers that don't make sense in a personal one-user POP/SMTP environment. In a corporate environment where you are responsible for reading your company's or department's e-mails, the tray icon remains until you actually read those new e-mails regardless of what you did with your rules, so the tray icon remains as a persistent reminder to read those e-mails that you are required to read. I use Outlook at both work and home (but wouldn't be using it at home it I had to pay for it out of my pocket). "Features" that are wanted by an employer may not be wanted by a user at home. When managing a herd of corporate customers, the vermin of end-users don't get much attention. > Actually I only really agree that we Outlook users are attempting to use a > *corporate* designed e-mail client as a *personal* e-mail client. There [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > employer may not be wanted by a user at home. When managing a herd of > corporate customers, the vermin of end-users don't get much attention. My real life experience is actually the other way around. When I use Outlook as a personal email client, this doesn't affect me, because personal emails are from such a wide variety of senders and topics I don't get repetitive corporate-process emails that need to be moved and automatically marked read. Also, it is not so critical that I see up-to-the-minute email flag in the task tray, my friends can wait. On the other hand, in a corporate environment, I frequently have to use the "mark as read" rule because I get these useless repetitive emails that must be moved to unclutter my inbox. They are often very low priority emails such as "daily build completed" or "source code checked in" so I don't care if I have ever reviewed these emails. On the other hand if I get an email about scheduling a meeting then I need to see that email right away. So if I'm working on something else in many windows covering up Outlook, the task tray icon is my only notification for these time sensitive emails. So this bug we are talking about reduces some of the productivity in Outlook in a corporate environment. It is not a factor when I use Outlook for personal emails, so I believe the opposite is true of the argument that you have put forward about corporate designed vs. personal designed email client and the flag. marking a message read using rules happens during MAPI processing while reading it in the reading pane happens after the mapi spooler is finished handling it so you can't compare the behavior. Either use the method vanguard suggested or use the unread (or a custom search) folder to read new mail and ignore (or disable) the tray icon.  SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** > Vanguard, that does not sound correct. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Why is it so hard to talk to the flag in the same way for a rule? Did the > programmer use some highly unconventional technique? > marking a message read using rules happens during MAPI processing while > reading it in the reading pane happens after the mapi spooler is finished > handling it so you can't compare the behavior. The MAPI rules processing engine is integrated to the UI enough to change the message subject from bold to normal when it is marked read. Then, with a little extra programming, Microsoft could "complete the job" and trigger another detection routine make that little task tray icon disappear if there are no more unread messages. Just call the same function that is called when the user manually clicks to mark as read. > Either use the method vanguard suggested or use the unread (or a custom > search) folder to read new mail and ignore (or disable) the tray icon. Vanguard has a neat idea but that involves disabling the tray icon. The tray icon is more user friendly than a pop up box. I would go nuts if I had a pop up box every time I get new emails. It would be better if Microsoft just finally fixes this in Outlook 2012. > The MAPI rules processing engine is integrated to the UI enough to > change the message subject from bold to normal when it is marked [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Just call the same function that is called when the user manually > clicks to mark as read. You can contend it's a bug all you want. The fact remains that rules do not affect the tray icon. Consider: you have three messages arrive at one time. The tray icon appears. A rule you have defined moves ONE of the messages and the other two remain. Do you want the tray icon to continue to display, indicating that there are more unread messages, or do you want the rule to turn it off? Remember, this is during rule processing when you might not even be around to know that new messages have arrived. No matter which you choose, SOMEONE will be unhappy with the choice. