Tech Support > Microsoft Windows > Windows CRM > New Outlook Fields
New Outlook Fields
Posted by Jason Dibble [MSFT] on January 23rd, 2007


Viewing the regarding in your view is pretty simple to do. Customize your
view in Outlook and add a new user defined field called 'Regarding'
(case-sensitive). Then, the regarding name will appear in this column for
those records you have linked to CRM with a Regarding value set.

As for this data appearing in the 'reminder' dialog, that is more of an
Outlook programming question than a CRM question. Please try an Outlook
programming newsgroup for help on that.

--
Jason
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


"sbanker" <sbanker@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:45ACCDBF-9F77-47DD-95AF-6D307B0E5CB2@microsoft.com...


Posted by sbanker on January 25th, 2007


I am trying to get "regarding" to sync between outlook and CRM so that i do
not have to manually update tasks that I am doing regarding a specific
campaign activity, for instance. Is there any way to do this?



"Jason Dibble [MSFT]" wrote:

Posted by Jason Dibble [MSFT] on January 25th, 2007


I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to do. Is it:
1) You want the regarding value to be set automatically based off of some
other field? If so, there isn't a way to do this out of the box.
2) You want to be able to edit the regarding field you added to your custom
Outlook view, and have that value sync to CRM. I don't believe this can be
done, and you have to open the Outlook form to do this.

--
Jason
--
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.


"sbanker" <sbanker@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:94FCBCB0-73DE-4BD4-B84D-58E1930C0CB5@microsoft.com...


Posted by sbanker on January 27th, 2007


If possible, either one. If activities and/or tasks are generated from
campaigns in CRM and presented in Outlook, I would like to be able to view
the regarding value automatically set by the regarding field in CRM. This
would be action #1 that you mention.

"Jason Dibble [MSFT]" wrote: