On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

MBQ

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 09:54:01 +0000, D.M.Chapman wrote:

Office is one of the MS products that seems pretty good - another is
their mice (I've a stash of Intellimouse in the drawer incase they stop
making them )

Sounds like me and my stash of IBN Model M keyboards!

--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

*lightning protection* - a w_tom conductor

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 19:02:32 -0000, John wrote:

Most I noted down as of interest don't seem to be on the makers web
sites. -

The big retailers like Dixons Retail (Dixons, Currys, PCWorld, etc)
have the buying power to get makers to build to their own exclusive
specification. You won't find the same model in other retailers or
direct from the maker. Side steps any problems with "price promises",
you simply can't get the same model from anywhere else...

--
Cheers
Dave.

In article ,
says...
Most I noted down as of interest don't seem to be on the makers web sites. -


Two reasons for that. First, as you pointed out they may be end-of-line.
The other, and very important for retailers, is that "special" models
mean that you can't compare like with like, particulaly when it comes to
Best Price bragging by vendors - if you can't find exactly that model
elsewhere then price matching is an empty brag.

--
Skipweasel - never knowingly understood.

In article o.uk,
says...
Side steps any problems with "price promises",
you simply can't get the same model from anywhere else...



Aaargh, the rays!

--
Skipweasel - never knowingly understood.

John wrote:
"Mike Humphrey" wrote in message
o.uk...
John wrote:
I am needing to get a laptop as I need to go away to do some work.

Has anyone got real experience of "Open Office" as an alternative to
Microsoft? It will make a difference to how I spend my budget if I don't
buy
"Office". On my desktop I use Office 2003 with Outlook - I will think of
this as my datum.
I'll just throw in my opinion. I use Open Office all the time (as I use
a Linux system I don't have the choice of using MS Office!). It works
fine, I've not found anything I can't do. The main limitation is that
very complex documents in Microsoft formats can get their formatting
mangled - but this can happen between different versions of Microsoft
Office too. There's no equivalent to Outlook, if you want
calendaring/mail you could try Evolution - it's supposed to integrate
with Exchange but I've never tried to do that.

I would suggest you try it - it won't cost you anything more than a bit
of time if you don't like it.




From the OP

Went to possibly buy a laptop today ( However, I like to compare what I am
being sold with the Manufacturer's site to ensure the model is current
before spending)

Some good ones - 4Gb Ram 500Gb HDD, etc. However, many are end of line
models.

I decided I want (not necessarily need):

4Gb RAM
HDMI Socket (Who knows, at some time I may wish to connect it to a new TV)
Separate Number Pad
LED Back Lighting

Currys had the best display - but a lot of end of range.

Most I noted down as of interest don't seem to be on the makers web sites. -
Off for a pint!


Do be aware of two things:

If you want to put Linux on it, some of the latest hardware wont have
drivers yet, and intel onboard graphics chips suck in linux AND windows
as well.

Try ad get Nvidia equipped graphics.

In article , PeterC
scribeth thus
On 14 Jan 2011 11:06:24 GMT, Adrian wrote:

One thing worth knowing is that OpenOffice is in the throes of forking at
the moment, following Oracle's purchase of Sun. The DocumentFoundation's
LibreOffice is in 3.3 beta at the moment - and is the "true" successor to
the current OpenOffice.org 3.2. I don't know what Oracle will do longer
term, but I think the community will move to LibreOffice generally.

A couple of days ago I downloaded LO 3.3 latest release, uninstalled OO and
installed LO. It picked up the mods that I'd made to OO in spite of the User
files having gone from Docs and Settings - not too worried as it saved some
work.

OO 3.2 took, to open a spreadsheet, about 15 - 16s;

How odd, just tried ours more or less instantaneous!..

LO takes 25 - 26s, so
back to OO2.x days! For comparison, Excel 2003 takes 2s!

It'll be interesting to see how the Final of LO 3.3 performs and if
http://go-oo.org/ will do anything with it.

--
Tony Sayer

On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a....