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] > You can contend it's a bug all you want. The fact remains that rules do > not affect the tray icon. Consider: you have three messages arrive at one [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > you might not even be around to know that new messages have arrived. No > matter which you choose, SOMEONE will be unhappy with the choice. I think you meant to say in your example that a rule you have defined performs the action "mark it as read" on one of the emails but not for both (rather than "move"). In this case of course the tray icon should continue to display because two unread (bold) emails remain in the inbox. If all three are acted upon by the "mark it as read" rule because all three meet the criteria, then there are no more messages to read and the flag should disappear if the problem were fixed. I don't think any user would be unhappy with this behavior. This is the expected and correct behavior. So then I'll explain my particular case. As a software architect at my company I joined a new project where every member of the team receives automatic email notification whenever a file is committed to source control. I get enough emails every day and I don't need to be bothered by these, but I need to find them in an email folder for reference whenever the need arises. So I created an Outlook rule to match the subject and move the messages to a folder, and also to "mark it as read." I use this rule because I don't need to know that I didn't read some developer's source control notification email (on another project I worked on before this, we got daily build emails; similar story). But the problem is, now I get these phantom task tray notifications with the little yellow envelope telling me that I have new email, when I really don't. If I want the flag to disappear I have to go into the source control folder and try to guess which email triggered the flag (probably the most recent) and click on it. It is not bold anymore and has already been marked read, but as soon as I click on "mark as UNread" the flag disappears! Very weird, but this works as a cumbersome manual flag clearing step. The reason I need the new mail notification flag in the task tray is because often I get very important emails, such as when someone wants to arrange a meeting, and I need to know when these arrive. I have many other application windows open and I can't be staring at the Outlook preview pane all day long. When the task tray envelope appears I know that I need to open Outlook. But that is all messed up now, and this kind of this affects office productivity, because the "mark as read" rule is really not marking as read, so that is a bug. Instead of really marking as read, it is just changing the subject from bold to normal text. Some programmer took a shortcut here. BTW - what version of Outlook do you use? I thought 2007 handles it better, although I never tested it as I never bother with marking messages read since I never look at the tray (too much other crap there and windows hides the mail icon eventually) and tune out the new mail sound - I just move the messages that are not important and deal with what is in the inbox. I check the inbox every now and again on my schedule - checking it each time new mail arrives (whether you use the tray icon, sounds or toast to alert you) is a sure way to kill productivity. SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** >> You can contend it's a bug all you want. The fact remains that rules do >> not affect the tray icon. Consider: you have three messages arrive at [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > changing the subject from bold to normal text. Some programmer took a > shortcut here. > BTW - what version of Outlook do you use? I thought 2007 handles it > better, although I never tested it as I never bother with marking messages [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > each time new mail arrives (whether you use the tray icon, sounds or toast > to alert you) is a sure way to kill productivity. I use Outlook 2003 at work and this is where the problem really affects me. I also use Outlook 2007 at home and although I don't use mail filtering rules at home, I can reproduce the same problem. So both versions, including 2007, have the bug. The problem Brian was trying to explain: Say you get 3 messages. the first 2 stay in the inbox. #3 is moved by a rule that marks as read and removes the tray icon. As soon as a message is read, the icon disappears - it doesn't matter if you have 1 or 50 unread messages in the inbox, as soon as 1 is marked read, the icon disappears. So now you don't have the icon to alert you that there are new messages in the inbox. Now if the order is the marked read message first then the other 2, its not an issue - the first one removes the icon, but the next ones restores it. The rule works fine if you always get messages 1 at a time - but anyone using pop or cache mode / rpc over http where the messages are received in bunches will not benefit by removing the tray icon via a rule. SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** >> You can contend it's a bug all you want. The fact remains that rules do >> not affect the tray icon. Consider: you have three messages arrive at [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > changing the subject from bold to normal text. Some programmer took a > shortcut here. > The problem Brian was trying to explain: Say you get 3 messages. the first > 2 stay in the inbox. #3 is moved by a rule that marks as read and removes [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > using pop or cache mode / rpc over http where the messages are received in > bunches will not benefit by removing the tray icon via a rule. I see the example now, but I am not saying that the "mark as read" rule should blindly take a swipe and remove the tray icon without consideration of what else is in the inbox. If the programmer had implemented this properly according to software application design best practices, when the "mark as read" rule is triggered, it would call another procedure that checks whether this is the only remaining unread message. Microsoft should be able to find a way to re-use the same function that is triggered when a user clicks on an item to mark as read. This function checks to see how many other messages there are unread. So why can't the automatic rule do the same