On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 09:55:31 -0500, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
>Now that is not a fair observation.
Sorry Rev. I didn't mean to offend. I thought about dropping an
emoticon in there. . .maybe I should have. (-:
Actually, I'm just as "guilty" of liking the familiar as you. I've made
a few runs
I did not say they charged for it.
They really should have given a rebate for it.
Just my opinion shared by some not shared by others.
Stewart
At 01:37 PM 3/26/2009, you wrote:
Well, I guess this is going nowhere. The price increase is a price increase,
not a charge for fixing Vista. They al
> Let us add the statement not yet.
>
> Right now XP is still available, for just over $100.00 from vendors.
> (OEM)
>
> Vista SP1 Upgrade is available from Vendors for about $125.00.
>
> How much is 7 going to cost out the gate? Will Vista drop in
> price? I suspect not. XP has not dropped a
Let us add the statement not yet.
Right now XP is still available, for just over $100.00 from vendors. (OEM)
Vista SP1 Upgrade is available from Vendors for about $125.00.
How much is 7 going to cost out the gate? Will Vista drop in
price? I suspect not. XP has not dropped appreciably in p
> Only if you already owned Vista.
Right, I understand this. I was just pointing out that MS did "fix" Vista at
no charge. The net result is the same either way: either you paid for Vista
and got the free update; or you pay for Win7 and get Vista, the free Vista
update, and all the new Win7 stuff.
Only if you already owned Vista. The early owners of Vista (before
SP1) were not an altogether happy lot. There were a lot of problems
with it, caused by both MS and the vendors who support Vista. (There
were a few ugly words between Vista and some vendors as to what code
was needed to write
> 7 sounds like it is a much better upgrade. (They worked all the bugs
> out, but then why charge folks for your screwup?)
Well, all this was "worked out" for Vista SP1, which *was* free.
While Mike is generally right about most things other than politics, I
disagree with him that Win7 is just
Notice I did not make any assertions about Vista (Not familiar enough
with it to do so.) I just said it was an upgrade I decided not to bite on.
Same thing happened in the DOS market. DOS 5 was a blockbuster. I
remember buying my copy. DOS 6 was not so hot. I think it took 2
incremental u
Vista suffers from poor marketing, and poor development from the MS side
(being released too soon) and from the developer side (not enough
drivers/software). Those problems were sufficiently gone by SP 1. It
always made me chuckle when I hear how poor Vista is and then learn it's
being put on fiv
Vista did not have the support for what I needed when it first came
out and also Machines I had would not all support Vista. (I had
just built a new machine and ran Vista advisor and it told me I still
had a few things I had to upgrade.)
It was just not an Upgrade I felt I needed to make. W
Why 7 and not Vista?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Rev. Stewart Marshall <
popoz...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> At present I am excited about Windows 7 and am anticipating upgrading to
> that.
>
>
*
** List info, subscr
Now that is not a fair observation.
I am constantly trying out new things. I choose the ones I like and
I let go the ones I do not like.
I did not upgrade to Vista as I did not see it as a good
upgrade. Same with Office 07. We do have Office 07 on the church
machine but I have troubles us
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:04:37 -0500, Rev. Stewart Marshall wrote:
>I have tried Open Office and it is just not the same nor can it do
>what I do with Word. Again if I wanted to spend my time learning a
>new system and a new set of menus I would spend time with it. But I
>want to keep my produc
What they attempted to do was what I dislike about some Word
Processor users. They wanted to make it more like a page layout
program, but forgot the fine controls needed to male them good.
Word Perfect was a great word processor but then they insisted on
adding crap so it could do fancy page
Thank you for using the past tense. Made. Not anymore but they once did.
Stewart
At 09:50 PM 3/24/2009, you wrote:
Ah, the Sleepy Jackson stratagem: when reality is inconvenient and renders
your point moot, cheat. I'm sure you will enlighten us with how they
prevent anyone from using one of
>What MS forgot, was we spent years learning how to use their Word
>Processor and were quite happy with it. We did not ask them to
>change the menu system on it.