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

MBQ

On Thu, 13 Jan 2011 22:56:02 -0000, Skipweasel wrote:

In article ,
says...
Has anyone got real experience of "Open Office" as an alternative to
Microsoft? It will make a difference to how I spend my budget if I don't buy
"Office". On my desktop I use Office 2003 with Outlook - I will think of
this as my datum.


I use it, and wouldn't say there's much wrong with it. A few of the
finer features aren't quite there yet, but it's coming along all the
time.

Microsoft, of course, can provide you with dozens of case studies which
tell of people incurring vast costs when they swap to OO - but then our
borough has just moved the school from Office 2003 to Office 2007 and I
have spent ages holding the hands of the confused who can't use it - so
migration for some people is always going to be hard.

But think how many businesses you have saved from the Office 2007 migration
nightmare! I have to admit that, although I love new software etc, Office
2007 was (and even now, with 2010, still can be) perplexing at times. But
on the whole, I do like the ribbon interface.

It's quite amazing how, even now, the older Office 97/2000/XP/2003 is still
ingrained in one's mindset. Like when we were discussing CPU-ID on here a
few days ago, and someone mentioned the Help - About method of getting PC
details. My instant thought was 'yes, of course', but when I went into
Office 2010, it's not there. And if it is, I can't find it!!
--
Cheers

JW

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), Man at B&Q wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

MBQ

I believe you are correct. FWIU, it is only piracy, and license number
abuse that will cause a license to be blocked or blacklisted in some way.
--
Cheers

JW

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to
enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software
licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I'm still using MS office 95.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

Andy

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:40:52 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to
enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software
licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I'm still using MS office 95.

Then you won't be able to open "docx" files with that.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:29:30 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.

I still see no sign of you being forced to upgrade! ;-)
--
Cheers

JW

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:28:28 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:40:52 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to
enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software
licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I'm still using MS office 95.

Then you won't be able to open "docx" files with that.

Not even a whiff of being 'forced' to upgrade. ;-)
--
Cheers

JW

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:55:09 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:29:30 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.

I still see no sign of you being forced to upgrade! ;-)

What if you want to open the docx file? They are trying to 'force'
you to 'upgrade'. My upgrade is to install and use OO instead.

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:40:52 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a
student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to
enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software
licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic
price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I'm still using MS office 95.

Oops! MS office 97

Then you won't be able to open "docx" files with that.

No?

I have been pleasantly surprised to find no trouble opening word
attachments to legal communications.

I have been avoiding Mozilla open office for some time through careful
reading of their *upgrade* offers.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:09:57 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:55:09 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:29:30 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.

I still see no sign of you being forced to upgrade! ;-)

What if you want to open the docx file? They are trying to 'force'
you to 'upgrade'. My upgrade is to install and use OO instead.

You ask the author/sender to save it as DOC format? I don't really think
you can blame MS for this. They have added the ability to use DOCX back as
far as 2003 I think. Not sure if it goes further. But you cannot expect
them to update every piece of software they have ever written.

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.

We have 2007 at work. Maybe that's why Sharepoint has always seemed so
****e!

--
Cheers

JW

In article ,
JW wrote:

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.

We have 2007 at work. Maybe that's why Sharepoint has always seemed so
****e!

It's still ****e in 2010 - it just steams a little less.

Darren

Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:40:52 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37 am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41 pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail
possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a
student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to
enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software
licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...


"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic
price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I'm still using MS office 95.

Oops! MS office 97

Then you won't be able to open "docx" files with that.

No?

I have been pleasantly surprised to find no trouble opening word
attachments to legal communications.

I have been avoiding Mozilla open office for some time through careful
reading of their *upgrade* offers.

open office is not Mozilla

regards

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:21:00 +0000 (UTC), D.M.Chapman wrote:

In article ,
JW wrote:

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.

We have 2007 at work. Maybe that's why Sharepoint has always seemed so
****e!

It's still ****e in 2010 - it just steams a little less.