thing? The only reason the automatic rule wouldn't be able to do it is if there was some unconventional programming practice (which should be fixed). > Microsoft should be able to find a way to re-use the same function that is > triggered when a user clicks on an item to mark as read. This function > checks to see how many other messages there are unread. where did you get the idea such a function exists? When a message is marked as read, the icon disappears regardless of how many other unread items there are. SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** >> The problem Brian was trying to explain: Say you get 3 messages. the >> first 2 stay in the inbox. #3 is moved by a rule that marks as read and [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > wouldn't be able to do it is if there was some unconventional programming > practice (which should be fixed). > The reason I need the new mail notification flag in the task tray is > because often I get very important emails, such as when someone wants to > arrange a meeting, and I need to know when these arrive. I have many > other application windows open and I can't be staring at the Outlook > preview pane all day long. When the task tray envelope appears I know > that I need to open Outlook. for cases like this turn off the tray notification and use a rule to move the messages. Use stop processing on all the rules that move messages and a final rule that applies to all mail (stop processing on the earlier rules makes this rule apply only to messages that are left in the inbox) that plays a sound and/or runs an application that adds an envelope icon to the tray. > for cases like this turn off the tray notification and use a rule to move > the messages. Use stop processing on all the rules that move messages and > a final rule that applies to all mail (stop processing on the earlier > rules makes this rule apply only to messages that are left in the inbox) > that plays a sound and/or runs an application that adds an envelope icon > to the tray. That is an interesting idea Although if there is some little application that could add a tray icon, it would just stay there and it wouldn't disappear when I mark something read by clicking on the message subject. It would seem to solve one problem but would introduce another new problem. But thanks for the effort trying to find a workaround to the bug. :) So far there isn't any practically useful workaround that I've heard of. > I think you meant to say in your example that a rule you have > defined performs the action "mark it as read" on one of the emails [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "mark it as read" rule because all three meet the criteria, then > there are no more messages to read Um, and who gets to make the determination "there are no more messages to read"? Certainly not you in a corporate environment where you are still required to read all the company's or department's mail regardless of how you chose to personally manage their appearance in your e-mail client. Outlook is a *corporate* e-mail client. It is not designed for personal use. Even if you had the option to turn off the tray icon (and the bubble notice that works with it) using a rule, that doesn't obviate your responsibility to read those company e-mails. Outlook is not designed for use as a personal e-mail client. It is designed as an enterprise solution along with Exchange (and optionally RM) as a corporate e-mail client. To be honest, you (and I) are using an oversized program to do personal e-mail that is not designed for personal use. > So then I'll explain my particular case. As a software architect at > my company I joined a new project where every member of the team [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > the Outlook preview pane all day long. When the task tray envelope > appears I know that I need to open Outlook. That is why I suggested turing OFF the envelope tray icon from showing up in the system notification area and instead using a rule to decide when to present an alert window. > Um, and who gets to make the determination "there are no more messages to > read"? Certainly not you in a corporate environment where you are still [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > oversized program to do personal e-mail that is not designed for personal > use. Then if this is true about being "required to read every message" then Microsoft should rename the "mark as read" rule and call it "undo bold text." Oulook should not try to pretend it has a "mark as read" rule when it really doesn't have one. Some manager/programmer came up with a fake rule in that case. >> Um, and who gets to make the determination "there are no more >> messages to read"? Certainly not you in a corporate environment [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > when it really doesn't have one. Some manager/programmer came up with > a fake rule in that case. Strictly speaking, isn't the envelope icon indicative of 'new, unopened items'? Just because a rule marks a message as read, it doesn't change the fact that the message is new and unopened. Signature-f.h. > I think you meant to say in your example that a rule you have defined > performs the action "mark it as read" on one of the emails but not > for both (rather than "move"). Correct. > In this case of course the tray icon > should continue to display because two unread (bold) emails remain in [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > don't think any user would be unhappy with this behavior. This is > the expected and correct behavior. It is certainly not the expected behavior (to me, expected behavior is as-implemented behavior) and I'm not convinced it's correct, either. It remains, however, that the two processes are disconnected. