It's also our fault for not explicitly telling the client not to upgrade. I've had clients upgrade before and I ask them "What made you think that it would still work without checking with me first?"
--- On Tue, 4/14/09, Jack Skelley <jskel...@mail.newjerseydevils.com> wrote: > From: Jack Skelley <jskel...@mail.newjerseydevils.com> > Subject: RE: When will I learn? > To: "profox@leafe.com" <profox@leafe.com> > Date: Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 11:47 AM > Kenneth: > I have been burned with a similar stuff so you are not > alone and I feel your pain. > I did an automation to Word 2000 out of our scouting system > written VFP 6. Works great in Word 2000. Does not work well > with Word 2007 on the new boxes and I simply don't have the > time or energy to fix it to make it look 'perfect'. It is a > report that takes the FRX and makes is a DOC file. > We have a M$ fellow that is a member of a cigar group I > belong to and I bend his ear very hard every chance I get. I > think he doesn't like to see me on most days... > Similar issues with the CDO email constructs with the > latest rollups to Exchange 2007. The 2007 part of any M$ app > will cause us Fox folks to lose more pounds of hair that we > all can not afford to lose (at least on my part - no pun > intended!). > Regards, > > Jack Skelley > > > ________________________________________ > From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com > [profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] > On Behalf Of Kenneth Kixmoeller [ken.kixmoel...@information-architecture.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 11:29 AM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: When will I learn? > > << Warning! Warning!! Microsoft rant ahead! >> > << All who rail about M$ bashing delete this message > NOW! >> > << You have been warned. >> > > It happened again. > > Last year, I got a nice little data conversion project > which fits one > of my other specialties: publishing with InDesign. So I > thunk: what > the heck, just a bunch of text manipulation, why not use > the Fox? I > can knock this out fast, Fox will do it well, the client is > married > to M$, so no cross-platform issues, etc. > > So I do it. Had a bit of problem with the XML, none of the > native > tools seemed to like the files, and hand-parsing it would > blow the > budget out of the water. No schema available. So I thought: > their Web > firm is pure M$ tools, so I wonder if I can expedite the > conversion > with a little two-step? > > I open the XML in Excel, and it converts absolutely > flawlessly. Cool. > Quick little automation script, save the converted data as > a DBF, and > on with the conversion to InDesign.... > > Worked great. Fast. My InDesign skills saved the client > *lots* of > design time. Client was pleased. All was right with the > world. > > Fast forward one year -- this is an annual process. (Hear > the ominous > music?) The client runs my conversion utility. "It's > broken." %^%* > She reports a really weird-sounding error, so I ask her to > send me a > screen shot of it. She does so in a Word document, and I > see the DOCX > extension. I get this sick feeling in the pit of my > stomach. Yes, > they had been persuaded to "upgrade" to Orifice 2007. > > Fast forward: Excel 2007 no longer will create a DBF. > > Now I know I can save it as a CSV and append it into > existing > structures. Or maybe I can do something better with the XML > bypassing > the automation. Whatever. I can still make it work. But the > point is > that M$ changed the rules again. Makes me look like an > idiot, and > will cost my client unnecessary $$. > > Ken > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/88058.94422...@web31404.mail.mud.yahoo.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
