I dislike Microsoft intensely, so my intent was not to glorify them. Perhaps I should have said MSO is the public's standard or publishing standard. I write articles, edit stuff, contribute to textbooks, etc., and in the publishing industry, unfortunately, at the moment everyone wants things in MSO form. So the users of this stuff have set the standard. If you don't make things user-friendly, as users conceive it, you have no chance of winning them over to our side. "De facto" standard, yes. I think we're better off arguing about how to get the public to use it than splitting hairs over what The Monster is doing.
Nancy Scanlan, DVM, MSFP Growing older is mandatory. Growing up is optional. -- Mike Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Monday 22 January 2007 06:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think a small but important point needs to be made: > I think we need to offer easy-to-access industry standards. MSO is an > industry standard. So is Avery. Not true. Industry standards adhere to IEEE standards (http://standards.ieee.org), and MSO is not approved (or even mentioned). You *could* say that these programs are "de-facto industry standards", but what has been said above is giving MSO far more importance than it should ever have. Regards Mike -- **************************** Better Access Pty Ltd Small Business IT Solutions [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.better-access.com **************************** --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
