Hard to add new Contact after failed search for existing contact

[Mickey Segal]

A typical scenario for adding a new Contact is the following:
1. Clicking the Windows Contacts icon (with target "%ProgramFiles%\Windows
Mail\wab.exe") to open Contacts
2. Typing the name into the Search box and finding it absent
3. Wanting a "New Contact" button to click to create a new contact.

However, after searching there is no "New Contact" button, even though there
was such a button when you had opened up Windows Contacts originally. A
workaround is to click the Windows Contacts icon again to open a new Windows
Contacts instance, but it would be better if there were a New Contact button
after a search in Windows Contacts.

This was more convenient in Windows XP.

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

If you're talking about the 'Search Results...' window, just use the
Backspace key to return to the Contacts window.

 

[Mickey Segal]

It would be good if searching within Contacts remembered that you were
searching Contacts and offered to make a new contact.

 

[Pamela Melton]

I have imported my contacts from my Palm Tungsten E and am not sure how to
import them from Palm to Microsoft Mail. Any suggestions on how to do that?

Pamela

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

And if your searching for files created before July 4, 2006 and none are
found, should it offer to create some? ;-)

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

If the Palm software has an option to export contacts in .csv (comma
seperated values) use that (I'm not familiar with Palm software). Then
import the .csv file into Contacts.

 

[Mickey Segal]

That is the problem with using a general search program, not search within a
contacts application, which would respond more helpfully.

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

There's always the 'Find' button in the 'Select Recipients' dialog.

 

[Mickey Segal]

There are many cases in which one wants to use Contacts when not using
email, for example looking for an address or telephone number. It is too
bad that some functionality has been stripped out so as to use a new
searching paradigm for contacts, particularly since it works much worse on
simple tasks such as alphabetizing.

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

Well, the apps bundled with an OS have always been basic. Notepad is not a
state-of-the-art word processor, Paint would be a lot more fun if it were
capable of 3D modeling & rendering, etc. If you want more functionality,
you buy a program specific to your needs.

That being said, have you opened a Contact in notepad? Contacts are XML
files, so you're not enslaved by a proprietary database. You can write an
app to handle Contacts in whatever way you desire -- you just have to want
it bad enough.

 

[Mickey Segal]

What is surprising is that Contacts has lost functionality and usability
since its XP equivalent.

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

What's surprising is your sense of entitlement.

 

[Mickey Segal]

I don't think the Microsoft intends the "Wow" in their advertizing campaign
for Windows to be "Wow, look what they left out".

It is surprising to find a Microsoft MVP encouraging people to expect a
lower level of functionality in Vista, rather than saying "This is a
problem, let me speak to folks at Microsoft to see if this can get fixed".

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

Lets review:

Your original question regarded adding a new contact after failed search. You thought you had to close the Search window & open Contacts again. I explained the use of the Backspace key. So:

Under XP: Under Vista:
Open Address Book Open Contacts
Click 'Find People' Click in Search box
Type 'Noone' Type 'Noone'
Press <Enter> or click 'Find' "Not Found" -> click in window
"Not Found..." -> Click 'OK' Press Backspace
Close Find People Click 'New Contact'
Click 'New' Add Info...
Click 'New Contact'
Add Info...


I don't think you're upset because now it takes two fewer steps -- that wouldn't make sense.

There is no lost functionality for this scenario -- so that can't be your complaint.

It's just slightly different.

I think the folks at MS are already aware that there are slight differences between XP & Vista.

 

[Mickey Segal]

Just as I did not see the fastest (but non-intuitive) approach in Vista, you
did not see the fastest (but very intuitive) approach in XP.

In XP, it was simple to alphabetize by last name, so the best search method
was to scroll to the last name. If that wasn't found, one made a new
contact. This is easier than the approach you outline, which fixates on
using Vista's text search paradigm in XP.

Unfortunately the alphabetization of contacts is ridiculously slow in Vista,
to the point of being unusable, so one needs to use search instead.
Unfortunately the search metaphor is so generic that users will not see a
"New contact" button after a search, and some purists find it distasteful to
add one.

Such functionality in XP was much better. The problems in Vista are easy to
fix, but that would require people to do what is obvious to the user, add a
"New Contact" button to the toolbar on the search results page. An
alternate solution would be to set the default (and therefore instant)
alphabetization in Windows Contacts to the choice made by the user, as one
could in XP.

These are obvious flaws. An MVP can be of most help to Microsoft by helping
figure out what needs to be fixed, rather than criticizing users for their
preference for more user-friendly software design.

I don't think you're upset because now it takes two fewer steps -- that
wouldn't make sense.

There is no lost functionality for this scenario -- so that can't be your
complaint.

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

In XP, it was simple to alphabetize by last name, so the best search
method was to scroll to the last name. If that wasn't found, one made a
new contact. This is easier than the approach you outline, which fixates
on using Vista's text search paradigm in XP.

LOL. You've just redefined searching as scrolling down the list looking for
what you want, that capability is still available in Vista ;-). Then you
accuse me of 'fixating' on using Search when that's what YOU asked about!
I'm guessing you work for Fox News

Unfortunately the alphabetization of contacts is ridiculously slow in
Vista, to the point of being unusable, so one needs to use search instead.

I searched & saw your other post about 'Last Name' -- the view & sort you
select for your Contacts folder should be remembered. Are you still having
this problem?

Unfortunately the search metaphor is so generic that users will not see a
"New contact" button after a search, and some purists find it distasteful
to add one.

I've never met a purist, do you know any?

Such functionality in XP was much better. The problems in Vista are easy
to fix, but that would require people to do what is obvious to the user,

What is obvious to one user is not to another.

