Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Heh, I'm definitely _not_ going to get in a text editor religious war with you along the lines of emacs is evil; why it should be eradicated, however true that may be. :-). Personally, when I don't use vim, I use BBEdit, and have done for more than a decade. Over my 20-odd years as a Mac user, I've used BBEdit almost exclusively. Vim came into regular use in the last couple of years, because a co-worker and I have written a bunch of scripts that help us be productive in our company's codebase. Dave On Apr 27, 2008, at 6:18 PM, William T Goodall wrote: On 24 Apr 2008, at 19:08, Dave Land wrote: If only because nobody makes money from vi, it hasn't been fscked- around with over the years. If you learned to use vi on a VT-52 hooked up to a PDP-11, as I did, then today's Mac OS X copy of Vim (VI iMproved) is as familiar as you'd want it to be. I never liked vi although vim was better. I mostly used to use Emacs but my favourite text editor now is TextMate on OS X. http://macromates.com/ Worth every penny Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons. - Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 24 Apr 2008, at 19:08, Dave Land wrote: If only because nobody makes money from vi, it hasn't been fscked- around with over the years. If you learned to use vi on a VT-52 hooked up to a PDP-11, as I did, then today's Mac OS X copy of Vim (VI iMproved) is as familiar as you'd want it to be. I never liked vi although vim was better. I mostly used to use Emacs but my favourite text editor now is TextMate on OS X. http://macromates.com/ Worth every penny Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons. - Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Printers can operate either in EPS mode (Encapsulated Postscript) or you can write an image directly to them. In EPS mode the printer decides what font to use, and in image mode the computer itself generates the bitmaps from its own fonts. (HPs will use PCL, Page Control Language, which is similar in concept to EPS) I'm not keen on printers -- I haven't had one at home for years -- so I don't know exactly what options will be available to you to resolve this. Also I've probably misstated a couple of important facts, but what it boils down to is that your printer is generating the page and doesn't have the right fonts available. Getting the PC to generate the final print image will sidestep this issue. It's also worth noting that printing will be a lot slower once you've done this. HTH, c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance A. Brown Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 10:31 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007) David Hobby wrote: But that is the configuration. One computer, one printer, and an old-style cable between them. (It's unfortunate that it wouldn't work well over a network, but I've had problems too. Another story...) That sucks. I'd make sure you have the correct driver installed for the printer. It's about the only variable left in that setup. --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is probably OK for me to say that the best/most cost-effective PDF output I've obtained comes free via the Preview button on every Mac OS X print dialog, and works in every application, not just Office. I use PDFCreator, which is open-source and works great for me. It installs on your system as a printer driver. http://sourceforge.net/projects/pdfcreator/ HTH, c ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Apr 24, 2008, at 5:15 PM, Andrew Crystall wrote: On 24 Apr 2008 at 11:37, Max Battcher wrote: * The PDF Exporter (Save As PDF) for Office 2007 is a free download: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=4D951911-3E7E-4AE6-B059-A2E79ED87041displaylang=en (Adobe blocked it from the out of box install, which to me is a pretty petty maneuver...) As a warning, the output from this is absolutely horrible and I've had no end of issues with it. Using either the proper Acrobat or something like the Bullzip PDF printer gives you much cleaner results. Well, as long as the answer to Nick's frustrations with Office 2007 is to suggest an entirely different office package (Open Office, which I was forced by Sun Microsystems to use, and found it to be a turd, but that was about 5 years ago), it is probably OK for me to say that the best/most cost-effective PDF output I've obtained comes free via the Preview button on every Mac OS X print dialog, and works in every application, not just Office. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? Isn't digital TV an entirely new product? Or are you suggesting everyone has cable already so it is pointless? Nope. I'm talking about people like Nick's little old lady, whom (I'm guessing) does not have cable (If not her specifically, there are millions like her who don't.) and who has to sometime in the next 9.5 months make another trip to the store and fork over part of her Social Security check to buy at least a converter box (not free even with the coupons) if she wants to keep watching the news or whatever. I guess I am just used to living in a country where the const of conversion is trivial compared to the ongoing costs of watching television. You are that it is the enforced obselence of something that works perfectly well (analogue TV.) However, I'm right in that digital TV is a pretty substantially different product. I think I'd also draw the distinction between a government doing something with a clear public policy aim and a corporation doing something to sell more razors. Martin ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Ronn! Blankenship wrote: ... When I've tried this kind of thing in MS-Word, it was quite frustrating. Every installation seemed to (not) have different symbols, and often what looked fine on the screen would print with lots of empty squares. I'm sure there's a way to get MS-Word to behave properly, but I have better things to do. That sounds like the problem could be with what fonts are installed on different machines . . . perhaps?? Ronn-- Yes. So hunting up the right fonts and installing them everywhere would have solved it. I don't really understand why a word processor would ever have different screen and display fonts, though. I mean I can see how it would happen, but that seems like pretty dumb design. ---David ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 02:49 AM Friday 4/25/2008, Martin Lewis wrote: On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? Isn't digital TV an entirely new product? Or are you suggesting everyone has cable already so it is pointless? Nope. I'm talking about people like Nick's little old lady, whom (I'm guessing) does not have cable (If not her specifically, there are millions like her who don't.) and who has to sometime in the next 9.5 months make another trip to the store and fork over part of her Social Security check to buy at least a converter box (not free even with the coupons) if she wants to keep watching the news or whatever. I guess I am just used to living in a country where the const of conversion is trivial compared to the ongoing costs of watching television. You are that it is the enforced obselence of something that works perfectly well (analogue TV.) However, I'm right in that digital TV is a pretty substantially different product. I think I'd also draw the distinction between a government doing something with a clear public policy aim and a corporation doing something to sell more razors. Even if the government is honest enough to name it the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005? http://www.ntia.doc.gov/otiahome/dtv/pl_109_171_titleiii.pdf (Scroll down to Title III.) Follow The Money Maru . