'Nuther compooter conundrum

[Hawkmoon]

Being the diehard Luddite that I am, I have continued to use Microsoft Word 2003 even though I have Office Pro 2016 on my computer, because I can't find anything in Microsoft's execrable ribbon style menu system. Consequently, I have just discovered what many of you probably already know: Since Word 2007, the envelope printing routine no longer allows including a postal bar code in the recipent's address on the envelope.

So I've been looking for a way to bring back that utility. So far, all I have found is commercial add-ins that offer to generate 2,387 differrnt types and styles of barcode that I've never heard of, and that all cost north of $100 for a single user, single computer license. Considering that I have three desktop computers, four notebook computers, and two tablets (yeah, it's only me here ... it's a long story), that means I would need a group license. Now the price is up to $500 to $1,500. I can't afford that.

Does anyone know of a decent freeware add-in that will handle this? As an alternate, there is apparently some uber-secret barcode field thingie built into Word, but thanks to Microsoft's typically dense and obscure "support" forum entries I can't figure out if this even works to pop a bar code into a single envelope that I'm printing to mail a single letter.

Can anyone help?

[MillCreek]

https://word.tips.net/T000895_Using_Delivery_Point_Barcodes.html

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/897290/the-postnet-bar-code-that-word-generates-no-longer-qualifies-for-usps

It looks as though the Post Office no longer uses the old Postnet barcodes, and that is why Word no longer prints them.

[Hawkmoon]

Still no luck finding a freeware replacement. I guess the USPS will just have to survive with my envelopes not being barcoded.

[Brad Johnson]

Still no luck finding a freeware replacement. I guess the USPS will just have to survive with my envelopes not being barcoded.

Barcodes really only counted if you were doing bulk mail. If it's regular old USPS First Class and you're only doing singles, bar codes are unnecessary. Make sure your addresses are legible and the USPS's fancy OCR equipment will do the rest.

Brad

[cordex]

Barcodes really only counted if you were doing bulk mail. If it's regular old USPS First Class and you're only doing singles, bar codes are unnecessary. Make sure your addresses are legible and the USPS's fancy OCR equipment will do the rest.

Yep.

If you're not submitting a Mail.DAT to the post office with your IMb data you don't need to put a barcode on it.

[Hawkmoon]

I thought the bar code got it sorted faster/better. After all, the USPS puts a bar code on every piece of mail, so it must serve some purpose.

[Brad Johnson]

I thought the bar code got it sorted faster/better. After all, the USPS puts a bar code on every piece of mail, so it must serve some purpose.

To a degree, but only in limited circumstances. As a general rule, all first class envelopes go in the same hopper and run through the same optical sorter. So long as the address is accurate and legible*, it really doesn't matter if it pre-barcoded.

*We found out legibility is a real thing when we were mailing out wedding invites. SWMBO's handwriting is beautifully frilly with all kinds of serifs and accents so she did the invites. About a dozen of them were kicked back as undeliverable. My handwriting is block print, a holdover from a couple years of drafting classes in college (the first time). I did the Thank You notes. Same address list, to a person, but none of mine were kicked back. We determined the cause was USPS optical sorters being unable to read her handwriting. Apparently the USPS doesn't chuck all the "maybe's" into a pile and hand-sort anymore. If the machine can't read it, it unceremoniously slaps an "undeliverable" label on it and sends it back.

All that to say, if you are addressing via printer and not using some type of bastardized, foofery-laden font, there's no need to pre-barcode your letters.

Brad