Signature Problem

[Carla D'von Goodloe]

Any ideas on how to fix this problem?

We set up universal style signatures for everyone here. I set all Outlook
apps on each machine to Rich Text because then HTML could view it correctly.
With HTML set on all machines, the signature was messed up. Problem now is
that when printed out, the signature is distorted. For instance, Carla D.
Goodloe has the . blending with the D. They are on top of each other when
printing. Another example is De Young, where the e blends with the D. I do
not know what is going on but it prints like this in both Rich Text and Html
format. The signature is centered, uses Avalon font and Chalet London 1970
and Times New Roman all 3 for different lines of the signature.

I've used Word 2003 to edit the signature and that doesn't always work
either. I usually have to paste the signature into the editing box within
Outlook to get it to look right.

My boss is upset because we have to go to Plaxo just to get a universal
signature. We don't like Plaxo but at least it gives us a uniform unchanged
signature unlike Outlook. For those of us who don't like plain boring fonts
for signatures, we end up losing out on the functionality of Outlook
Signatures because the program can't handle the fonts or something. Not sure
exactly.

Any other programs that work with Outlook for customized signatures?

Carla

 

[Brian Tillman]

Any ideas on how to fix this problem?

We set up universal style signatures for everyone here. I set all
Outlook apps on each machine to Rich Text because then HTML could
view it correctly. With HTML set on all machines, the signature was
messed up. Problem now is that when printed out, the signature is
distorted. For instance, Carla D. Goodloe has the . blending with
the D. They are on top of each other when printing. Another example
is De Young, where the e blends with the D. I do not know what is
going on but it prints like this in both Rich Text and Html format. The
signature is centered, uses Avalon font and Chalet London 1970
and Times New Roman all 3 for different lines of the signature.

What page description language does your printer support? Since the problem
you're seeing is in printing, it could be that the printer is using a
substitute font because it doesn't contain an analogue of the font you're
displaying. For some printing, the fonts are not downloaded to the printer
and a bitmap of the document isn't sent to the printer. The printer is sent
positional information (glyphs) for the characters and the bitmap of the
characters it decides to use do not match the glyphs,

My boss is upset because we have to go to Plaxo just to get a
universal signature. We don't like Plaxo but at least it gives us a
uniform unchanged signature unlike Outlook. For those of us who don't
like plain boring fonts for signatures, we end up losing out on the
functionality of Outlook Signatures because the program can't handle
the fonts or something. Not sure exactly.

My opinion is that you're being picayunish in trying to force everyone to
use a particular signature and in insisting on Rich Text or HTML messages.
Glitz and glitter to not add substance to a message and it is the substance,
after all, that you most wish to transmit, not to mention the fact that
items like universal addenda to mesages are most effeciently done by the
server, not by configuring all the clients.

 

[Sue Mosher [MVP-Outlook]]

You should stick to very commonly used fonts for signatures. Otherwise, you
can't predict what font the other person's system will substitute. It may be
plain and boring, but at least it will be readable.