I can believe that.
--
Cheers

JW

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
Tim Lamb wrote:
I have been avoiding Mozilla open office for some time through careful
reading of their *upgrade* offers.

open office is not Mozilla

And the only upgrade offers from Open Office I've seen are saying either
"Download the new, improved version for free" or "If you want
professional support, please pay these guys a fee."

If you want community support, just register and use the forum for free.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:52:06 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 20:40:52 +0000, Tim Lamb
wrote:

In message , Mark
writes
On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:13:59 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 17, 10:37*am, Mark
wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jan 2011 13:02:18 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"



wrote:
On Jan 14, 7:41*pm, dmc@puffin. (D.M.Chapman) wrote:
In article ,
John Rumm wrote:

they might not do an academic package again. One detail possibly worth
noting on the academic ones, is that once you cease being a
student, the
license also ceases. (not that I expect they do anything to
enforce this)

Not the case for most of the deals - it is true for software
licensed under
MSDNAA though (IIRC).

http://www.software4students.co.uk/S...m_I_Eligible-a...

"You receive Full Professional version software at an academic
price for
lifetime use at home only"

Lifetime of what? You or the computer?

Until the next version of Microshaft Office.

Do you say that with any authority?

None at all. I am just being cynical.

Previous version licenses have never been invalidated, AFAIK, by a new
version being released.

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I'm still using MS office 95.

Oops! MS office 97

Then you won't be able to open "docx" files with that.

No?

No. You can't open docx files with Office '97. With later versions
(2003?) you could download a converter, but this is not available for
'97.

I have been pleasantly surprised to find no trouble opening word
attachments to legal communications.

Are they docx?

I have been avoiding Mozilla open office for some time through careful
reading of their *upgrade* offers.

As others have pointed out it is not Mozilla. And what is wrong with
a free upgrade?
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:55:30 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:09:57 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:55:09 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:29:30 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.

I still see no sign of you being forced to upgrade! ;-)

What if you want to open the docx file? They are trying to 'force'
you to 'upgrade'. My upgrade is to install and use OO instead.

You ask the author/sender to save it as DOC format?

A lot of people do not have the technical knowledge to do this,
believe it or not. As if often the case one receives important
documents shortly before a meeting and there is not time for the
document to be resent.

I've had important documents sent in all sort of weird formats. The
only one I can't open is Microsoft Works but others have trouble with
all but the old fashioned "doc" format.

I don't really think
you can blame MS for this.

I can blame MS for changing the format they use for document storage.

They have added the ability to use DOCX back as
far as 2003 I think. Not sure if it goes further. But you cannot expect
them to update every piece of software they have ever written.

They didn't have to change the format. It is a problem of their own
making.

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.

We have 2007 at work. Maybe that's why Sharepoint has always seemed so
****e!

Sharepoint is ****e anyway.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:56:22 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:55:30 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:09:57 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:55:09 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:29:30 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.

I still see no sign of you being forced to upgrade! ;-)

What if you want to open the docx file? They are trying to 'force'
you to 'upgrade'. My upgrade is to install and use OO instead.

You ask the author/sender to save it as DOC format?

A lot of people do not have the technical knowledge to do this,
believe it or not. As if often the case one receives important
documents shortly before a meeting and there is not time for the
document to be resent.

Sometimes the case - but bad practice anyway. Documents should be sent out
long in advance. And if it's for business use, you can reasonably expect
all corporate PCs to be able to read DOCX. If they cannot, then there is a
business justification to upgrade. If the problem is that you cannot open
business documents on your home PC, then the simple fact is that your home
setup is not suitable for home working. However, with OO, you have a
solution. So not really sure what the problem is.

I don't really think
you can blame MS for this.

I can blame MS for changing the format they use for document storage.

They have only changed the installed default save option. I've never done
it, but I checked in Options - Save, and there is a simple dropdown box to
change the default back to 97-2003 format. If it is that big an issue,
setting up a standard paragraph to help people "Save As" will surely be
appreciated.

They have added the ability to use DOCX back as
far as 2003 I think. Not sure if it goes further. But you cannot expect
them to update every piece of software they have ever written.

