Home Forums Discussions Feedback and Recommendations Muting ability

I was talking to another ACer, and this idea came up. For me, it would be great. For others, probably not so much.

Anyway, we use a IM system IPMSG (again the best IM messenger for your network there is ever and free). When you get a message, it makes a little notification sound. This is very important as many of the messages from staff are crucial, e.g. Dr. consultant is on the phone or whatever where you need to come out of the room or whatever. So, I HAVE to have the sound on my computer turned on.

But, as many may do, I multitask in the room. Every chance i get, I am listening to the patient or something else and quickly glancing at a message. Some I can just quickly save to the chart. Well, as you know, this makes two sounds. If you save three messages, that's six sounds, and the patient obviously knows you are doing something else. (PLEASE NO COMMENTS ON WHY AREN'T YOU GIVING 100% TO THE PATIENT -- YOU JUST HAVE TO BE THERE TO KNOW HOW IT CAN BE DONE).

So, anyway, it would be great if AC could be muted. When you think about it, I don't know anything in AC that truly requires a sound UNLESS we were to get notifications for messages.

I would love to get comments on this. Oops, I guess I was adamant up about not to get comments, lol.

I hadn't thought about that being a problem because I leave my headphones plugged in so I can dictate....so there is nothing to hear from my computer as far as the patient knows. Can your IM program "light up" or flash when a new message comes in? Then you could mute the computer and just have a visual signal.

Of course, you should be paying 100% of your attention.......well, nevermind! ;-)

Well, the problem is I may be examining the patient and a message comes through.

As an example, I waited all day to hear from a hematology consultant (who never called -- imagine that)(my apologies to any hematologists on the board, but I don't have to because I am sure you get back to your PCPs quickly).

But, there are two issues with missing that message: 1) playing phone tag and, 2) having the consultant not call back at all -- called passive-aggressive.

So, for me, it is extremely helpful to be able to hear the message. I just casually walk over and glance at it. Most of the time I can ignore it until a better time to response, but many times I am glad I could hear it.

I understand what you are saying. It would be nice to selctively silence programs on a computer. I think that carries over to the messaging alert thread.

That's funny...Adam and my staff say the same thing about me.

Do you have a mute button? On second thought, don't answer that.

If the sound file is not wrapped inside the exe you can probably just rename it so that it cannot be played. If this causes an error you could make a dummy file with the correct name. I will try to check later to see if I can find the sound you are talking about.

If Bert talks in the woods and no one hears does he still make noise?

Lol! I tried saving a message and got a typical Windows sound. I then went to Control Panel > Sounds and Audio Devices clicked on the Sounds tab, and in the Program Events box I selected Asterisk. Then I clicked the Browse button to the right and selected Windows XP Minimize.wav . I applied, hit OK, and tried it again and now when I save a message it doesn't make the noise!

You can also use the dropdown box to select the audio file, or select None at the top.

I am pretty sure I do. I tried it earlier, and I could hear it.

But you count as someone. The question asked if "no one hears". You would have to be deaf for that to work, and then you would not know whether or not you made a noise. Of course, with no observer, quantum physics may mean the outcome is both, as in the wave/particle duality.

Thanks Paul,

Based on your post, I think I found an easier way. Go to C:\Windows\Windows XP Exclamation.wav and change the extension from .wav to
.old.

Windows XP Exclamation.wav is the wav (sound) file for saving messages. Now your messages will be silent.

You can also use Search in Windows and search for Windows XP Exclamation.wav and it will come up and you can change it there or go to the path on the right in case it is a different path than I am using.

I think it would be easier to just go to the Windows sound scheme and change it. Another easy way to get to it is to right click on the speaker icon in the task tray and select Adjust Audio Properties. Go to the Sounds tab and in program events just change any sounds you do not like to None with the dropdown box. This will make it easier to change things back to normal if you ever need to. You can even change the whole sound scheme to play no windows sounds at all. Renaming the files works but I would think that this would be easier to make changes.

Here is why I disagree. For one, under sounds, if you select one you can then click on browse and all will open and you can go to the exclamation one and change the extension. Then in a month when you want to change it back, you know which one it is. In fact, you can change the name to Windows XP Exclamation.saveac_message

Now, I tried the method you suggested (works fine), but I forgot which .wav was associated with it. Now my close program sound is TaDa! I will now have to go through all of them again AFTER I go to another computer and find out which sound file it is.

Of course, I could be missing something.

Can't you just hit the mute button on the keyboard? Of course you'd have to remember to unmute when you were done. And it's not a very elegant solution.

The mute button on the keyboard turns off all sounds. Then, you would miss the sound of the instant message.

Bert, to put things back just click the Sound Scheme dropdown box above the Program Events box and select Windows Default. If you rename the sounds you would have to go back and rename them. This way it is just a click and ALL the sounds are changed back to the standard.

I see now. Yes, that does work very well. Plus, you can name certain setups and go back to those.

I suppose it can be done both ways, but I must agree now that you have made me see the light, and I prefer your way.