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 24 Apr 2008 at 20:55, Max Battcher wrote: Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Open Source and use a number of applications that I like better in spite of their commercial equivalents (Firefox, Lightningbird (Thunderbird + Lightning plugin), Vim, Inkscape, ...), but OO.org, to me, seems the lesser choice to Office. Given the choice I'd much rather work in Office than OO.org. At a workplace where I had to use Office 07, it cut my productivity in it by over a third, and created no end of issues. Managing formating was such a problem I ended up copy/pasting between two documents a lot to force the precise text formating I wanted. Also, ironically, I can't stand thunderbird and use pegasus mail. AndrewC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Dave Land said the following on 4/25/2008 2:15 AM: Well, as long as the answer to Nick's frustrations with Office 2007 is to suggest an entirely different office package (Open Office, which I was forced by Sun Microsystems to use, and found it to be a turd, but that was about 5 years ago), it is probably OK for me to say that the best/most cost-effective PDF output I've obtained comes free via the Preview button on every Mac OS X print dialog, and works in every application, not just Office. The current version of OpenOffice is almost infinitely better than 5 years ago. :-) --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
David Hobby said the following on 4/25/2008 7:12 AM: Yes. So hunting up the right fonts and installing them everywhere would have solved it. I don't really understand why a word processor would ever have different screen and display fonts, though. I mean I can see how it would happen, but that seems like pretty dumb design. More likely it was a difference in fonts available to the word processor and the printer. It's amazing how stupid such things can be. --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 1:15 AM, Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: it is probably OK for me to say that the best/most cost-effective PDF output I've obtained comes free via the Preview button on every Mac OS X print dialog, and works in every application, not just Office. I'll second that, but for PDF work on PC I use FoxIt and have never had trouble with it. Also, I've been using OpenOffice on both PC and Mac for a while and never run across any functionality that I needed that it didn't have. As for no auto-save for untitled documents, I've never had a problem with that because the first thing I do when I open a document is to save and title it. I'm actually pretty anal about that. It comes from having lost a lot of data once back before auto-save was in vogue. But no solution for any problem is a true one-size-fits-all. Some people just don't get along with some programs, and of course there's not a thing in the world wrong with that. Like the Romans used to say, De gustibus non est disputandum. -- Mauro Diotallevi Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Don't drink and derive. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 09:23 AM Friday 4/25/2008, Lance A. Brown wrote: David Hobby said the following on 4/25/2008 7:12 AM: Yes. So hunting up the right fonts and installing them everywhere would have solved it. I don't really understand why a word processor would ever have different screen and display fonts, though. I mean I can see how it would happen, but that seems like pretty dumb design. More likely it was a difference in fonts available to the word processor and the printer. That's what I was thinking, too. It's amazing how stupid such things can be. Not to mention how annoying it can be, esp. when you are doing math or something else which requires a lot of symbols, many of which are not even included in the latest Unicode standard, or in fonts designed to that standard . . . It Ain't Just In The Fonts That You Find Dingbats Maru . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Lance A. Brown wrote: David Hobby said the following on 4/25/2008 7:12 AM: Yes. So hunting up the right fonts and installing them everywhere would have solved it. I don't really understand why a word processor would ever have different screen and display fonts, though. I mean I can see how it would happen, but that seems like pretty dumb design. More likely it was a difference in fonts available to the word processor and the printer. It's amazing how stupid such things can be. Lance-- Hi. I don't see that. I think the printer is capable of printing whatever pattern of dots it's told to, and these are supposed to be True Type fonts. ---David ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
David Hobby wrote: Hi. I don't see that. I think the printer is capable of printing whatever pattern of dots it's told to, and these are supposed to be True Type fonts. You would be amazed. It depends entirely how the job is processed, especially if the printer is not attached directly to the computer you are using. Best chance for a good outcome is using a printer attached directly to your computer, with the proper driver for the printer installed. Then you will almost certainly get the result you are after. If you are accessing a network printer by printing directly to it, make sure you have the appropriate driver for the printer make/model installed. If you are accessing a printer using a print server or print service on another computer, then things can get squirrely. Your computer may have the font needed, but depending on the print driver on your computer, that print job may be re-processed on the print server, with the worst case being embedded fonts getting dropped, leading to wrong output on the printer, for example. (How's that for a nasty run-on sentence?) Crossing platforms, a Windows desktop sending print jobs to a UNIX print server, or a Mac sending a print job to a print attached to a Windows computer, can also lead to problems unless everything is handled correctly. As usual, heterogeneous environments lead to strange edge