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] "Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com> wrote in message > It is certainly not the expected behavior (to me, expected behavior is > as-implemented behavior) and I'm not convinced it's correct, either. It > remains, however, that the two processes are disconnected. Here is something you should try, that may help to convince you that this is indeed a bug and not expected behavior. Reproduce the orphaned tray icon using the "mark as read" rule, and then close Outlook and start Outlook again. Notice that the tray icon has now disappeared. Therefore the tray icon is not sticking around because of a sensible usability reason, but rather because of a missing software call. By restarting Outlook the program initialization routine finally makes the proper software call. If still not convinced, go to the message that the rule "marked as read" and then manually right click and "mark as unread." Now the task tray icon disappears! Very strange! This evidence should override all these other discussions we've been having. If it acts so strange in this manner, it should be clear it's a bug and I have a really hard time to believe that it's a feature, and it reminds me of those silly cartoons where programmers like to claim that a bug is a feature. The problem is that everyone calls it an unread message alert - it's a new mail alert and is only there when you have new mail. If you have older unread mail, it will not show. As soon as you read 1 message (even if you have 50 new ones), it disappears because you should know there is new mail in your inbox. When you close outlook the icon disappears because outlook is closed and when you restart, for at least a few seconds, there isn't any *new* mail - so no icon. SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** > "Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > reminds me of those silly cartoons where programmers like to claim that a > bug is a feature. > The problem is that everyone calls it an unread message alert - it's a new > mail alert and is only there when you have new mail. If you have older [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > is closed and when you restart, for at least a few seconds, there isn't > any *new* mail - so no icon. I see, now that makes sense. I think this confusion arises because the tray icon uses the marked as read mechanism to make the flag disappear, at least for the first message. I still can't figure out why the "mark as read" rule does not cause the same effects on the tray icon envelope as when a human does it. Outlook should have another rule called "mark as read while simulating a human" that produces the correct behavior. > I still can't figure out why the "mark as read" rule does not cause > the same effects on the tray icon envelope as when a human does it. Because, as Mr. Muffman said, "mark as read" doesn't mean "opened". > Outlook should have another rule called "mark as read while > simulating a human" that produces the correct behavior. Now you're being silly. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] "Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com> wrote in message > Because, as Mr. Muffman said, "mark as read" doesn't mean "opened". Then if we choose to play with words Microsoft needs to create another rule called "mark as opened." This is a problem for the ordinary corporate user. Search the web and you'll find thousands of complaints on this. >> Because, as Mr. Muffman said, "mark as read" doesn't mean "opened". >> > Then if we choose to play with words Microsoft needs to create another > rule called "mark as opened." I wasn't trying to play with words. I was simply using the words that are there. You want the words to mean something they don't, not me. > This is a problem for the ordinary corporate user. Search the web and > you'll find thousands of complaints on this. a) Then train your corporate users. b) And I see millions of Outlook users who aren't complaining, notable by the lack of complaints. I'm just thinking that this is something you need to accept and move on. If you want Microsoft to fix it, call the support line, say what's broken and ask them to open a bug. If they won't, ask for a supervisor. Keep asking for one until they open a bug and give you a bug number. Take that however you want. Signature-f.h. > a) Then train your corporate users. > ..... "Corporate Training Manual for Outlook Section 44.2" "When you mark mail read by clicking on it, your new mail notification will disappear from the task tray." "When you mark mail read using a rule, the new mail notification will not disappear." "If you right-click on the message that is marked read via the rule, and then you manually mark it un-read, the tray notification will disappear." "This is by design, because when you mark mail read using a rule, Outlook knows you didn't really mean to do that. Whereas if you mark it read by clicking on it, then you must have done it on purpose. This is Outlook's way of protecting you." "There is another new protection feature from our IT department: when you configure an automatic Out of Office notification, it won't be sent when you're away from your desk. This is because you are not really out of the office unless you turn off the computer. When you physically press the power button, the notification will be sent." > "Corporate Training Manual for Outlook Section 44.2" ...snip... > "This is by design, because