My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book. Shouldn't
they and how to fix.
--
jackboy

"jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
> My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
> Shouldn't
> they and how to fix.

well they don't here - Outlook 2007 - the addressbook is only a view of
contacts that is used in addressing an email, so they wouldn't, would they?

Makes perfect sense. Behaving as designed. Why should Contacts to whom you
cannot send electronic messages appear in the Outlook Address Book? What
purpose would that serve?
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
"jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
> My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
> Shouldn't
> they and how to fix.
> --
> jackboy

Just upgraded to Outlook 2007. Going through Outlook 2007 Inside Out from
Microsoft Press with a fine tooth comb vs my installed application. Chapter 6
Managing Address Books and Distribution Lists, states on Page 138 and I quote:

"Outlook 2007 Address Book

On all installations, including those with no email accounts, Outlook 2007
creates a default Outlook Address Book (OAB). This address book consolidates
all your Outlook 2007 Contact folders."

I dunno, either a mistake or not very clear or maybe the software should
work this way. I agree, I just about always use it to insert a email address,
but still it might be convenient to know you have all your contacts in OAB.
What is your basis for saying this is in the design. Your source for knowing
design intent is....? There is after all a lot of reduntdency in all MS apps.
I certainly realize there are other searches available to find these
contacts. Anyway above paragraph was source of my question.

Looking forward to your response. Most grateful you took the time to get
back to me with your views and expertise. New member of this group but plan
to be active.




--
jackboy


"Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:

> Makes perfect sense. Behaving as designed. Why should Contacts to whom you
> cannot send electronic messages appear in the Outlook Address Book? What
> purpose would that serve?
> --
> Russ Valentine
> [MVP-Outlook]
> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
> > Shouldn't
> > they and how to fix.
> > --
> > jackboy
>

Same message as I sent to Russ. thanks for your feedback

Just upgraded to Outlook 2007. Going through Outlook 2007 Inside Out from
Microsoft Press with a fine tooth comb vs my installed application. Chapter 6
Managing Address Books and Distribution Lists, states on Page 138 and I quote:

"Outlook 2007 Address Book

On all installations, including those with no email accounts, Outlook 2007
creates a default Outlook Address Book (OAB). This address book consolidates
all your Outlook 2007 Contact folders."

I dunno, either a mistake or not very clear or maybe the software should
work this way. I agree, I just about always use it to insert a email address,
but still it might be convenient to know you have all your contacts in OAB.
What is your basis for saying this is in the design. Your source for knowing
design intent is....? There is after all a lot of reduntdency in all MS apps.
I certainly realize there are other searches available to find these
contacts. Anyway above paragraph was source of my question.

Looking forward to your response. Most grateful you took the time to get
back to me with your views and expertise. New member of this group but plan
to be active.
--
jackboy


"Gordon" wrote:

> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
> > Shouldn't
> > they and how to fix.
>
> well they don't here - Outlook 2007 - the addressbook is only a view of
> contacts that is used in addressing an email, so they wouldn't, would they?
>
>
>

I have no idea what the author is saying here. It is a patently unclear
statement. The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been.
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
"jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:F7D98D6C-99B9-4F6D-A348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> Just upgraded to Outlook 2007. Going through Outlook 2007 Inside Out from
> Microsoft Press with a fine tooth comb vs my installed application.
> Chapter 6
> Managing Address Books and Distribution Lists, states on Page 138 and I
> quote:
>
> "Outlook 2007 Address Book
>
> On all installations, including those with no email accounts, Outlook 2007
> creates a default Outlook Address Book (OAB). This address book
> consolidates
> all your Outlook 2007 Contact folders."
>
> I dunno, either a mistake or not very clear or maybe the software should
> work this way. I agree, I just about always use it to insert a email
> address,
> but still it might be convenient to know you have all your contacts in
> OAB.
> What is your basis for saying this is in the design. Your source for
> knowing
> design intent is....? There is after all a lot of reduntdency in all MS
> apps.
> I certainly realize there are other searches available to find these
> contacts. Anyway above paragraph was source of my question.
>
> Looking forward to your response. Most grateful you took the time to get
> back to me with your views and expertise. New member of this group but
> plan
> to be active.
>
>
>
>
> --
> jackboy
>
>
> "Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:
>
>> Makes perfect sense. Behaving as designed. Why should Contacts to whom
>> you
>> cannot send electronic messages appear in the Outlook Address Book? What
>> purpose would that serve?
>> --
>> Russ Valentine
>> [MVP-Outlook]
>> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
>> > Shouldn't
>> > they and how to fix.
>> > --
>> > jackboy
>>

You state "The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been."

