• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

MS Excel 2010 Macro's/Windows 7/Printers

Our office uses a lot of macro's in Excel. We had been using MS Office version 2007. Recently we began upgrading to Office 2010 when we would install a fresh OS (Win 7 Pro in this case)

We were fine with Windows 7 Pro and Office 2007 so it seems to be an Office 2010 issue.

Typically to find out the system name of the printer that needs to be in the macro we would "Record a new Macro", choose "Print", select each printer on our list of printers, and then "Stop Recording". At that point we would choose to Edit that macro just so we could see what the system called each printer. It would normally be some like:
Application.ActivePrinter = "\\FS1\Canon iR5050 on Ne06:"
Each of our printers ended in a different "Ne#".
Our problem now is that MS Office Version 2010 does not show that list of printer names when we record a macro. When we have a fresh OS install the printer list might vary slightly. Therefore, we cannot edit our old macros with the new printer names because we can't see what they are on that PC.
It is not feasible to record new macro's from scratch because there are too many of them and most of them are very complicated and would take days to try to recreate.
Does anyone know another way to find out these system printer names so we can edit our macros?
Carol
 
Yes my exact problem also! I think that each time a network printer is added or removed, the address path gets reassigned to the adjusted printer list, so occasionally the Ne number changes. A stupid method! We used your workaround for some years and unfortunately it no longer seems to work in Office 2010. Perhaps it was a blunder on microsoft's part and it will be fixed with a patch. Here's hoping!
 
Back
Top