when you mark mail read using a rule, > Outlook knows you didn't really mean to do that. Whereas if you mark > it read by clicking on it, then you must have done it on purpose. This is > Outlook's way of protecting you." Too funny. > "There is another new protection feature from our IT department: when > you configure an automatic Out of Office notification, it won't be > sent when you're away from your desk. This is because you are not > really out of the office unless you turn off the computer. When you > physically press the power button, the notification will be sent." Sorry, but this isn't even close to having the intent you wish, since Outlook DOES send OO messages as soon as you enable the feature. Unless you have your delivery location on a PST, it doesn't matter whether Outlook is running or not, since the Exchange server takes care of the message. You don't have a valid complaint on this one. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] "Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com> wrote in message > Sorry, but this isn't even close to having the intent you wish, since > Outlook DOES send OO messages as soon as you enable the feature. Unless > you have your delivery location on a PST, it doesn't matter whether > Outlook is running or not, since the Exchange server takes care of the > message. You don't have a valid complaint on this one. I know that Out of Office is on the server and will send the message as soon as you configure it, but this was meant as a joke that the IT dept would mess with OO to change its behavior to a ridiculous scenario of having to push the power button, protect the user - similar to the new mail icon "protection." > I know that Out of Office is on the server and will send the message > as soon as you configure it, but this was meant as a joke that the IT > dept would mess with OO to change its behavior to a ridiculous > scenario of having to push the power button, protect the user - > similar to the new mail icon "protection." I get it now. Humor-impaired, I guess. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] Also, something about software application architecture best practices: When the mark-read rule is processing, it is not the job of the rule engine to check for all the remaining messages that are still unread. Instead this should be the job of the application module that is responsible for the read/unread status and display changes pertaining to that status. I have a feeling that during the creation of the rule engine some programmer used an unconventional technique and just changed the bold face to non-bold formatting for a read message and said to the software development manager "hey I'm all done." .... instead of using the proper API. > Also, something about software application architecture best > practices: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > software development manager "hey I'm all done." .... instead of > using the proper API. I have run across many perceived ease-of-use anomalies that when reported has the developer claiming that it is working as designed. I then go read the Functional Specification and come back with the claim that the behavior is not so specified. The result is usually to change from "working as designed" to "working as coded". So I end up issuing a trouble ticket to report the ease-of-use defect and won't close it based on the lame "working as coded" excuse. But as a QA tester, I can't change the product but only recommend changes or report defective behavior that differs from the spec (I can report what I think is a defect but have to work on getting the developers to agree if it is not spec'ed that way). After all, you are complaining to a peer community of users that can't do anything to change the product. What do you want us users to do about it? > "fpbear" <fpbear@nospam.nowhere> wrote in message > I have run across many perceived ease-of-use anomalies that when reported > has the developer claiming that it is working as designed. I then go read [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > After all, you are complaining to a peer community of users that can't do > anything to change the product. What do you want us users to do about it? I'm hoping someone from Microsoft will read this, and then they can go do a web search and find posts from thousands of other users talking about the same thing. Then maybe this bug will raise higher on the manager's priority list. > I'm hoping someone from Microsoft will read this, and then they can > go do a web search and find posts from thousands of other users > talking about the same thing. Then maybe this bug will raise higher > on the manager's priority list. I doubt it. As I recall, Microsoft (through their Contact Us link), had you submit a feedback webform for those type of requests. Individual requests will have little or no impact to change code. I doubt even hundreds of such requests would make a dent in their design philosophy. There could be thousands of complaints here in Usenet but only maybe a dozen of those thousands of users bother to submit a feedback using the webform. More often it takes one, or more, large corporations with a fat contracts with Microsoft and who are also paying for premium support from Microsoft to nag loud enough for Microsoft to hear and comply. You could, for example, pay hefty for an MSDN subscription to get closer to Microsoft's ear. Hoping that Microsoft does anything to alter their software based on posts here is as likely as submitting spam reports to SpamCop will reduce the outflux of crap from spammers. Here you need to find out how