They also forgot that they once had a very good word processor that was
very logical and easy to use. They have steadily crapped it
> That would be true in a free market. MS has insulated itself from
> market
> forces and hence is free to be as shoddy as it wants to be.
Ah, the Sleepy Jackson stratagem: when reality is inconvenient and renders
your point moot, cheat. I'm sure you will enlighten us with how they
prevent anyone
>If the market agrees with you, MS will be punished with reduced sales and
>consumers switching to alternatives, just as the market is doing to IE. If
>not, well then, you'll have refined the angry crank persona just that much
>more.
That would be true in a free market. MS has insulated itself fr
You see that explains my bitch.
I have been using Word long enough I know exactly how to do a header
or a footer, format it, etc. (I started using Word when it was a DOS
based Word Processor.) MY dad worked for AT&T and they had contracts
with MS to supply their products to the company and m
>And also interesting...the MS hater is again...hating MS.
I don't hate MS. I hate shoddy work. If MS stops being shoddy I will not
be complaining.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
om/en-ca/training/CR100654561033.aspx
From: Rich Schinnell
Date: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 01:45 pm
Subject: Re: [CGUYS] Office 2007
check out:
http://www.addintools.com/english/menuoffice/default.htm
they have a free trial for 15 days, support paypal and
it costs $29.95 for a single
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 7:54 PM, Tom Piwowar wrote:
> >It took me a few weeks to finally track down the problem, event viewer
> >didn't offer any real clues, but while I was troubleshooting, I offered to
> >roll them back to Office 2003. Every single person refused this offer and
> >said that th
At 08:57 PM 3/24/2009, you wrote:
There are several free, open source alternatives to Office available,
including Google Docs, which our new glitterati Fed CIO started moving the
DC gubmint to when he was the DC CIO. Many .orgs have moved to Open Office
to take advantage of the significant cost
> Here is kind of where you are right and wrong.
And here is where I disagree with you.
> Corel is now marketing a version of Word Perfect, but that power
> house has now become a joke of a program.
>
> This is one case where MS used their monopolistic market muscle to
> force people into using
> I am a MSfan boy according to Tom and I dislike them immensely for
> this change!!!
That's the final straw! Turn in your badge and decoder ring at the door.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives,
> A dumb way to do it.
Rather a shame that actual users don't agree with you.
Must...reeducate...users...
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and mo
Here is kind of where you are right and wrong.
When they introduced 07 they kind of took 03 off the market so you
did not have much of a choice on a paid office suite.
A number of states and a few nations are insisting on an open office
compatibility that MS has resisted immensely.
Corel is
> It is interesting that the cheerleaders for this latest interface
> travesty are the same two people who are always cheerleaders for
> whatever
> MS deigns to dish out.
I'm sorry that you're having such a tough time with objective reality, Tom.
Should I tell them that they're doing it all wrong?
Careful who you call paleface!!!
I am a MSfan boy according to Tom and I dislike them immensely for
this change!!!
Stewart
At 06:58 PM 3/24/2009, you wrote:
And also interesting...the MS hater is again...hating MS.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Tom Piwowar wrote:
>
>
> It is interestin
And also interesting...the MS hater is again...hating MS.
On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Tom Piwowar wrote:
>
>
> It is interesting that the cheerleaders for this latest interface
> travesty are the same two people who are always cheerleaders for whatever
> MS deigns to dish out.
>
*
>It took me a few weeks to finally track down the problem, event viewer
>didn't offer any real clues, but while I was troubleshooting, I offered to
>roll them back to Office 2003. Every single person refused this offer and
>said that they loved the new interface too much to go back to the old.
It
>Otherwise folks just stop using it. Or retain their older version.
Or switch to Open Office.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy **
** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http:
>But, using the Help file and actually _doing_ it once or
>twice, and figuring out the differences, it really wasn't *harder* -
>only *different*.