cases. --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008, Lance A. Brown wrote: You would be amazed. It depends entirely how the job is processed, especially if the printer is not attached directly to the computer you are using. Best chance for a good outcome is using a printer attached directly to your computer, with the proper driver for the printer installed. Then you will almost certainly get the result you are after. If you are accessing a network printer by printing directly to it, make sure you have the appropriate driver for the printer make/model installed. If you are accessing a printer using a print server or print service on another computer, then things can get squirrely. Your computer may have the font needed, but depending on the print driver on your computer, that print job may be re-processed on the print server, with the worst case being embedded fonts getting dropped, leading to wrong output on the printer, for example. (How's that for a nasty run-on sentence?) Crossing platforms, a Windows desktop sending print jobs to a UNIX print server, or a Mac sending a print job to a print attached to a Windows computer, can also lead to problems unless everything is handled correctly. As usual, heterogeneous environments lead to strange edge cases. OK, so a good reason to keep every box in the house under the same OS, and specifically, this computer (which is acting as a print server) and the one in the guest room (which does not have a printer attached directly to it) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Lance A. Brown wrote: David Hobby wrote: Hi. I don't see that. I think the printer is capable of printing whatever pattern of dots it's told to, and these are supposed to be True Type fonts. You would be amazed. It depends entirely how the job is processed, especially if the printer is not attached directly to the computer you are using. Best chance for a good outcome is using a printer attached directly to your computer, with the proper driver for the printer installed. Then you will almost certainly get the result you are after. ... Lance-- But that is the configuration. One computer, one printer, and an old-style cable between them. (It's unfortunate that it wouldn't work well over a network, but I've had problems too. Another story...) ---David ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 26/04/2008, at 5:17 AM, Julia Thompson wrote: OK, so a good reason to keep every box in the house under the same OS, and specifically, this computer (which is acting as a print server) and the one in the guest room (which does not have a printer attached directly to it) That bird's long flown... 2x OSX 10.5, one win XP SP2, one vista business SP1, one ubuntu, one ps3 sitting on our network, and there'll be a win xp media centre here soon too. Charlie. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Julia Thompson wrote: OK, so a good reason to keep every box in the house under the same OS, and specifically, this computer (which is acting as a print server) and the one in the guest room (which does not have a printer attached directly to it) It does tend to make things easier to work right. ;-) --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
David Hobby wrote: But that is the configuration. One computer, one printer, and an old-style cable between them. (It's unfortunate that it wouldn't work well over a network, but I've had problems too. Another story...) That sucks. I'd make sure you have the correct driver installed for the printer. It's about the only variable left in that setup. --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I used to do because I can't find anything. They seem to have succeeded in making it harder to use. The most bizarre thing is that I cannot find the Help menu anywhere. My wife, who was forced into this particular torture a few months ago, has had the same problem. The whole point of using drop-down menus in a GUI is to be table to slide the cursor across them and immediately see what's available. Somebody in Redmond apparently thought they were improving on that. Vi is easier than this. Sheesh. This brings to mind an elderly friend who yesterday was talking about her extreme frustration in trying to buy a new head for her electric toothbrush. There are so many models from the same manufacturer that she can't figure out which one is for hers... and bought the wrong one. This is a woman on a very low fixed income who isn't very comfortable driving and really doesn't want to have to go back to the store repeatedly. But I'm sure the toothbrush company comes up with a new model at least every year in order to urge people to upgrade... for no good reason. The fifth new version is really no more effective than the first one. Sometimes marketing, which I sort of work in, drives me nuts. At least my job is more or less about making marketing responsive to people, instead of manipulating people to be responsive to marketing. I think. I hope. What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Lots of things, I guess. There's nothing new and improved about new and improved. I suppose one of the worst offenders is the pharmaceutical industry, where the newer allergy and heartburn drugs are no better than the old ones, just tested less... and far more expensive. Nick P.S. Oh, look, a tiny question mark in the upper right corner of the window brings up a help page. First item: What's new. I'll bet that will try to rationalize all the changes. Second item, Getting help. Too late. -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 10:05 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, Nick Arnett wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 10:05 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I used to do because I can't find anything. They seem to have succeeded in making it harder to use. The most bizarre thing is that I cannot find the Help menu anywhere. My wife, who was forced into this particular torture a few months ago, has had the same problem. The whole point of using drop-down menus in a GUI is to be table to slide the cursor across them and immediately see what's available. Somebody in Redmond apparently thought they were improving on that. Vi is easier than this. ;) Sheesh. This brings to mind an elderly friend who yesterday was talking about her extreme frustration in trying to buy a new head for her electric toothbrush. There are so many models from the same manufacturer that she can't figure out which one is for hers... and bought the wrong one. This is a woman on a very low fixed income who isn't very comfortable driving and really doesn't want to have to go back to the store repeatedly. But I'm sure the toothbrush company comes up with a new model at least every year in order to urge people to upgrade... for no good reason. The fifth new version is really no more effective than the first one. Sometimes marketing, which