They didn't have to change the format. It is a problem of their own
making.

And the broadcasting people don't have to switch off the analogue TV
signals...but they will...

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.

We have 2007 at work. Maybe that's why Sharepoint has always seemed so
****e!

Sharepoint is ****e anyway.

Agreed.

I quite like DOCX. It was by accident (actually, because Clarity screwed up
at work) that I realised that DOCX is just an archive format. Rename it to
..ZIP, and you can simply retrieve all embedded images etc.

--
Cheers

JW

In article ,
lid says...
You ask the author/sender to save it as DOC format?

A lot of people do not have the technical knowledge to do this,
believe it or not.


Send people an email with an .rtf file in it and half will swear they
can't open it in Word "Because it's not there". Show them how to use the
drop-down to see other formats and they look appalled that they might
have to actually /do/ something.

--
Skipweasel - never knowingly understood.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 13:20:50 -0000, Skipweasel wrote:

In article ,
lid says...
You ask the author/sender to save it as DOC format?

A lot of people do not have the technical knowledge to do this,
believe it or not.


Send people an email with an .rtf file in it and half will swear they
can't open it in Word "Because it's not there". Show them how to use the
drop-down to see other formats and they look appalled that they might
have to actually /do/ something.

Send them an .RTFM file, and see what they make of it!
--
Cheers

JW

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:39:16 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:56:22 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:55:30 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:09:57 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:55:09 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:29:30 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:00:50 +0000, Andy Champ
wrote:

On 17/01/2011 13:32, Mark wrote:

But they 'force' you to 'upgrade' somehow.

I run a fully legit copy of Office 2000.

I have office 2007 at work, and prefer the older one.

I have '97 at home and have to use 2010 at work. I do prefer the
older one but, as I stated in another post, I can't open "docx" files
with my version MS Office.

I still see no sign of you being forced to upgrade! ;-)

What if you want to open the docx file? They are trying to 'force'
you to 'upgrade'. My upgrade is to install and use OO instead.

You ask the author/sender to save it as DOC format?

A lot of people do not have the technical knowledge to do this,
believe it or not. As if often the case one receives important
documents shortly before a meeting and there is not time for the
document to be resent.

Sometimes the case - but bad practice anyway. Documents should be sent out
long in advance.

I agree. But it happens frequently.

And if it's for business use, you can reasonably expect
all corporate PCs to be able to read DOCX. If they cannot, then there is a
business justification to upgrade.

Just by changing the document they are creating an artificial
"justification" for upgrade.

If the problem is that you cannot open
business documents on your home PC, then the simple fact is that your home
setup is not suitable for home working. However, with OO, you have a
solution. So not really sure what the problem is.

I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like and are only capable
of double clicking on an icon, so "cannot" read some documents. As
they are all volunteers I can't moan about it too much but it's a pain
when several people turn up at a meeting, not having read some of the
documentation.

If they can't load a docx file some of them think they *have* to buy
the latest version of office. Telling them about OO usually leads to
a blank look at best.

I don't really think
you can blame MS for this.

I can blame MS for changing the format they use for document storage.

They have only changed the installed default save option. I've never done
it, but I checked in Options - Save, and there is a simple dropdown box to
change the default back to 97-2003 format. If it is that big an issue,
setting up a standard paragraph to help people "Save As" will surely be
appreciated.

I haven't got time to hand-hold everyone who may possibly send a
document in the "wrong" format. I have tried this kind of thing
before -- everyone just ignores instructions they don't understand.

They have added the ability to use DOCX back as
far as 2003 I think. Not sure if it goes further. But you cannot expect
them to update every piece of software they have ever written.

They didn't have to change the format. It is a problem of their own
making.

And the broadcasting people don't have to switch off the analogue TV
signals...but they will...

And therefore force people to "upgrade".

At work we have to use 2010 as the sharepoint integration doesn't work
in earlier versions.

We have 2007 at work. Maybe that's why Sharepoint has always seemed so
****e!

Sharepoint is ****e anyway.

Agreed.

