fax numbers in address book

  • Thread starter Thread starter LB
  • Start date Start date
L

LB

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, 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
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?


.
 
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
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?


.
 
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.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
Clapper said:
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
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?


.
 
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
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.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
Clapper said:
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-***

to
display all to
store them in a them
with an alpha phone
numbers. name
into number
or


.
 
I quite agree.
We've been asking for this for years.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
Clapper said:
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
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.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
Clapper said:
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
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]
message
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?


.


.
 
Back
Top