I sort of work in, drives me nuts. At least my job is more or less about making marketing responsive to people, instead of manipulating people to be responsive to marketing. I think. I hope. I fear that particular ship sailed decades ago . . . What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Lots of things, I guess. There's nothing new and improved about new and improved. I suppose one of the worst offenders is the pharmaceutical industry, where the newer allergy and heartburn drugs are no better than the old ones, just tested less... and far more expensive. Not to mention restricting the purchase of the older, more effective OTC products to only so much per 30 days ( a 30-day supply) with ID or making them Rx-only in the name of doing something wrt the war on drugs. Nick P.S. Oh, look, a tiny question mark in the upper right corner of the window brings up a help page. ? First item: What's new. I'll bet that will try to rationalize all the changes. Second item, Getting help. Maybe it's a link to a list of anger-management clinics. Too late. Or a suicide-prevention hotline . . . . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:05 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, Nick Arnett wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? The one that really gets me is razor blades. Does anyone really need 5 blades vibrated by a small motor to shave? Is the new Gillette FusionPower Phenom with 5 blades and onboard microchip for consistent power that much better that the 4 blade model from last year or the 3 blade SensorExcel from a couple of years ago? -- Mauro Diotallevi Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Don't drink and derive. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? Isn't digital TV an entirely new product? Or are you suggesting everyone has cable already so it is pointless? Martin ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I used to do because I can't find anything. They seem to have succeeded in making it harder to use. The most bizarre thing is that I cannot find the Help menu anywhere. My wife, who was forced into this particular torture a few months ago, has had the same problem. The whole point of using drop-down menus in a GUI is to be table to slide the cursor across them and immediately see what's available. Somebody in Redmond apparently thought they were improving on that. It _is_ an improvement, if you give it a chance. Where over the years the Menus became nearly non-sensical containers of cruft (what was the difference between the old Edit menu and Tools or Insert? why did the Table menu show up all the time even though most of it was useless if you weren't actually working on a Table?), the Ribbon actually is broken down into mostly intelligent categories with a great deal more testing and user feedback than the old menus were ever put through. (I'm a relatively long time Office user (since Windows 3.1) and a huge fan of the new Ribbon. Admittedly I'm a young guy and I still adapt quickly to change...) All of the Ribbon buttons have huge tooltips with pictures if you can't figure out what a button does from the name, and just about everything on the Ribbon previews what it does in your document as you mouse over it. There is a bit of a relearning experience, but I think you'll find that the new placement of things generally makes logical sense. Here's a few navigational tricks that I find generally help when they are pointed out: * You can use your mouse's scroll wheel to switch tabs on the ribbon. This can be very handy for fast searches to find what you are looking for. * The new keyboard shortcuts are generally quite friendly. Press and release Alt and you'll see little letters pop up over the buttons. * When mousing over a button pressing F1 will jump you straight to that buttons topic in the help. Also, just another more general tip: * The PDF Exporter (Save As PDF) for Office 2007 is a free download: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=4D951911-3E7E-4AE6-B059-A2E79ED87041displaylang=en (Adobe blocked it from the out of box install, which to me is a pretty petty maneuver...) Hope some of those tips help, -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ Sometimes old dogs get good treats from new tricks Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Apr 24, 2008, at 8:21 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 10:05 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, Nick Arnett wrote: The whole point of using drop-down menus in a GUI is to be table to slide the cursor across them and immediately see what's available. Somebody in Redmond apparently thought they were improving on that. Somebody at AddInTools.com evidently agrees with you that this was no real improvement, and has a product to restore classic menus: http://www.addintools.com/english/menuoffice/ Microsoft: creating a vibrant software ecosystem by ruining existing products. Vi is easier than this. ;) If only because nobody makes money from vi, it hasn't been fscked- around with over the years. If you learned to use vi on a VT-52 hooked up to a PDP-11, as I did, then today's Mac OS X copy of Vim (VI iMproved) is as familiar as you'd want it to be. This brings to mind an elderly friend who yesterday was talking ... Cool UI thing on Mac OS X Leopard and the Mail application: hovering over the word yesterday reveals that it has been recognized as a time-related word, which can be clicked to pull down a menu allowing me to: Create New iCal Event or Show This Date in iCal. I suppose one of the worst offenders is the pharmaceutical industry, where the newer allergy and heartburn drugs are no better than the old ones, just tested less... and far more expensive. Such as the supposed difference between Celexa and Lexapro: Lexapro came out just as third parties began marketing generic citalopram. Actual theraputic benefits of the new version may not be meaningful. Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? The one that really gets me is razor blades. Does anyone really need 5 blades vibrated by a small motor to shave? Is the new Gillette FusionPower Phenom with 5 blades and onboard microchip for consistent power that much better that the 4 blade model from last year or the 3 blade SensorExcel from a couple of years ago? Gillete's dictum : give away the razors, charge the hell out of 'em for the blades. This kinda backfired, where I'm from. Sensor II razor was so popular they were forced to continue selling the blades ever after. I'm on a 15 year old razor, buying a blade every 2 months. The modern innovations do not impress. I give gilette like around a dollar a month, and I don't begrudge them that. It's a great razor, with great blades. Screw the 3 and 4 blade things, they don't do it for me. So yah. C ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
