On 22/01/2008, Neil Gardner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Being a bit of an open source zealot myself, I've long learned that > only more IT literate people can even begin to understand my > criticisms of the overuse of M$ Word for the content of simple e- > mails. Most users just think M$ Windows + M$ Office are just pre- > installed with new computers and that a computer without M$ Office is > like a car without a petrol (Microsoft) or Diesel (Apple) engine. > I'm always amazed how people advise me I need Adobe Reader to open a > PDF (which open lightning fast on this wee MacBook), but no warning > about the compatibility of various M$-centric attachments. Word .doc > files open in NeoOffice (Aqua version of OOo) in 99.8% of cases, some > smaller Docx files open. But I need a converter for Visio (a trial > version of Visual Paradigm does the trick) and Publisher files simply > won't open in anything but the version of M$ Publisher used to create > them (for that reason I has a Win98 machine with an old pirated copy > of Publisher just to open files from one client). > The real reason you should not send M$ Office files, and probably the > best way to convince Green political activists, is that they > significantly boost download time, i.e a 200 word (1200 character) > plain text e-mail takes up little more than 2KB with headers and > only, the same as a Word Doc is at least 50 - 60K and if you add a > logo, that can soon balloon to 200Kb+. I once received a meeting > notice with around 40 words and a cut and pasted logo. It measured > 2MB. The most environmentally friendly solution, would be send all e- > mails as plain text with a link to an online PDF version. All they > need is the free and open-source OOo to generate that.
Now let me ask you, why is it more environmentally friendly to have smaller file sizes? I need to know, so that I can make that point. I myself don't really see how that is more environmentally friendly. Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il א-ב-ג-ד-ה-ו-ז-ח-ט-י-ך-כ-ל-ם-מ-ן-נ-ס-ע-ף-פ-ץ-צ-ק-ר-ש-ת A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
