Vista - Contact Groups?

In XP I could create groups to keep all my email contacts separated. For
Instance I had one folder for "Office" one for "Family" one for "Friends"
etc. In XP in the compose window I could click on the "To:" and then drill
down to the folder I wanted and then select within that folder. In RC1 in
my Contacts folder they are indeed separated into the group folders just
like in XP, however when I am in the compose window and click on the "To:"
they are no longer separated into those folders and *ALL* the contacts are
listed in alphabetic order! (No longer in folders) I have to either scroll
through the whole lot or leave the compose window, go to the contacts
folder, find my contact, right click and then select email! Is this a bug
or by design because if it's by design this is a horrible deviation from
what worked fine in XP! There too many more steps or unnecessary scrolling!
dotcom

"dotcom" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:O0$Rv141GHA.4752@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> In XP I could create groups to keep all my email contacts separated. For
> Instance I had one folder for "Office" one for "Family" one for "Friends"
> etc. In XP in the compose window I could click on the "To:" and then drill
> down to the folder I wanted and then select within that folder. In RC1 in
> my Contacts folder they are indeed separated into the group folders just
> like in XP, however when I am in the compose window and click on the "To:"
> they are no longer separated into those folders and *ALL* the contacts are
> listed in alphabetic order! (No longer in folders) I have to either scroll
> through the whole lot or leave the compose window, go to the contacts
> folder, find my contact, right click and then select email! Is this a bug
> or by design because if it's by design this is a horrible deviation from
> what worked fine in XP! There too many more steps or unnecessary scrolling!


You can put groups in subfolders, but a contact cannot be a member of more than one group in this scheme.
Very disappointing indeed.

--
Alex.