I quite like DOCX. It was by accident (actually, because Clarity screwed up
at work) that I realised that DOCX is just an archive format. Rename it to
.ZIP, and you can simply retrieve all embedded images etc.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:28:10 +0000, Mark wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 12:39:16 +0000, JW wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:56:22 +0000, Mark wrote:

And if it's for business use, you can reasonably expect
all corporate PCs to be able to read DOCX. If they cannot, then there is a
business justification to upgrade.

Just by changing the document they are creating an artificial
"justification" for upgrade.

It really isn't just down to MS. If they had their way, do you not think
they would have wanted to retain their MS-proprietary formats? This article
is interesting:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...mment.comment1

If the problem is that you cannot open
business documents on your home PC, then the simple fact is that your home
setup is not suitable for home working. However, with OO, you have a
solution. So not really sure what the problem is.

I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like and are only capable
of double clicking on an icon, so "cannot" read some documents. As
they are all volunteers I can't moan about it too much but it's a pain
when several people turn up at a meeting, not having read some of the
documentation.

Just because someone is a volunteer doesn't mean they can never be taught
better ways to do things.

And the broadcasting people don't have to switch off the analogue TV
signals...but they will...

And therefore force people to "upgrade".

When are Microsoft switching off the old DOC format?

Look - put simply, it seems like you are the central point of a lot of
non-techie users. And therefore, the way I see it, you have a business
requirement to be able to open lots of different formats. The world moves
on. No-one ever says you have to move with it.

On Jan 18, 2:28*pm, Mark
wrote:


Just by changing the document they are creating an artificial
"justification" for upgrade.

So who upgraded to using docx without considering the consequences?
Surely it's their fault or their management/IT dept.

If the problem is that you cannot open
business documents on your home PC, then the simple fact is that your home
setup is not suitable for home working. However, with OO, you have a
solution. So not really sure what the problem is.

I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. *They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like

So how do you deal with those formats? Are they all MS's fault? Why
can't you deal with docx the same way?

MBQ

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:14:56 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 18, 2:28*pm, Mark
wrote:


Just by changing the document they are creating an artificial
"justification" for upgrade.

So who upgraded to using docx without considering the consequences?
Surely it's their fault or their management/IT dept.

Who knows? There are far too many people in the group to ask them
all. Often the problem comes from someone outside the main group
(consultant, government official etc) and we have even less control of
this.

If the problem is that you cannot open
business documents on your home PC, then the simple fact is that your home
setup is not suitable for home working. However, with OO, you have a
solution. So not really sure what the problem is.

I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. *They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like

So how do you deal with those formats? Are they all MS's fault? Why
can't you deal with docx the same way?

Personally I can open .docx files. The problem is that others can't
and haven't read them before a relevant meeting. This wastes time.
--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking some articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.

On 18/01/2011 12:39, JW wrote:

And the broadcasting people don't have to switch off the analogue TV
signals...but they will...

That's exactly what they did here in parts of Cumbria. We were one of
the _last_ regions to get digital TV and the _first_ to have analogue
turned off. The first batch of channels changed from analogue digital
overnight with _no_ overlap, the rest followed a few weeks later in the
same way.

--
Mike Clarke

On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:21:40 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:14:56 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 18, 2:28*pm, Mark
wrote:
I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. *They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like

So how do you deal with those formats? Are they all MS's fault? Why
can't you deal with docx the same way?

Personally I can open .docx files. The problem is that others can't
and haven't read them before a relevant meeting. This wastes time.

Anyone with half an ounce of common sense who was distributing complex
documents for others to read on screen or print (and not edit) would
use pdf. Anything simple should use plain text and not HTML.
Unfortunately Microsoft have spawned a generation of ****wits.

There is also huge potential with all Microsoft formats for the
document to be displayed or printed in a completely different manner
than that of the original author when the version numbers don't match
or conversions are done with other programs.

All closed formats are like that, total ****e.