It _is_ an improvement, if you give it a chance. Where over the years the Menus became nearly non-sensical containers of cruft (what was the difference between the old Edit menu and Tools or Insert? schnipp I'm a software engineer, and I hate the new ribbon interface -- yet it's pervasive: all of the new applications I'm writing incorporate this. I'm writing this stuff. Yet I hate it. Maybe one day it will grow on me -- but not yet. Have some pity for the poor techies who're forced into the new paradigm! c ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Curtis Burisch wrote: This kinda backfired, where I'm from. Sensor II razor was so popular they were forced to continue selling the blades ever after. I'm on a 15 year old razor, buying a blade every 2 months. The modern innovations do not impress. I give gilette like around a dollar a month, and I don't begrudge them that. It's a great razor, with great blades. Screw the 3 and 4 blade things, they don't do it for me. Or go like me. I've not put a razor to my face in something like 18 years or so. I forget. I did shave my head for a while after doing away with my thinned out pony tail, but gave that up for the stubbly look a trimmer leaves. Much easier to maintain and actually looks better on my dome. :-) --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Yah well I'm as I said an IT pro, so the beardy look doesn't quite cut it. Much as I'd love to live on pemmican in the appalacians for the rest of my life, things just aren't that simple. So go figure. Clean shaven gets me a nearly US-equivalent salary in a third-world country, and I'm not about to shit on Gilette for that. c -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lance A. Brown Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 8:28 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007) Curtis Burisch wrote: This kinda backfired, where I'm from. Sensor II razor was so popular they were forced to continue selling the blades ever after. I'm on a 15 year old razor, buying a blade every 2 months. The modern innovations do not impress. I give gilette like around a dollar a month, and I don't begrudge them that. It's a great razor, with great blades. Screw the 3 and 4 blade things, they don't do it for me. Or go like me. I've not put a razor to my face in something like 18 years or so. I forget. I did shave my head for a while after doing away with my thinned out pony tail, but gave that up for the stubbly look a trimmer leaves. Much easier to maintain and actually looks better on my dome. :-) --[Lance] -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Curtis Burisch wrote: It _is_ an improvement, if you give it a chance. Where over the years the Menus became nearly non-sensical containers of cruft (what was the difference between the old Edit menu and Tools or Insert? schnipp I'm a software engineer, and I hate the new ribbon interface -- yet it's pervasive: all of the new applications I'm writing incorporate this. I'm writing this stuff. Yet I hate it. Maybe one day it will grow on me -- but not yet. Have some pity for the poor techies who're forced into the new paradigm! I'm a software engineer as well, but have not had the pleasure of a project that required me to use a ribbon interface. Your clients are probably asking for ribbons for ribbons sake and you may be giving them what they want but not exactly what they need... Have you seen the presentations from Jensen Harris? There's a lot of good things he talks about (including the importance of lots of usability testing and lots of automated feedback of product usage) in his presentations on and about the ribbon. Well worth the attempt to find the presentations that you can online. -- --Max Battcher-- Not all UI has to look like the current Office Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 24 Apr 2008, at 19:31, Curtis Burisch wrote: Yah well I'm as I said an IT pro, so the beardy look doesn't quite cut it. Much as I'd love to live on pemmican in the appalacians for the rest of my life, things just aren't that simple. So go figure. Clean shaven gets me a nearly US-equivalent salary in a third-world country, and I'm not about to shit on Gilette for that. http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~bwk/ http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/index.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Thompson And sandals Maru. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ The three chief virtues of a programmer are: Laziness, Impatience and Hubris - Larry Wall ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
So, KR and frikkin Ken Thompson FTW. So? Is there a point forthcoming?? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of William T Goodall Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 9:08 PM To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion Subject: Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007) On 24 Apr 2008, at 19:31, Curtis Burisch wrote: Yah well I'm as I said an IT pro, so the beardy look doesn't quite cut it. Much as I'd love to live on pemmican in the appalacians for the rest of my life, things just aren't that simple. So go figure. Clean shaven gets me a nearly US-equivalent salary in a third-world country, and I'm not about to shit on Gilette for that. http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~bwk/ http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/index.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Thompson And sandals Maru. -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ The three chief virtues of a programmer are: Laziness, Impatience and Hubris - Larry Wall ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
- Original Message - From: Curtis Burisch [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion' brin-l@mccmedia.com Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 4:24 AM Subject: RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007) Gillete's dictum : give away the razors, charge the hell out of 'em for the blades. Sounds very similar to ink jet printer theory. Regards, Wayne. ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 01:08 PM Thursday 4/24/2008, Dave Land wrote: On Apr 24, 2008, at 8:21 AM, Ronn! Blankenship wrote: At 10:05 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, Nick Arnett wrote: Vi is easier than this. ;) If only because nobody makes money from vi, it hasn't been fscked- around with over the years. If you learned to use vi on a VT-52 hooked up to a PDP-11, as I did, Nope. I used vtedit on a VT-100 hooked up to a VAX . . . . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
RE: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 01:24 PM Thursday 4/24/2008, Curtis Burisch wrote: Gillete's dictum : give away the razors, charge the hell out of 'em for the blades. Copied by Lexmark (among others). . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