I'm not looking for different for the sake of being different. This is
not a fashion show. Was it better, or did they put you for the wringer
just fo
> Just curious, what is the experience level and age range for the
> people who loved the new interface?
Experience level was average and ages in the 20's to late 30's.
*
** List info, subscription management, list rules, a
check out:
http://www.addintools.com/english/menuoffice/default.htm
they have a free trial for 15 days, support paypal and
it costs $29.95 for a single copy with quantity discounts.
Rich
I Know, I know, why spend more money to modify office 2007 but
either you get into the 21st century or you p
Just curious, what is the experience level and age range for the
people who loved the new interface?
Richard P.
> It took me a few weeks to finally track down the problem, event viewer
> didn't offer any real clues, but while I was troubleshooting, I offered to
> roll them back to Office 2003.
> I have yet to meet a non IT person who doesn't strongly dislike MS's
> 07 versions.
> People just want to do their work ... not be forced to slow down to
> learn something in the process for no good reason.
My experience has been the complete opposite.
When I first started rolling it out to st
I'd love to have a list of exactly those features of Word that you actually use.
Mail Merge?
Hanging indents?
Tables (with math)?
Styles
Fine adjustments of line spacing??
. . . . .
People object to "menus" but I find substantially everything within two levels
below the main menu, which is
> Is this true for _all_ kinds of users, e.g. basic users (produce/edit
> only "simple" documents), intermediate users, and advanced users (use
> all sorts of bells and whistles in the application? Is this true for
> both folks who "spend all day" working with Word documents, and those
> who use W
> The F1 key is very useful, but remember some of us are trying to be
> productive, and when you constantly have to hit the F1 key to figure
> out soemthing that you knew how to do on the old system, it gets old,
> and frustrating and you get rid of it.
Constantly? That's what I don't get. I used
That is part of my point. I use Word almost everyday.
Some days it is simple edit print. Other days it is a mail merge,
envelope addressing.
Maybe another day laying out a form etc.
I know where to look when I want to do what I want to do.
When I went to Office 07 I immediately felt lost.
Is this true for _all_ kinds of users, e.g. basic users (produce/edit only
"simple" documents), intermediate users, and advanced users (use all sorts of
bells and whistles in the application? Is this true for both folks who "spend
all day" working with Word documents, and those who use Word onc
The F1 key is very useful, but remember some of us are trying to be
productive, and when you constantly have to hit the F1 key to figure
out soemthing that you knew how to do on the old system, it gets old,
and frustrating and you get rid of it.
Stewart
At 10:14 AM 3/24/2009, you wrote:
The
I have yet to meet a non IT person who doesn't strongly dislike MS's
07 versions.
People just want to do their work ... not be forced to slow down to
learn something in the process for no good reason.
db
Tony B wrote:
The most complicated thing I had to re-learn was mailings. I even
think i
The most complicated thing I had to re-learn was mailings. I even
think it was called something else in older versions - "mail merge" or
something. But, using the Help file and actually _doing_ it once or
twice, and figuring out the differences, it really wasn't *harder* -
only *different*.
Just r
I have the conversion tool to load the newer form on my Office 03. I
cannot find things I normally tweak and work with in the newer office
and just get frustrated with it.
It would have been nice if they included a way for those of us who
have used word since the DOS days to learn the new sys
> I expected the same reaction from both my wife and my boss when they
> were first faced with the new layouts. Oddly, neither of them said a
> thing to me or even asked my help with anything. In both cases it was
> months later when I thought to ask them if they were having any
> trouble and neith
I expected the same reaction from both my wife and my boss when they
were first faced with the new layouts. Oddly, neither of them said a
thing to me or even asked my help with anything. In both cases it was
months later when I thought to ask them if they were having any
trouble and neither were.
I'm trying to use the customization tool for a rollout of new computers.
We're using Dell's Image Direct so the Office 2007 installation will
happen after the image is placed onto the system. So I need all
installs to be run silently.
Except, I can't get the installation to run silently.
I'v
49 matches
Mail list logo