That's the whole point of my question, False it 's not of view of each, it
excludes entrys that do not have email address even if contact has name,
address and phone #. Ya know, my wife has a little red leather book with a
gold embossed title on front cover that says "Address Book". Inside she has
people she knows with Name, telephone, address and email. Except, sometimes
she has only 1 or 2 of the last three fields. Still she finds it useful to
have the info in one place(she doesn't tear out the page). I guess this
centurys old tool has a more open and forgivng design.
--
jackboy


"Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:

> I have no idea what the author is saying here. It is a patently unclear
> statement. The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been.
> --
> Russ Valentine
> [MVP-Outlook]
> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:F7D98D6C-99B9-4F6D-A348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Just upgraded to Outlook 2007. Going through Outlook 2007 Inside Out from
> > Microsoft Press with a fine tooth comb vs my installed application.
> > Chapter 6
> > Managing Address Books and Distribution Lists, states on Page 138 and I
> > quote:
> >
> > "Outlook 2007 Address Book
> >
> > On all installations, including those with no email accounts, Outlook 2007
> > creates a default Outlook Address Book (OAB). This address book
> > consolidates
> > all your Outlook 2007 Contact folders."
> >
> > I dunno, either a mistake or not very clear or maybe the software should
> > work this way. I agree, I just about always use it to insert a email
> > address,
> > but still it might be convenient to know you have all your contacts in
> > OAB.
> > What is your basis for saying this is in the design. Your source for
> > knowing
> > design intent is....? There is after all a lot of reduntdency in all MS
> > apps.
> > I certainly realize there are other searches available to find these
> > contacts. Anyway above paragraph was source of my question.
> >
> > Looking forward to your response. Most grateful you took the time to get
> > back to me with your views and expertise. New member of this group but
> > plan
> > to be active.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > jackboy
> >
> >
> > "Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:
> >
> >> Makes perfect sense. Behaving as designed. Why should Contacts to whom
> >> you
> >> cannot send electronic messages appear in the Outlook Address Book? What
> >> purpose would that serve?
> >> --
> >> Russ Valentine
> >> [MVP-Outlook]
> >> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> > My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
> >> > Shouldn't
> >> > they and how to fix.
> >> > --
> >> > jackboy
> >>
>

"jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:CCE7F667-B215-45CC-A170-(E-Mail Removed)...
> You state "The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
>> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been."
>
> That's the whole point of my question, False it 's not of view of each, it
> excludes entrys that do not have email address even if contact has name,
> address and phone #.

because, as I responded, you ONLY see the "addressbook" view WHEN COMPOSING
AN EMAIL......so there's no point in displaying contacts that DON'T have an
email address...

Read my post again. It includes every electronic address. Since when is a
snail mail address electronic? What type of electronic message will you be
sending to it?
You would only need a snail mail address in Word. Guess what? There it is!
--
Russ Valentine
[MVP-Outlook]
"jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:CCE7F667-B215-45CC-A170-(E-Mail Removed)...
> You state "The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
>> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been."
>
> That's the whole point of my question, False it 's not of view of each, it
> excludes entrys that do not have email address even if contact has name,
> address and phone #. Ya know, my wife has a little red leather book with a
> gold embossed title on front cover that says "Address Book". Inside she
> has
> people she knows with Name, telephone, address and email. Except,
> sometimes
> she has only 1 or 2 of the last three fields. Still she finds it useful to
> have the info in one place(she doesn't tear out the page). I guess this
> centurys old tool has a more open and forgivng design.
> --
> jackboy
>
>
> "Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:
>
>> I have no idea what the author is saying here. It is a patently unclear
>> statement. The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
>> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been.
>> --
>> Russ Valentine
>> [MVP-Outlook]
>> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:F7D98D6C-99B9-4F6D-A348-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> > Just upgraded to Outlook 2007. Going through Outlook 2007 Inside Out
>> > from
>> > Microsoft Press with a fine tooth comb vs my installed application.
>> > Chapter 6
>> > Managing Address Books and Distribution Lists, states on Page 138 and I
>> > quote:
>> >
>> > "Outlook 2007 Address Book
>> >
>> > On all installations, including those with no email accounts, Outlook
>> > 2007
>> > creates a default Outlook Address Book (OAB). This address book
>> > consolidates
>> > all your Outlook 2007 Contact folders."
>> >
>> > I dunno, either a mistake or not very clear or maybe the software
>> > should
>> > work this way. I agree, I just about always use it to insert a email
>> > address,
>> > but still it might be convenient to know you have all your contacts in
>> > OAB.
>> > What is your basis for saying this is in the design. Your source for
>> > knowing
>> > design intent is....? There is after all a lot of reduntdency in all MS
>> > apps.
>> > I certainly realize there are other searches available to find these
>> > contacts. Anyway above paragraph was source of my question.
>> >
>> > Looking forward to your response. Most grateful you took the time to
>> > get
>> > back to me with your views and expertise. New member of this group but
>> > plan
>> > to be active.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > jackboy
>> >
>> >
>> > "Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:
>> >
>> >> Makes perfect sense. Behaving as designed. Why should Contacts to whom
>> >> you
>> >> cannot send electronic messages appear in the Outlook Address Book?
>> >> What
>> >> purpose would that serve?
>> >> --
>> >> Russ Valentine
>> >> [MVP-Outlook]
>> >> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> >> news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
>> >> > My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
>> >> > Shouldn't
>> >> > they and how to fix.
>> >> > --
>> >> > jackboy
>> >>
>>