I've had my beard longer than I've had my professional career and a software applications developer and then sysadmin. My and my moderately fuzzy chin do just fine professionally. :-) -- GPG Fingerprint: 409B A409 A38D 92BF 15D9 6EEE 9A82 F2AC 69AC 07B9 CACert.org Assurer ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, Mauro Diotallevi wrote: On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:05 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, Nick Arnett wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? The one that really gets me is razor blades. Does anyone really need 5 blades vibrated by a small motor to shave? Is the new Gillette FusionPower Phenom with 5 blades and onboard microchip for consistent power that much better that the 4 blade model from last year or the 3 blade SensorExcel from a couple of years ago? I gave up on razors 17 years ago -- the last time I used one, I cut a lovely little gash in my ankle the night before a job interview. :P Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 10:33 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, you wrote: On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? Isn't digital TV an entirely new product? Or are you suggesting everyone has cable already so it is pointless? Martin Nope. I'm talking about people like Nick's little old lady, whom (I'm guessing) does not have cable (If not her specifically, there are millions like her who don't.) and who has to sometime in the next 9.5 months make another trip to the store and fork over part of her Social Security check to buy at least a converter box (not free even with the coupons) if she wants to keep watching the news or whatever. Obviously of course the corporate folks hope she and the millions like her will start subscribing to cable and replace her old, perfectly functional TV with a new HD set in order to keep watching whatever they watch. And the claimed reason the switchover is mandated by law is to free up the bandwidth used by analog TV broadcasts so it can be auctioned off (bringing in more money to the Federal government) to companies who want to provide new wireless services, as if the roads have gotten so much safer recently that drivers need more wireless gadgets to distract them from the task of driving and give them something to look at other than the road. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Apr 24, 2008, at 11:24 AM, Curtis Burisch wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? The one that really gets me is razor blades. Does anyone really need 5 blades vibrated by a small motor to shave? Is the new Gillette FusionPower Phenom with 5 blades and onboard microchip for consistent power that much better that the 4 blade model from last year or the 3 blade SensorExcel from a couple of years ago? This reminds me of two multi-bladed-razor bits of comedy: The first is a commercial by Philips for their Coolskin 2005 electric, which begins with a fake ad for Quintippio with 15 blades. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV42I26tx2s The second is an Onion piece, F*** Everything, We're Doing Five Blades, from the era when the idea of a razor with five blades was, in itself, comic: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 10:33 AM Thursday 4/24/2008, you wrote: On 4/24/08, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? Digital TV, frex? Isn't digital TV an entirely new product? Or are you suggesting everyone has cable already so it is pointless? Martin Nope. I'm talking about people like Nick's little old lady, whom (I'm guessing) does not have cable (If not her specifically, there are millions like her who don't.) and who has to sometime in the next 9.5 months make another trip to the store and fork over part of her Social Security check to buy at least a converter box (not free even with the coupons) if she wants to keep watching the news or whatever. Obviously of course the corporate folks hope she and the millions like her will start subscribing to cable and replace her old, perfectly functional TV with a new HD set in order to keep watching whatever they watch. And the claimed reason the switchover is mandated by law is to free up the bandwidth used by analog TV broadcasts so it can be auctioned off (bringing in more money to the Federal government) to companies who want to provide new wireless services, as if the roads have gotten so much safer recently that drivers need more wireless gadgets to distract them from the task of driving and give them something to look at other than the road. . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 4:18 PM, Dave Land [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Apr 24, 2008, at 11:24 AM, Curtis Burisch wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? The one that really gets me is razor blades. Does anyone really need 5 blades vibrated by a small motor to shave? Is the new Gillette FusionPower Phenom with 5 blades and onboard microchip for consistent power that much better that the 4 blade model from last year or the 3 blade SensorExcel from a couple of years ago? This reminds me of two multi-bladed-razor bits of comedy: The first is a commercial by Philips for their Coolskin 2005 electric, which begins with a fake ad for Quintippio with 15 blades. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV42I26tx2s The second is an Onion piece, F*** Everything, We're Doing Five Blades, from the era when the idea of a razor with five blades was, in itself, comic: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 Dave ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l Back in the early days of SNL (the '70s) they did a mock commercial for a cartridge with 3 blades. IIRC, the first grabbed the hair, the second pulled it further, and the third ripped your skin off. Very frakkin funny at the time, now less so. john never quite got the hang of shaving with pop's old cut-throat maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
What were they thinking?
This reminds me of two multi-bladed-razor bits of comedy: The first is a commercial by Philips for their Coolskin 2005 electric, which begins with a fake ad for Quintippio with 15 blades. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV42I26tx2s The second is an Onion piece, F*** Everything, We're Doing Five Blades, from the era when the idea of a razor with five blades was, in itself, comic: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 Dave I gave up on razors 17 years ago -- the last time I used one, I cut a lovely little gash in my ankle the night before a job interview. :P Julia i use a rotary norelco when in a hurry, and when its power pack gives up the ghost, i buy the newest latest model. cheaper than repair and i get new rotating heads. for a close shave i use the five blade gillette fusion because it vibrates, just like an electric. jon ~ waxing my ear hair, maru!~} Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking?