An alternate solution would be to set the default (and therefore instant)
alphabetization in Windows Contacts to the choice made by the user, as one
could in XP.

Ahh...the default behavior of naming the Contact file in the FirstLast
format & not giving the user the option of selecting LastFirst as the
default. THAT is a valid issue that has been relayed to MS. In the
meantime, if you want your Contact files renamed in LastFirst format, I've
written a script for that. Right-click on the link and select 'Save Target
As...' (no web page there, just individual files). Then extract the vbs
file from the .zip file & run the script.

http://mysite.verizon.net/res18hr7/Last, First.zip

If your Contacts have data in the FirstName & LastName fields, that will be
used in contructing the name. If only a FullName exists, a 'best guess' is
made at parsing. Unmodified Contacts will remain in their original folder.
Modified Contacts will be placed in a subfolder. Backups of the originals
will be placed in another. It is left up to the User to select which to
retain & which to delete.

These are obvious flaws. An MVP can be of most help to Microsoft by
helping figure out what needs to be fixed, rather than criticizing users
for their preference for more user-friendly software design.

Thanks for the tip.

 

[Mickey Segal]

I searched & saw your other post about 'Last Name' -- the view & sort you
select for your Contacts folder should be remembered. Are you still
having this problem?

"I'm" not having that problem. Windows Contacts is still having that
problem. It doesn't fail to "remember" the sorting method - it displays the
contacts in its preferred sorting method, which depends on the order used in
each address added to your Contacts, and then takes about a minute to
display the user's preferred sorting order.

I just gave up and used the Search strategy, and that's how I discovered the
non-intuitive generic use of search, without an offer to create a new entry
if no entry is found. Conceptualizing everything as a generic search is
simply not going to come across as intuitive to a huge number of people, and
the problem can easily be fixed within the context of the Search model,
except for those who feel it would be a capitulation.

Ahh...the default behavior of naming the Contact file in the FirstLast
format & not giving the user the option of selecting LastFirst as the
default. THAT is a valid issue that has been relayed to MS. In the
meantime, if you want your Contact files renamed in LastFirst format, I've
written a script for that. Right-click on the link and select 'Save
Target As...' (no web page there, just individual files). Then extract
the vbs file from the .zip file & run the script.

http://mysite.verizon.net/res18hr7/Last, First.zip

That is a worthwhile service, but unless you monitor all new Contacts the
system will have exceptions. It would be better for Microsoft to just fix
the problem, or if we are to be shunted into the Search model, make that
more intuitive. I'll now know to hit the back arrow, but if it wasn't
intuitive to me I can guaranteee that many people will never figure it out.

Some of the new Microsoft products have been terrific, particularly Office
2007 and the Tablet PC features of Vista. Others have been real steps
backward, particularly the lack of ability to customize the default toolbars
in Internet Explorer and the various problems of Windows Mail, of which the
Contacts problem are one of the minor annoyances (the worst I've seen are
the broken pasting of hyperlinks and the need to scroll up to get the newest
newsgroup messages if more than a few arrive). It would be interesting to
know which projects still had input from the founding generation of
Microsoft.

 

[Keith Miller MVP]

URL update:

http://mysite.verizon.net/res18hr7/LastFirst.zip


--
Good Luck,

Keith
Microsoft MVP [Windows XP Shell/User]

In XP, it was simple to alphabetize by last name, so the best search
method was to scroll to the last name. If that wasn't found, one made a
new contact. This is easier than the approach you outline, which fixates
on using Vista's text search paradigm in XP.

LOL. You've just redefined searching as scrolling down the list looking
for what you want, that capability is still available in Vista ;-). Then
you accuse me of 'fixating' on using Search when that's what YOU asked
about! I'm guessing you work for Fox News

Unfortunately the alphabetization of contacts is ridiculously slow in
Vista, to the point of being unusable, so one needs to use search
instead.

I searched & saw your other post about 'Last Name' -- the view & sort you
select for your Contacts folder should be remembered. Are you still
having this problem?

Unfortunately the search metaphor is so generic that users will not see a
"New contact" button after a search, and some purists find it distasteful
to add one.

I've never met a purist, do you know any?

Such functionality in XP was much better. The problems in Vista are easy
to fix, but that would require people to do what is obvious to the user,

What is obvious to one user is not to another.

An alternate solution would be to set the default (and therefore instant)
alphabetization in Windows Contacts to the choice made by the user, as
one could in XP.

Ahh...the default behavior of naming the Contact file in the FirstLast
format & not giving the user the option of selecting LastFirst as the
default. THAT is a valid issue that has been relayed to MS. In the
meantime, if you want your Contact files renamed in LastFirst format, I've
written a script for that. Right-click on the link and select 'Save
Target As...' (no web page there, just individual files). Then extract
the vbs file from the .zip file & run the script.

http://mysite.verizon.net/res18hr7/Last, First.zip

If your Contacts have data in the FirstName & LastName fields, that will
be used in contructing the name. If only a FullName exists, a 'best
guess' is made at parsing. Unmodified Contacts will remain in their
original folder. Modified Contacts will be placed in a subfolder. Backups
of the originals will be placed in another. It is left up to the User to
select which to retain & which to delete.

These are obvious flaws. An MVP can be of most help to Microsoft by
helping figure out what needs to be fixed, rather than criticizing users
for their preference for more user-friendly software design.

Thanks for the tip.


--
Good Luck,

Keith
Microsoft MVP [Windows XP Shell/User]

I don't think you're upset because now it takes two fewer steps -- that
wouldn't make sense.

There is no lost functionality for this scenario -- so that can't be your
complaint.