--

In message , The Other Mike
writes
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:21:40 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:14:56 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 18, 2:28*pm, Mark
wrote:
I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. *They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like

So how do you deal with those formats? Are they all MS's fault? Why
can't you deal with docx the same way?

Personally I can open .docx files. The problem is that others can't
and haven't read them before a relevant meeting. This wastes time.

Anyone with half an ounce of common sense who was distributing complex
documents for others to read on screen or print (and not edit) would
use pdf. Anything simple should use plain text and not HTML.
Unfortunately Microsoft have spawned a generation of ****wits.

There is also huge potential with all Microsoft formats for the
document to be displayed or printed in a completely different manner
than that of the original author when the version numbers don't match
or conversions are done with other programs.

All closed formats are like that, total ****e.

Ah well! You have pointed up the differences between us users and the
adepts:-)

Am I likely to have a facility on this m/c to create pdf files?

AFAIK Adobe 8 is limited to reading only.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , Mike
Clarke writes

Plenty of free PDF converters around, e.g. PDFCreator for Windows
http://www.pdfforge.org/. It installs as a printer driver but
outputs to a file instead of a printer so you can get PDF output from
any application that can print.

Oh!

I'm not sure that works on XP but I'm sure something will.

Ta.

Hmm...

Installs. Works on XP SP3, fully updated.

Produces printable pdf files.

Thanks for that, I needed a PDF creator.
--
Tciao for Now!

John.

On 21/01/2011 20:55, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Other Mike
writes
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:21:40 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:14:56 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 18, 2:28 pm, Mark
wrote:
I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like

So how do you deal with those formats? Are they all MS's fault? Why
can't you deal with docx the same way?

Personally I can open .docx files. The problem is that others can't
and haven't read them before a relevant meeting. This wastes time.

Anyone with half an ounce of common sense who was distributing complex
documents for others to read on screen or print (and not edit) would
use pdf. Anything simple should use plain text and not HTML.
Unfortunately Microsoft have spawned a generation of ****wits.

There is also huge potential with all Microsoft formats for the
document to be displayed or printed in a completely different manner
than that of the original author when the version numbers don't match
or conversions are done with other programs.

All closed formats are like that, total ****e.

Ah well! You have pointed up the differences between us users and the
adepts:-)

Am I likely to have a facility on this m/c to create pdf files?

AFAIK Adobe 8 is limited to reading only.

regards


Plenty of free PDF converters around, e.g. PDFCreator for Windows
http://www.pdfforge.org/. It installs as a printer driver but outputs
to a file instead of a printer so you can get PDF output from any
application that can print.

--
Mike Clarke

In message , Mike
Clarke writes
On 21/01/2011 20:55, Tim Lamb wrote:
In message , The Other Mike
writes
On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 09:21:40 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Tue, 18 Jan 2011 07:14:56 -0800 (PST), "Man at B&Q"
wrote:

On Jan 18, 2:28 pm, Mark
wrote:
I have to deal with a lot of people who are not technical. They send
out documents in whatever format they feel like

So how do you deal with those formats? Are they all MS's fault? Why
can't you deal with docx the same way?

Personally I can open .docx files. The problem is that others can't
and haven't read them before a relevant meeting. This wastes time.

Anyone with half an ounce of common sense who was distributing complex
documents for others to read on screen or print (and not edit) would
use pdf. Anything simple should use plain text and not HTML.
Unfortunately Microsoft have spawned a generation of ****wits.

There is also huge potential with all Microsoft formats for the
document to be displayed or printed in a completely different manner
than that of the original author when the version numbers don't match
or conversions are done with other programs.

All closed formats are like that, total ****e.

Ah well! You have pointed up the differences between us users and the
adepts:-)

Am I likely to have a facility on this m/c to create pdf files?

AFAIK Adobe 8 is limited to reading only.

regards


Plenty of free PDF converters around, e.g. PDFCreator for Windows
http://www.pdfforge.org/. It installs as a printer driver but outputs
to a file instead of a printer so you can get PDF output from any
application that can print.

Oh!

I'm not sure that works on XP but I'm sure something will.

Ta.

regards


--
Tim Lamb