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008, jon louis mann wrote: This reminds me of two multi-bladed-razor bits of comedy: The first is a commercial by Philips for their Coolskin 2005 electric, which begins with a fake ad for Quintippio with 15 blades. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV42I26tx2s The second is an Onion piece, F*** Everything, We're Doing Five Blades, from the era when the idea of a razor with five blades was, in itself, comic: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 Dave I gave up on razors 17 years ago -- the last time I used one, I cut a lovely little gash in my ankle the night before a job interview. :P Julia i use a rotary norelco when in a hurry, and when its power pack gives up the ghost, i buy the newest latest model. cheaper than repair and i get new rotating heads. for a close shave i use the five blade gillette fusion because it vibrates, just like an electric. jon ~ waxing my ear hair, maru!~} I like micro-screen shavers better than rotary ones (my first shaver was, in fact, a rotary Norelco!), and I have a neat Panasonic that works in the shower very nicely. (The only problem is being only partway done and having to open it up to rinse out a buildup of shaving cream mid-shave, and that's not that big a deal.) Julia ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I used to do because I can't find anything. They seem to have succeeded in making it harder to use. And you don't even have to handle the mistranslations of the commands. The idiots that translated M$ products into Portuguese decided to aportuguesar the commands. So, if in Portuguese paste is colar, and the Control-C was taken by Copy, some idiots use Control-L to paste, other idiots use Control-O, or Control-U, or Control-A - whatever its single neuron was thinking at that moment. So, the user must memorize one set of Control-things for _each_ application. Alberto Monteiro ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 03:18 PM Thursday 4/24/2008, Dave Land wrote: On Apr 24, 2008, at 11:24 AM, Curtis Burisch wrote: What else is like this... endless upgrades to convince people that their perfectly good old product is obsolete? The one that really gets me is razor blades. Does anyone really need 5 blades vibrated by a small motor to shave? Is the new Gillette FusionPower Phenom with 5 blades and onboard microchip for consistent power that much better that the 4 blade model from last year or the 3 blade SensorExcel from a couple of years ago? This reminds me of two multi-bladed-razor bits of comedy: The first is a commercial by Philips for their Coolskin 2005 electric, which begins with a fake ad for Quintippio with 15 blades. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FV42I26tx2s The second is an Onion piece, F*** Everything, We're Doing Five Blades, from the era when the idea of a razor with five blades was, in itself, comic: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/33930 Dave Also, there's The Space Age Razor Race in _MAD_ #208 (July 1979), p. 37-39, which in addition to the Trac LXXVI with seventy-six cutting edges on a flexible head that will wrap around an entire face and shave it close and clean in two or three effortless moves also introduced the Quick-Freeze Razor, the Flame-Thrower Razor, the Microwave Razor, the Laser Razor, the Neutron Razor (the ultimate razor of the space age . . . like the great neutron bombkills whiskers but doesn't harm face) and others . . . Too Bad I Can't Attach The Article From The CD Maru . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
What? Were they thinking?
(Subject line corrected to more accurately fit the corporate/government mindset.) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I used to do because I can't find anything. They seem to have succeeded in making it harder to use. I can't find it now, but IIRC Penny Arcade's Tycho wrote saying that he found the new Office interface so beautiful he felt honored to use it, but everything took him twice as long to do in it. Once I started using it, I've found myself agreeing with him. Vi is easier than this. Remember, you can't spell EVIL without Vi. So, KR and frikkin Ken Thompson FTW. So? Is there a point forthcoming?? The world of computing has lots of with beardy, unshaven guys, in my experience. It's not reserved for the gurus. They're some famous examples, but I see unshaven guys all the time in IT, including most of the time when I look in a mirror. -Bryon ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 1:15 PM, Ronn! Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nope. I'm talking about people like Nick's little old lady, whom (I'm guessing) does not have cable (If not her specifically, there are millions like her who don't.) and who has to sometime in the next 9.5 months make another trip to the store and fork over part of her Social Security check to buy at least a converter box (not free even with the coupons) if she wants to keep watching the news or whatever. Obviously of course the corporate folks hope she and the millions like her will start subscribing to cable and replace her old, perfectly functional TV with a new HD set in order to keep watching whatever they watch. In fact, we don't have cable and I hardly watch any TV at all -- it's been four years since I decided it was generally a no-win activity -- but we have an HD antenna on the roof, I have an HD receiver card in a media computer and a few weeks ago I bought, using one of those gummint-issued coupons (more like a debit card), a converter box. I didn't realize all the features that HD would bring... channel guide (very basic) and such, V-chip capabilities (not sure I really like that, but oh boy, now I can block Canadian broadcasts) and the picture is darn good. And now I pick up three or four times as many channels... but at least a third of them are in languages I don't speak. The other two-thirds haven't changed much from when I did watch. I use the media PC to record -- in HD -- home improvement shows (This Old House and such) and what has become my one surrender to voyeurism, Cops. And the occasional movie, but it seems like 80 percent of the movies broadcast around here are in Spanish. I am much more willing to watch time-shifted television. Not so much because I can skip ads, but because I feel like my time is my own again. I was a real skeptic about HD -- I tended to think like Nick Negroponte (MIT Media Lab), who said something like we don't need more pixels, we need more intelligence. I'm still skeptical, but at least we're not wasting all that bandwidth on TV. We'll waste in on something else, I suppose. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 24 Apr 2008 at 8:05, Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I'd suggest upgrading further to Open Office, it's less of a change in UI from Office 2003 and costs less. AndrewC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 24 Apr 2008 at 11:37, Max Battcher wrote: * The PDF Exporter (Save As PDF) for Office 2007 is a free download: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=4D951911-3E7E-4AE6-B059-A2E79ED87041displaylang=en (Adobe blocked it from the out of box install, which to me is a pretty petty maneuver...) As a warning, the output from this is absolutely horrible and I've had no end of issues with it. Using either the proper Acrobat or something like the Bullzip PDF printer gives you much cleaner results. AndrewC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Andrew Crystall wrote: On 24 Apr 2008 at 8:05, Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I'd suggest upgrading further to Open Office, it's less of a change in UI from Office 2003 and costs less. ...and does half as much. OpenOffice.org one of very few applications that leaves me pining for my Windows system when I'm working in Ubuntu. It's pretty stupid and sometimes just painful to use. (The next biggest program that I switch to my Windows system for is Visual Studio.) There's no way that I could use OpenOffice.org daily. I'd rather use Vim. In fact, with Vim's inline spell check (new in 7.0) I have been using it a lot more for basic document writing than either OO.org or Office. -- --Max Battcher-- You get what you pay for Maru ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
