Retort Re: Publisher and Webpage

[PopRivet]

I (sort of) respectfully submit that you don't know
what you're talking about and have only yourself to
blame.

David Candy wrote:
> I use Word.
So do I.
>From experience if one does one page per document it
> produces superior output (although it takes more
work).
Yes, it does. Same with multiple pages too. And it
doesn't take "more work", whatever that means.

>But the main
> claim to infamity is that documents can't be shared
(as no serious
> person has publisher) or printed (unless one is
printing locally).
"infamity"? Do you mean infamy? Or fame?
Documents can easily be shared, corroborated, reviewed,
and marked up. Vetting is easy with Word, for as many
people as you wish to have access any particular file.
What are you using, Word 1.0? Or pirated software?
If so, you're missing lots of pieces.

>
> I used to publish a newsletter (circulation 2000)
with word output
> going to offset printing.
I still do. Circulation 3550, on glossy 4-color
layout.

>It was layout perfect. The editor that
> replaced me was an idiot.
No, I suspect she was a familiar face, very similar to
you IFF what you say is true, but more importantly, I
have a feeling you were replaced for less than, shall
we say, effectivity? So, why did she replace you?
I'll ignore the incorrect use of the title "editor"
there.

She could only use Works and Publisher type
> program. All the minor details of the carefull
layout was lost.
Managed to sabotage her did you? I can't tell: At one
point it sounds like you did the layout, then it sounds
like someone else did the layout. Not imporatant
though; I don't really care who did it.


> title went from small caps to capitals, drop caps
disappered, and
> many other things.
Hmm, sounds like garbage in, garbage out, to me, along
with the submitter probably refusing to follow
submission requirements.

>> David Candy wrote:
This little gem I already covered in another post.
But, it's been fun - thanks for the entertainment.

>>> Publisher is a useless program that is basically
useless. Therefore
>>> you need to ask were the losers hang out.
>>>
>>> Generally speaking one puts in links relative to
the current
>>> document, unless they are too another site. But as
I said Publisher
>>> is a useless program designed to seperate idiots
from their money.
>>>
>>> Edit the links manually using notepad.
>>
>> It is useless as far as web-design goes, I would
agree, but as a
>> home/SOHO DTP application it is very useful, IMO.
>>
>> As a Publisher user, I find your remarks offensive.
So, what do you
>> use for DTP? Not everyone can afford PageMaker and
the learning
>> curve is almost vertical which makes it prohibitive
to all but those
>> with plenty of time and money.

[David Candy]

You want some more reason why publisher should cease to exist. I was =
organising labour about three years ago, my contact with the union was =
through the federal office (state office only cared about storemen and =
packers - in Australia the govt forced unions to merge and become bigger =
- the NUW largest union that merged in was the S&P - in my state they =
still think they were the only union to form the NUW). The fed organiser =
used to send me stuff in publisher to distribute to my new and =
prospective members. This required me to get my CD, install publisher, =
copy and paste it to word, uninstall publisher. This took an hour to =
make the documents useable. If not for me noone would have any idea of =
agendas, formal notifications, and other democratic necessities.

As I said good for idiots. If you want to give cards made out of paper =
or other similar stuff, go for it. That wouldn't impress me (if I'm =
going to waste my time I'll make a multimedia extravaganza in powerpoint =
- I spent years wondering WTF use was powerpoint - then another =
programmer at work got some attachment that took hours to download - it =
was a get well card for her cat - ahh I said PP is for E-Cards as noone =
would use it for presentations - Word, a transparancy maker, a laser =
printer (needed for the transparancy maker), a blank sheet of paper, and =
an overhead projector is what one would use).

