MS Office

[Ken Blake]

They will, but they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents.

Sorry, but the statement "they won't be able to read ms office 2007
documents " is not correct, for two reasons:

1. First the only issue is for files types created by Office 2007 apps with
an extensions ending in x, such as .docx. However, although the Office 2007
apps use those file types by default, they don't have to use them. They can
create .doc file, rtf files, etc., which can easily be handled by prior
versions of Office.

2. Those older versions of Office can be changed with a free patch from
Microsoft to let the open the new file types.

 

[Terry R.]

The date and time was 11/8/2008 4:32 AM, and on a whim, Ken Blake
pounded out on the keyboard:

Sorry, but the statement "they won't be able to read ms office 2007
documents " is not correct, for two reasons:

1. First the only issue is for files types created by Office 2007 apps with
an extensions ending in x, such as .docx. However, although the Office 2007
apps use those file types by default, they don't have to use them. They can
create .doc file, rtf files, etc., which can easily be handled by prior
versions of Office.

2. Those older versions of Office can be changed with a free patch from
Microsoft to let the open the new file types.

One BIG complaint about MSO 2007. I set users for Word and Excel to
save in the 2003 formats (doc & xls). This works fine IF the user
clicks Save, the default is set. BUT, if you use Save As, both of those
programs revert back to the new format. This defeats the purpose of
changing the defaults. Brilliant programming...



--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[Gordon]

One BIG complaint about MSO 2007. I set users for Word and Excel to save
in the 2003 formats (doc & xls). This works fine IF the user clicks Save,
the default is set. BUT, if you use Save As, both of those programs
revert back to the new format. This defeats the purpose of changing the
defaults. Brilliant programming...

Errr the point about "Save As" is exactly that - there IS no Default. That's
the whole PURPOSE of "Save As". Duh..........

 

[Bill Sharpe]

Errr the point about "Save As" is exactly that - there IS no Default.
That's the whole PURPOSE of "Save As". Duh..........

I beg to differ. The default (first) choice in the Save As dialog box
for a new 2007 document is .docx. You have to scroll down the file list
to select a different choice.

If I open an existing .doc file, though, and then select Save As, the
first choice is .doc.

Bill

 

[Gordon]

I beg to differ. The default (first) choice in the Save As dialog box for
a new 2007 document is .docx. You have to scroll down the file list to
select a different choice.

If I open an existing .doc file, though, and then select Save As, the
first choice is .doc.

Well they have to put SOMETHING first, don't they?

 

[Gordon]

I beg to differ. The default (first) choice in the Save As dialog box for
a new 2007 document is .docx. You have to scroll down the file list to
select a different choice.

If I open an existing .doc file, though, and then select Save As, the
first choice is .doc.

And in addition I think you'll find most WP apps do that - if you set Open
Office to save documents as .doc by default, if you do "save AS" the top
option is .odt......

 

[Terry R.]

The date and time was 11/8/2008 11:18 AM, and on a whim, Gordon pounded
out on the keyboard:

Errr the point about "Save As" is exactly that - there IS no Default. That's
the whole PURPOSE of "Save As". Duh..........

If someone sets a default in Save, it should be that way throughout. It
defeats the purpose to change the file type, ESPECIALLY since there
isn't a way to set a default for Save As. If someone wants to save a
file in a different format, the first option should be the same as it is
set for the default. THEN the user can decide if it's even necessary to
select a different file type.

I had to advise an insurance agent last week who sent me a quote in the
docx format. Using MSO 2003 even with the compatibility pack, it looked
like crap. The office had no idea that MS even changed the format,
which is typical of so many users. And even fewer know anything about
the compatibility pack (which doesn't do all that great of a job).

You try getting a network of users to understand that when using Save
As, they have to change the file type EVERY time they save a file.

Duh yourself.

--
Terry R.

***Reply Note***
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.

 

[Gordon]

The date and time was 11/8/2008 11:18 AM, and on a whim, Gordon pounded
out on the keyboard:


If someone sets a default in Save, it should be that way throughout.

<sigh> The "Save AS" option is used to save as a DIFFERENT
format..........NOT the default format..........

 

[Gordon]

It works that way for Word 2007 on MY system! I don't have the full
Office Suite installed.

PJ White

then there's something wrong - the "Save AS" function is used to save as a
DIFFERENT format to the default......