Hi Russ and Gordan,

First, I want to thank you again for taking the time to get back to me. This
is my first time in the community and I can see already that it's going to be
a informative and spirited environment. I think MS Outlook 2007 w BCM is
"Hall of Fame" software. It why after 5 years in real estate, I've chosen it
as a platform for re-entry into the tech world. Coded in Microsoft Basic on
Intel 8080 platform in 1977. Now 30 years later immersing myself in this
product and VSTO. Two final thoughts and I'll give you guys the last word,
since it's time to move on.

1. It's not called an address book for electronic addresses. Outlook always
refers to it as just address book. Like my wifes little red leather one. I
can see someone looking up a name of someone you know is a contact who you
think they have an email address for but they don't. It's like calling
information and finding out someone has an unlisted phone #. Not the info you
wanted but information as well. And if they name was in the "Address book"
you would wouldn't have to search again elsewhere or wonder if it's actually
a contact item. You would have a snail mail address or a phone # to as
alternative communications methods right there.

2. Outlook 2007 Inside Out from Microsoft Press. Isn't that considered an
official source? It clearly states on pg 138 "Including those with no email
accounts" as being in the OAB. (I guess author and Microsoft editors did not
think the function to be so ridiculous) Anyway, how do we bring this to their
attention? Notice the author Jim Boyce is an Outlook MVP. Any way to let him
know about this directly?

That's it for me on this topic. Have a great holiday and hope to engage you
again on another topic. I have lot's to learn.
--
jackboy


"Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:

> Read my post again. It includes every electronic address. Since when is a
> snail mail address electronic? What type of electronic message will you be
> sending to it?
> You would only need a snail mail address in Word. Guess what? There it is!
> --
> Russ Valentine
> [MVP-Outlook]
> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:CCE7F667-B215-45CC-A170-(E-Mail Removed)...
> > You state "The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
> >> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been."
> >
> > That's the whole point of my question, False it 's not of view of each, it
> > excludes entrys that do not have email address even if contact has name,
> > address and phone #. Ya know, my wife has a little red leather book with a
> > gold embossed title on front cover that says "Address Book". Inside she
> > has
> > people she knows with Name, telephone, address and email. Except,
> > sometimes
> > she has only 1 or 2 of the last three fields. Still she finds it useful to
> > have the info in one place(she doesn't tear out the page). I guess this
> > centurys old tool has a more open and forgivng design.
> > --
> > jackboy
> >
> >
> > "Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:
> >
> >> I have no idea what the author is saying here. It is a patently unclear
> >> statement. The fact remains: the Outlook Address Book is simply a view of
> >> each electronic address book in a Contacts Folder. Always has been.
> >> --
> >> Russ Valentine
> >> [MVP-Outlook]
> >> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> news:F7D98D6C-99B9-4F6D-A348-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> > Just upgraded to Outlook 2007. Going through Outlook 2007 Inside Out
> >> > from
> >> > Microsoft Press with a fine tooth comb vs my installed application.
> >> > Chapter 6
> >> > Managing Address Books and Distribution Lists, states on Page 138 and I
> >> > quote:
> >> >
> >> > "Outlook 2007 Address Book
> >> >
> >> > On all installations, including those with no email accounts, Outlook
> >> > 2007
> >> > creates a default Outlook Address Book (OAB). This address book
> >> > consolidates
> >> > all your Outlook 2007 Contact folders."
> >> >
> >> > I dunno, either a mistake or not very clear or maybe the software
> >> > should
> >> > work this way. I agree, I just about always use it to insert a email
> >> > address,
> >> > but still it might be convenient to know you have all your contacts in
> >> > OAB.
> >> > What is your basis for saying this is in the design. Your source for
> >> > knowing
> >> > design intent is....? There is after all a lot of reduntdency in all MS
> >> > apps.
> >> > I certainly realize there are other searches available to find these
> >> > contacts. Anyway above paragraph was source of my question.
> >> >
> >> > Looking forward to your response. Most grateful you took the time to
> >> > get
> >> > back to me with your views and expertise. New member of this group but
> >> > plan
> >> > to be active.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > jackboy
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Makes perfect sense. Behaving as designed. Why should Contacts to whom
> >> >> you
> >> >> cannot send electronic messages appear in the Outlook Address Book?
> >> >> What
> >> >> purpose would that serve?
> >> >> --
> >> >> Russ Valentine
> >> >> [MVP-Outlook]
> >> >> "jackboy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> >> >> news:8E0B1FD9-3A9C-43A5-B63F-(E-Mail Removed)...
> >> >> > My contacts with no email addresses do not post to my address book.
> >> >> > Shouldn't
> >> >> > they and how to fix.
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > jackboy
> >> >>
> >>
>