--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.g2mil.com/Dec2003.htm
"PopRivet" > wrote in message =
...
> I (sort of) respectfully submit that you don't know
> what you're talking about and have only yourself to
> blame.
>=20
> David Candy wrote:
> > I use Word.
> So do I.
> >From experience if one does one page per document it
> > produces superior output (although it takes more
> work).
> Yes, it does. Same with multiple pages too. And it
> doesn't take "more work", whatever that means.
>=20
> >But the main
> > claim to infamity is that documents can't be shared
> (as no serious
> > person has publisher) or printed (unless one is
> printing locally).
> "infamity"? Do you mean infamy? Or fame?
> Documents can easily be shared, corroborated, reviewed,
> and marked up. Vetting is easy with Word, for as many
> people as you wish to have access any particular file.
> What are you using, Word 1.0? Or pirated software?
> If so, you're missing lots of pieces.
>=20
> >
> > I used to publish a newsletter (circulation 2000)
> with word output
> > going to offset printing.
> I still do. Circulation 3550, on glossy 4-color
> layout.
>=20
> >It was layout perfect. The editor that
> > replaced me was an idiot.
> No, I suspect she was a familiar face, very similar to
> you IFF what you say is true, but more importantly, I
> have a feeling you were replaced for less than, shall
> we say, effectivity? So, why did she replace you?
> I'll ignore the incorrect use of the title "editor"
> there.
>=20
> She could only use Works and Publisher type
> > program. All the minor details of the carefull
> layout was lost.
> Managed to sabotage her did you? I can't tell: At one
> point it sounds like you did the layout, then it sounds
> like someone else did the layout. Not imporatant
> though; I don't really care who did it.
>=20
>=20
> > title went from small caps to capitals, drop caps
> disappered, and
> > many other things.
> Hmm, sounds like garbage in, garbage out, to me, along
> with the submitter probably refusing to follow
> submission requirements.
>=20
> >> David Candy wrote:
> This little gem I already covered in another post.
> But, it's been fun - thanks for the entertainment.
>=20
> >>> Publisher is a useless program that is basically
> useless. Therefore
> >>> you need to ask were the losers hang out.
> >>>
> >>> Generally speaking one puts in links relative to
> the current
> >>> document, unless they are too another site. But as
> I said Publisher
> >>> is a useless program designed to seperate idiots
> from their money.
> >>>
> >>> Edit the links manually using notepad.
> >>
> >> It is useless as far as web-design goes, I would
> agree, but as a
> >> home/SOHO DTP application it is very useful, IMO.
> >>
> >> As a Publisher user, I find your remarks offensive.
> So, what do you
> >> use for DTP? Not everyone can afford PageMaker and
> the learning
> >> curve is almost vertical which makes it prohibitive
> to all but those
> >> with plenty of time and money.
>=20
>

[Cerridwen]

David Candy wrote:
> You want some more reason why publisher should cease to exist. I was
> organising labour about three years ago, my contact with the union
> was through the federal office (state office only cared about
> storemen and packers - in Australia the govt forced unions to merge
> and become bigger - the NUW largest union that merged in was the S&P
> - in my state they still think they were the only union to form the
> NUW). The fed organiser used to send me stuff in publisher to
> distribute to my new and prospective members. This required me to get
> my CD, install publisher, copy and paste it to word, uninstall
> publisher. This took an hour to make the documents useable. If not
> for me noone would have any idea of agendas, formal notifications,
> and other democratic necessities.
>
> As I said good for idiots. If you want to give cards made out of
> paper or other similar stuff, go for it. That wouldn't impress me (if
> I'm going to waste my time I'll make a multimedia extravaganza in
> powerpoint - I spent years wondering WTF use was powerpoint - then
> another programmer at work got some attachment that took hours to
> download - it was a get well card for her cat - ahh I said PP is for
> E-Cards as noone would use it for presentations - Word, a
> transparancy maker, a laser printer (needed for the transparancy
> maker), a blank sheet of paper, and an overhead projector is what one
> would use).

Word is a word processor, with basic DTP capabilities. I am a graphic
designer - I design greeting cards, postcards, business cards, calendars,
programmes, bookmarks, and other print items for various charities - have
you ever tried designing a greeting card in Word?!

You cannot (unless you know more than I do) use Word to perform CMYK
separations, something I need to do on an - almost - daily basis.

Each has its place. I use both daily, but I keep Word for what it's good at
(word processing) and Publisher for what it's good at (DTP).

There is no argument for scrapping Publisher.

[David Candy]

Well I've done CMYK in Word (Word 1 at that) in doing posters for some =
toy library. You just print 4 pages - one colour per page (I may have =
been using 2 spot colours - it's almost 10 years ago next month (May =
94)). Although as I remember the printers weren't able to open the file =
and I gave them it in some mac format (now I do remember trying to find =
the format command on a mac - I searched for hours before asking some =
girl "where is the format floppy command". She said "just put the disk =
in and it will ask"). But publisher is even more limited than Word at =
DTP.

