Display email address when selecting name

Topic

New Reply

We have recently upgraded our exchange server from 2003 to 2010. We also use a Document Management System to store our emails as they are sent and received.

It seems that prior to the exchange upgrade we were able to open up an email from the document management system, then double click on either the sender or recipient name to have a box pop up to display the email address. Now, for people on Outlook 2003 most of the time when they attempt to double click the name within the email, it just highlights the text, as though there is nothing behind it. However if someone with a 2007 client opens the same email and selects the name they will see the popup and be able to identify the email address behind the name.

Is there a difference in the way that 2003 and 2007 interacts with Exchange 2010 and is there a way that I can force 2003 to display the same behaviour as 2007?

Thanks

Lor

Reply | Quote

Replies

See Common Client Access Considerations for Outlook 2003 and Exchange 2010. There are links to other TechNet articles for more information.

Also, see How to make Outlook 2003 coexist peacefully with Exchange 2010 Server[/url].

Do you have the latest service pack and update rollup installed for Exchange? Is Office up-to-date with service packs and patches?

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Excellent Joe – I’ll have a look at these articles and hopefully will be able to get this working again. Exchange was only upgraded a couple of weeks ago, and I understand that we were installed to SP3 (which I understand to be the latest version available) and we are on SP3 of Office. We are planning to move to 2007 before too long, which I believe will come with its own issues (thanks Microsoft!!) but may at least help to resolve some others…

Thanks!

Reply | Quote

I recommend you consider Office 2010 or 2013 if it is possible. Support for Office 2007 expires 10/10/2017. Office 2010 support expires 10/13/2020. Office 2013 support expires 4/11/2023.

Joe

--Joe

Reply | Quote

Personally I would go to 2010 as I’m not a fan of 2007, however we currently have licenses for 2007 and would have to pay more for 2010 – and we’ve already spent too much this year 😉 Thanks for these links – they have unfortunately not helped with this issue, but have with others. Its just a shame the consultants we used couldn’t have forewarned us..

Lor

Reply | Quote