 

[ray]

Sorry, but the statement "they won't be able to read ms office 2007
documents " is not correct, for two reasons:

1. First the only issue is for files types created by Office 2007 apps
with an extensions ending in x, such as .docx. However, although the
Office 2007 apps use those file types by default, they don't have to use
them. They can create .doc file, rtf files, etc., which can easily be
handled by prior versions of Office.

That's all fine and good; but when someone with ms office 2007 sends you
an attachment, what are they going to do? 90% of the time, at least,
they'll take the path of least resistance i.e. the default.

 

[Ken Blake]

That's all fine and good; but when someone with ms office 2007 sends you
an attachment, what are they going to do? 90% of the time, at least,
they'll take the path of least resistance i.e. the default.

Two points in reply:

1. What's good or bad or done 90% of the time has nothing to do with the
point I was making. I was replying to the erroneous message stating that
"they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents " That was not
correct, and I pointed it out.

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

 

[Snidley W.]

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

And you can't protect yourself from that, given all the good stuff
available for such situations... including a bazillion MS updates for
Word????

You're lying, or you're a wimp.

Probably both.

 

[ray]

Two points in reply:

1. What's good or bad or done 90% of the time has nothing to do with
the point I was making. I was replying to the erroneous message stating
that "they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents " That was
not correct, and I pointed it out.

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

Yeah - ain't Linux great!

 

[ray]

Two points in reply:

1. What's good or bad or done 90% of the time has nothing to do with
the point I was making. I was replying to the erroneous message stating
that "they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents " That was
not correct, and I pointed it out.

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

Yeah - ain't Linux great!

 

[ray]

Two points in reply:

1. What's good or bad or done 90% of the time has nothing to do with
the point I was making. I was replying to the erroneous message stating
that "they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents " That was
not correct, and I pointed it out.

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

Yeah - ain't Linux great!

 

[ray]

Two points in reply:

1. What's good or bad or done 90% of the time has nothing to do with
the point I was making. I was replying to the erroneous message stating
that "they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents " That was
not correct, and I pointed it out.

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

Yeah - ain't Linux great!

 

[ray]

Two points in reply:

1. What's good or bad or done 90% of the time has nothing to do with
the point I was making. I was replying to the erroneous message stating
that "they won't be able to read ms office 2007 documents " That was
not correct, and I pointed it out.

2. If the attachment is sent to *me*, what's done in this regard doesn't
matter at all. That's because I won't open the attachment, since a Word
document can contain a macro with malicious intent.

Yeah - ain't Linux great!

 

[Sackboy]

Yeah - ain't Linux great!

No.
It's OK.

It's free.
Like how you can find free stuff in a dumpster.

It's the dumpster diving OS.

I admit to using it.
Using Debian Lenny now.

But Vista is far better.

It's a well known fact.

Pass It on !

 

[Sackboy]

tell that to the hungry children in africa...

its their choice..

It was their parents choice, moron.
Nobody forces starving people to bring more starving mouths into the
world.
It shows just how stupid, and starved those people will always be.

Let's see...I live in a barren desert, I eat flies to get by, so I'm
gonna have 9 kids !
They aren't even people.

 

[Sackboy]

Frank says its all up to a persons choice.

A child does not chose if it will be born or not unless you believe in
incarnation and that you choose where and when to be reborn.

I agree with you that its their parents fault..


I bet they are more decent than you! What kind of nazi crap thing to say
was that???????

You have adolfs picture hanging over your bed you moron?

No, moron...I have a keen grip on reality.
Ever notice how the "give to the children" charity representatives are fat
guys ?
9 villages could eat that fat guy for 11 months.
The head of the red cross in 2004 made $650,000.
Thats a lot of food !
It's all a scam...the same starving people are displayed for the benefit of
the same wealthy people year after year.

There is an old saying :

Give a man a fish...he eats for a day.
Teach a man to fish...he eats for a lifetime.

I never, ever give to professional charities after seeing what the top
sharks take home.
The heads of charities live like Ceasars...leaving the poor to rot.

I once gave an individual $1000, and my phone number.
He is off the streets, and a good friend of mine now.
And he paid me the $1000 back.
It was the most awesome display of human kindness I have ever felt.

So...go f yourself....moron.

I like people, am no nazi....but hate stupidity !