Don't worry my sister used to love it too. I gave her my disk. It was =
destroyed but I found a copy of the disk on my drive (I always copy CD =
to disk and install from disk - very important for office).

Publisher is easy to use. It allows untrained people to generate sub =
standard work, but the work looks ok if one doesn't know better.

--=20
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.g2mil.com/Dec2003.htm
"Cerridwen" > wrote in message =
...
> David Candy wrote:
> > You want some more reason why publisher should cease to exist. I was
> > organising labour about three years ago, my contact with the union
> > was through the federal office (state office only cared about
> > storemen and packers - in Australia the govt forced unions to merge
> > and become bigger - the NUW largest union that merged in was the S&P
> > - in my state they still think they were the only union to form the
> > NUW). The fed organiser used to send me stuff in publisher to
> > distribute to my new and prospective members. This required me to =
get
> > my CD, install publisher, copy and paste it to word, uninstall
> > publisher. This took an hour to make the documents useable. If not
> > for me noone would have any idea of agendas, formal notifications,
> > and other democratic necessities.
> >
> > As I said good for idiots. If you want to give cards made out of
> > paper or other similar stuff, go for it. That wouldn't impress me =
(if
> > I'm going to waste my time I'll make a multimedia extravaganza in
> > powerpoint - I spent years wondering WTF use was powerpoint - then
> > another programmer at work got some attachment that took hours to
> > download - it was a get well card for her cat - ahh I said PP is for
> > E-Cards as noone would use it for presentations - Word, a
> > transparancy maker, a laser printer (needed for the transparancy
> > maker), a blank sheet of paper, and an overhead projector is what =
one
> > would use).
>=20
> Word is a word processor, with basic DTP capabilities. I am a graphic
> designer - I design greeting cards, postcards, business cards, =
calendars,
> programmes, bookmarks, and other print items for various charities - =
have
> you ever tried designing a greeting card in Word?!
>=20
> You cannot (unless you know more than I do) use Word to perform CMYK
> separations, something I need to do on an - almost - daily basis.
>=20
> Each has its place. I use both daily, but I keep Word for what it's =
good at
> (word processing) and Publisher for what it's good at (DTP).
>=20
> There is no argument for scrapping Publisher.
>=20
>

[Cerridwen]

David Candy wrote:
> Well I've done CMYK in Word (Word 1 at that) in doing posters for
> some toy library. You just print 4 pages - one colour per page (I may
> have been using 2 spot colours - it's almost 10 years ago next month
> (May 94)). Although as I remember the printers weren't able to open
> the file and I gave them it in some mac format (now I do remember
> trying to find the format command on a mac - I searched for hours
> before asking some girl "where is the format floppy command". She
> said "just put the disk in and it will ask"). But publisher is even
> more limited than Word at DTP.
>
> Don't worry my sister used to love it too. I gave her my disk. It was
> destroyed but I found a copy of the disk on my drive (I always copy
> CD to disk and install from disk - very important for office).
>
> Publisher is easy to use. It allows untrained people to generate sub
> standard work, but the work looks ok if one doesn't know better.

How can Publisher be "more limited than Word at DTP" when that's its sole
purpose?! Word is a word processor, as I think I may have stated before,
Publisher is a SOHO DTP application - and a damned good one at that. You
never answered my question. Have you tried setting up a greeting card
accurately in Word?!

[David Candy]

Well no, because I have no need for greeting cards.

Publisher comes from the Home Product stable. It's counterpart is Works WP.

In Serenity Macros I have a calculator that calculates what the exact measurements are. All pages are layed out in 1, 2 , 3, 4, or 5 (prob not on A4) columns. It calculates the 1/2, 1/3. 1/4, 1/5 of the page or current part of the document. EG one may have 2 columns of text but graphics are layed out on a 1/3 basis. It copies it to the clipboard so it can be pasted to a input box.

Allows Easy Settings of Objects to Predetermined Widths

Menu Tools

Pages are generally laid out on a grid. Drawings and other objects are usually 1/3, 1/2 or 3/4 of the page width. This macro allows easy calculation of these values and the results to be copied to the clipboard for pasting into (Shift + Insert, or Ctrl + V) other dialog boxes.

