I often need to print out .MSG files that originated from any version of
Outlook from 97-2007. Occasionally, I will run across one that yields the
following error trying to print:

"There is a problem with the selected printer. You might need to reinstall
this printer. Try again,or use a different printer."

Selecting any of about a dozen different printer drivers yields the same
results. The only thing I've noticed with these files is that the Emails are
in RTF format and have inline attachment icons in the Email. The only
workaround I've found is to choose Edit Message and change it to HTML format,
but that moves the inline attachment icons to just filenames in the
Attachments: line of the header, so isn't ideal. Not all RTF Emails w/
inline attachments cause this error...only an occasional one here and there.
There doesn't appear to be any odd formatting in the Email either and
Microsoft's website lists no record of any such error message.

Any ideas? Thanks!

Steve

You ever find a fix for this? We are having the same thing.

"xstevejx" wrote:

> I often need to print out .MSG files that originated from any version of
> Outlook from 97-2007. Occasionally, I will run across one that yields the
> following error trying to print:
>
> "There is a problem with the selected printer. You might need to reinstall
> this printer. Try again,or use a different printer."
>
> Selecting any of about a dozen different printer drivers yields the same
> results. The only thing I've noticed with these files is that the Emails are
> in RTF format and have inline attachment icons in the Email. The only
> workaround I've found is to choose Edit Message and change it to HTML format,
> but that moves the inline attachment icons to just filenames in the
> Attachments: line of the header, so isn't ideal. Not all RTF Emails w/
> inline attachments cause this error...only an occasional one here and there.
> There doesn't appear to be any odd formatting in the Email either and
> Microsoft's website lists no record of any such error message.
>
> Any ideas? Thanks!
>
> Steve
>