to fix or workaround a problem or defect. In SpamCop, you really just want to get their blacklist updated. Anything other expectation is about as real as pushing a disconnected crosswalk button: it eases your frustration but with no real change. Are you familiar with MAPI or the Outlook object model and rules engine? SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** > Also, something about software application architecture best practices: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > development manager "hey I'm all done." .... instead of using the proper > API. > Are you familiar with MAPI or the Outlook object model and rules engine? Yes I had to work with MAPI in 2003, it has a long history and needs some re-architecting. Well, this has been lively. If you want to get the functionality for which you are looking, you'll have to do it in Outlook VBA, with calls to WIN32 APIs. See: http://www.outlookcode.com/d/code/clearenvicon.htm or for a very low cost, buy an add-in - http://www.techhit.com/autoread/ SignatureDiane Poremsky [MVP - Outlook] Author, Teach Yourself Outlook 2003 in 24 Hours Need Help with Common Tasks? http://www.outlook-tips.net/beginner/ Outlook 2007: http://www.slipstick.com/outlook/ol2007/ Outlook Tips by email: dailytips-subscribe-request@lists.outlooktips.net Outlook Tips: http://www.outlook-tips.net/ Outlook & Exchange Solutions Center: http://www.slipstick.com Subscribe to Exchange Messaging Outlook newsletter: EMO-NEWSLETTER-SUBSCRIBE-REQUEST@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM ** Please include your Outlook version, Account type, and Windows Version when requesting assistance ** > Well, this has been lively. > > If you want to get the functionality for which you are looking, you'll > have to do it in Outlook VBA, with calls to WIN32 APIs. See: > http://www.outlookcode.com/d/code/clearenvicon.htm I had this same problem, but I found a solution to the bug. I get three or four emails a day from various administrators notifying me of updated/new/deleted procedures. I don't need to read them so I had Outlook mark them as read and move them to another folder. When Outlook moves unread, unopened email to another folder the tray icon does not appear, but since Outlook was first marking them as read and then moving them to a new folder the tray icon would remain, even if I later opened that folder and read the newly received email. Solution: I made two separate rules- the first moves the mail to a new folder and the second marks it as read. This circumvents the bug (which is a bug, obviously) and allows me to focus on the emails that I actually need to read. > Solution: I made two separate rules- the first moves the mail to a > new folder and the second marks it as read. This circumvents the bug > (which is a bug, obviously) and allows me to focus on the emails that > I actually need to read. I'd like to see the definitions of these two rules, since the usual method of defining two rules, with one of them a move, should cause only the first rule to act, unless you have the "mark as read" rule first and did not specify the "stop processing more rules" action. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] >> Solution: I made two separate rules- the first moves the mail to a >> new folder and the second marks it as read. This circumvents the bug [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > first rule to act, unless you have the "mark as read" rule first and did > not specify the "stop processing more rules" action. Brad, this is a nice idea and I just tried this, but just like Brian says, only the first rule takes effect. After the email is moved into the folder it is not marked read, even though there is another rule attempting to mark it read. I have Microsoft Outlook 2003 SP3. I was seeing the terribly obnoxious permanent envelope icon before splitting the rules into two. Even after clicking and "reading" every new email I had received that icon would not go away. The problem is annoying, but this work around isn't terribly difficult. I hope it works with whatever Outlook version you have. The first rule reads: Apply this rule after the message arrives with 'Updated Procedures' or ... move it to the Proc Updates folder The second rule reads: Apply this rule after the message arrives with 'Updated Procedures' or ... mark it as read and stop processing more rules > I have Microsoft Outlook 2003 SP3. I was seeing the terribly > obnoxious permanent envelope icon before splitting the rules into [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > mark it as read > and stop processing more rules You should be able to combine these rules into a single rule: Apply this rule after the message arrives with "Updated Procedures" or... Move it to the Proc Updates folder and mark it as read and stop processing more rules SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] That's how the rules started out, but since it seemed to mark it as read before moving it to the new folder, the envelope icon would get stuck in my systray and I would have to close Outlook and reopen it to get the icon to disappear. > That's how the rules started out, but since it seemed to mark it as > read before moving it to the new folder, the envelope icon would get > stuck in my systray and I would have to close Outlook and reopen it > to get the icon to disappear. If the two rules do what you want, well and good. You could also simply open ANY message to make the icon disappear. It does for me. No need to close and reopen Outlook. SignatureBrian Tillman [MVP-Outlook] |
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.