Close
Closes the dialog box.
Copy
Copies the selected measurement to the clipboard.
Help
Starts context sensitive help (this page).

In Word there are Tables, Frames, Text Boxes, Graphics/Pictures, and drawing canvas. All have layout uses. I can barely use word these days. Far too user friendly (which means excessively complex and thus becomes more of a chaotic system as it is constantly trying to predict what you want - ask someone to explain numbering in word (97 or later) for you. If word predicts how you want it numbered wrongly you doc will never be of use to anyone again ).

In the eighties one of the most popular programs used for WP was Lotus 123 Ver 2.1. A spreadsheet. This is because complex programs can do anything (I used word as a spreadsheet 10000 times more often than Excel, I used Lotus 123 mostly as a WP, I used word for most database tasks (it why I started using it - for it's data manipulation features which I was in withdrawal from as I no longer had a mainframe).

As I said "Publisher is easy to use. It allows untrained people ..." and you said "Publisher is a SOHO DTP application ..." is the reason why word is more powerful. Word is easy to knock up a crap letter but difficult to use to it's full power.

Make 4 graphics. Enter your text and graphics into the graphics (not jpeg type but VECTOR). Arranfe them on the page. Hold down alt key to see measurements on the ruler or use any of the hundreds of tools to lay it out exactly (like entering auto for some entries to make word just fix it).

If you only used 97 or later set it to 95 compat mode (or Use Printer Metrics sub option) and set your default printer to what it will be printed on. There are some options in 2000 and later that may need to be turned off (I have printed 2 web pages in last 4 years from IE. I'm all electronic these days so I have never printed with MS last two versions of Word) about scaling to fit paper etc. Users found exactness too hard so it was disabled as the default.

I could make a greeting card but it would require trial and error and relearning layout while being trapped by 2000/2002/2003's efforts to help me.



--
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.g2mil.com/Dec2003.htm
"Cerridwen" > wrote in message ...
> David Candy wrote:
> > Well I've done CMYK in Word (Word 1 at that) in doing posters for
> > some toy library. You just print 4 pages - one colour per page (I may
> > have been using 2 spot colours - it's almost 10 years ago next month
> > (May 94)). Although as I remember the printers weren't able to open
> > the file and I gave them it in some mac format (now I do remember
> > trying to find the format command on a mac - I searched for hours
> > before asking some girl "where is the format floppy command". She
> > said "just put the disk in and it will ask"). But publisher is even
> > more limited than Word at DTP.
> >
> > Don't worry my sister used to love it too. I gave her my disk. It was
> > destroyed but I found a copy of the disk on my drive (I always copy
> > CD to disk and install from disk - very important for office).
> >
> > Publisher is easy to use. It allows untrained people to generate sub
> > standard work, but the work looks ok if one doesn't know better.
>
> How can Publisher be "more limited than Word at DTP" when that's its sole
> purpose?! Word is a word processor, as I think I may have stated before,
> Publisher is a SOHO DTP application - and a damned good one at that. You
> never answered my question. Have you tried setting up a greeting card
> accurately in Word?!
>
>

[PopRivet]

Cerridwen wrote:
>> David Candy wrote:
>>> Well I've done CMYK in Word (Word 1 at that) in
doing posters for
....
>> Have you tried
>> setting up a greeting card accurately in Word?!

IMO, it's highly likely this blowhard has any actual
experience with anything remotely related. It likes to
drop its own personal references and seemingly personal
resume around a lot, but there has been absolutely
nothing even close to demonstrating an actual
experience or knowledge in anything actually relevant.
It does have entertainment value, however.

Regards,

Pop

[PopRivet]

==Ohhhhh, God, you gotta be kidding! Maybe I'll have to glance at your web page after all, just for grins! No worry, I don't believe in scanning addresses or hacking or anything remotely similar: Any vetting I might do, if I do, will be kept to myself unless you do something to cause it to be released.