On 24 Apr 2008 at 20:18, Max Battcher wrote: Andrew Crystall wrote: On 24 Apr 2008 at 8:05, Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I'd suggest upgrading further to Open Office, it's less of a change in UI from Office 2003 and costs less. ...and does half as much. OpenOffice.org one of very few applications that leaves me pining for my Windows system when I'm working in Ubuntu. It's pretty stupid and sometimes just painful to use. (The next biggest program that I switch to my Windows system for is Visual Studio.) There's no way that I could use OpenOffice.org daily. I'd rather use Vim. In fact, with Vim's inline spell check (new in 7.0) I have been using it a lot more for basic document writing than either OO.org or Office. The only things which are missing from Open Office are a few of the more obscure and advanced functions of Excel (and you can fix sheets up perfectly well with a little research) and functionality which is better situated in products other than your office suite. AndrewC ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Andrew Crystall wrote: On 24 Apr 2008 at 20:18, Max Battcher wrote: Andrew Crystall wrote: On 24 Apr 2008 at 8:05, Nick Arnett wrote: So... I upgraded to Microsoft Office 2007 recently. Can't do half of what I'd suggest upgrading further to Open Office, it's less of a change in UI from Office 2003 and costs less. ...and does half as much. OpenOffice.org one of very few applications that leaves me pining for my Windows system when I'm working in Ubuntu. It's pretty stupid and sometimes just painful to use. (The next biggest program that I switch to my Windows system for is Visual Studio.) There's no way that I could use OpenOffice.org daily. I'd rather use Vim. In fact, with Vim's inline spell check (new in 7.0) I have been using it a lot more for basic document writing than either OO.org or Office. The only things which are missing from Open Office are a few of the more obscure and advanced functions of Excel (and you can fix sheets up perfectly well with a little research) and functionality which is better situated in products other than your office suite. YMMV, but for me there I get a huge dissonance from OO.org and many of the things that I rely on in Office simply cannot be found. Not to start a flame war, but I could probably name a bunch of little pet peeves if I sat down to. My biggest issue recently was that OO.org has been prone to more crashes lately than I'd like. I don't mind blaming that on the fact that I'm running perhaps a bit more of a beta version, but one HUGE problem struck me the other night: OO.org didn't auto-save a recoverable version of my work in progress! This has been an Office mainstay since Office 95 and it appears that OO.org does do this... mostly... just apparently not for Untitled documents, which IIRC was fixed in Office 97. Perhaps it's due to the fact that OO.org borrows just enough from older Office UI that I think I can find what I'm looking for only to hit the brick wall of not finding it. Honestly, Office 03 - OO.org is a lot harder on me than Office 03 - Office 07 because at least with Office 07 I have something that I can blame when I can't find what I'm looking for. It doesn't help that OO.org needs better Gnome integration, even after the tweaks to OO.org from Canonical/Ubuntu. It doesn't help that *nix and X have always existed in this twilight realm of copy/paste and drag and drop that almost sort of does what you expect, some of the time. This is something that continually nags at me from time to time in Ubuntu but OO.org is where things feel the worst because it particularly doesn't feel consistent between OO.org applications themselves, much less between OO.org and everything else that I use. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate Open Source and use a number of applications that I like better in spite of their commercial equivalents (Firefox, Lightningbird (Thunderbird + Lightning plugin), Vim, Inkscape, ...), but OO.org, to me, seems the lesser choice to Office. Given the choice I'd much rather work in Office than OO.org. -- --Max Battcher-- ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
Max Battcher wrote: ... YMMV, but for me there I get a huge dissonance from OO.org and many of the things that I rely on in Office simply cannot be found. Not to start a flame war, but I could probably name a bunch of little pet ... Max-- It may well be a matter of what features one is looking for. I last used Open Office for editing 150 pages of notes for a math class. It wasn't really worth the effort to do it in TeX, but I did need a lot of symbols. When I've tried this kind of thing in MS-Word, it was quite frustrating. Every installation seemed to (not) have different symbols, and often what looked fine on the screen would print with lots of empty squares. I'm sure there's a way to get MS-Word to behave properly, but I have better things to do. With Open Office, I downloaded and installed, and it worked perfectly ten minutes later. Since then, I've never found a feature I wanted that it lacked. ---David GCU Well worth the price ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Re: What were they thinking? (MS Office 2007)
At 09:14 PM Thursday 4/24/2008, David Hobby wrote: Max Battcher wrote: ... YMMV, but for me there I get a huge dissonance from OO.org and many of the things that I rely on in Office simply cannot be found. Not to start a flame war, but I could probably name a bunch of little pet ... Max-- It may well be a matter of what features one is looking for. I last used Open Office for editing 150 pages of notes for a math class. It wasn't really worth the effort to do it in TeX, but I did need a lot of symbols. I guess I will have to try it, then . . . When I've tried this kind of thing in MS-Word, it was quite frustrating. Every installation seemed to (not) have different symbols, and often what looked fine on the screen would print with lots of empty squares. I'm sure there's a way to get MS-Word to behave properly, but I have better things to do. That sounds like the problem could be with what fonts are installed on different machines . . . perhaps?? With Open Office, I downloaded and installed, and it worked perfectly ten minutes later. Since then, I've never found a feature I wanted that it lacked. ---David GCU Well worth the price . . . ronn! :) ___ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
