This one time, at band camp, Paul Cameron said:
>> As well, I've had nothing but trouble with PDF's .... using acroread
>> on Linux as well as ghostview (which often pukes up PDF's)
>
>Well maybe u shouldn't use the linux version as its crap! Use windows it
>was written for it! honestly i dont understand if u want documentation
>that is not man crap than use .doc!!!
"Hey there linux f00lz! you sux0r!" You're like a bull in a china
shop.
>I am honestly sick of the linux lamers at work, they want to use their
>own crazt abiword or man crap. It cant generate proper .doc files, so
>where is the point? I tried to make for them for application documentate
>software, but i can't appease those freakes.
Hello? Is this a tr0ll? Who wants Word .docs anyway, when there are
much better alternatives?
>> It jus' ain't practical compared with ASCII and HTML.
>
>Seem my previous stuff it you see Word exports html files!! Its damm
>easy u just select if from the menu.
Ever run an HTML validator on your supposed 'HTML' output?
>Look, I've seen this before. If you want to be employable, than you
>need to have the skills. Not knowing basics documentation stuff
>like Word is surefire way to get passed up. Anyhow theres my advice.
Using Word for documenting is hardly a 'skill', and any professional
documentor will be using tools like DocBook, or TeX, and generating
their documentation in something PORTABLE and USEFUL, unlike the
steaming crap that Word produces: i.e. *valid* HTML, PS, PDF, and many
others.
--
jamesw
<Balial> so you have a dodgey OS connected to a proxy with a dodgey network
card connecting to a dodgey ISP and chatting on dodgey IRC servers - all you
need now is some alcohol & night swimming & you have a winning combination!
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://slug.org.au/lists/listinfo/slug