== You'll probably get upset at this and take more offense than I intend, but ... boy, you are one of the more mixed up members of the "old boys" network I've ever come across!
== I do have to admit though, after my very recent comment that you never backed anything up with anything usable, that you did actually make a good attempt at it. The only problem is your apparent closed mind and an inability to believe that anyone other than you knows anything about anything is not only egocentric, but it's also bordering on silly.

> David Candy wrote:
> Well no, because I have no need for greeting cards.
==I don't believe you were asked to have a need for greeting cards.

>
> Publisher comes from the Home Product stable. It's counterpart is
> Works WP.
==That makes no sense.

>
> In Serenity Macros I have a calculator that calculates what the exact
> measurements are. All pages are layed out in 1, 2 , 3, 4, or 5 (prob
> not on A4) columns. It calculates the 1/2, 1/3. 1/4, 1/5 of the page
> or current part of the document. EG one may have 2 columns of text
> but graphics are layed out on a 1/3 basis. It copies it to the
> clipboard so it can be pasted to a input box.
Umm, OK, but, is that progress for the sake of progress, or just reinventing the wheel?
>
> Allows Easy Settings of Objects to Predetermined Widths
For what?
>
> Menu Tools
>
> Pages are generally laid out on a grid. Drawings and other objects
> are usually 1/3, 1/2 or 3/4 of the page width. This macro allows easy
> calculation of these values and the results to be copied to the
> clipboard for pasting into (Shift + Insert, or Ctrl + V) other dialog
> boxes.
==Duh, most of us call those columns, though the setters like to use different syntax.
>
> Close
> Closes the dialog box.
> Copy
> Copies the selected measurement to the clipboard.
> Help
> Starts context sensitive help (this page).
"this page"?
>
> In Word there are Tables, Frames, Text Boxes, Graphics/Pictures, and
> drawing canvas.
==Canvas? "Canvas didn't show up in Word until 2xxx versions. If you're so stuck in 95 and 97, where'd canvas come from?

> All have layout uses. I can barely use word these
> days. Far too user friendly (which means excessively complex and thus
> becomes more of a chaotic system as it is constantly trying to
> predict what you want - ask someone to explain numbering in word (97
> or later) for you. If word predicts how you want it numbered wrongly
> you doc will never be of use to anyone again ).
== Wow, fantastic. I didn't realize Word was a predictive application, or had any of the AI that it takes to BE predictive! I do however know that Word, if one just takes a short period of time to read through the menues (Help isn't often used for those who are actually writers with experience), lets you turn off or on a lot of very nice, helpful features. My learning curve with Pagemaker was magnitudes longer than with Word; it was amazingly un-intuitive for me, with non-standard syntax for many features, the majority of which were only known by other PM users. Pagemaker wanted the field to themselves at one time and tried to make it difficult to change to any other app once you learned it. Took them a long time to learn that, in fact.
>
> In the eighties one of the most popular programs used for WP was
> Lotus 123 Ver 2.1.
==Quickly followed by Borland's answer to Lotus.

> A spreadsheet. This is because complex programs
> can do anything (I used word as a spreadsheet 10000 times more often
> than Excel,
==Wow, you either used a LOT of 2 x 3 tables, or had a LOT of time on your hands! I have my doubts whether you used ANY application 10,000 times, let alone 10k times MORE than anything.

> I used Lotus 123 mostly as a WP, I used word for most
> database tasks (it why I started using it - for it's data
> manipulation features which I was in withdrawal from as I no longer
> had a mainframe).
==I bet your mainframe was a VAX, wasn't it?
You used Word 1 etc. for DATABASE tasks? What would your definition of a database be? Woof! Even Borland's database functions were better than Word's, and I'm a Word afficionado!
== When I lost "my" mainframe, I switched from Ashton Tate's DBII, later DBIII, to Vulcan (same software designers/writers). And, I got into it when it was FREE! In fact, there is still an amazing amount of Ashton Tate stuff out there being used; a real legacy product of value. Dunno what happened to Vulcan - apparently fell by the wayside as MS took over.

>
> As I said "Publisher is easy to use. It allows untrained people ..."
> and you said "Publisher is a SOHO DTP application ..." is the reason
> why word is more powerful.
Word is MORE powerful BECAUSE Pub is a soho DTP app? Now, that's bordering on purely silly! Capabilities, not a name, make an application.

> Word is easy to knock up a crap letter but
> difficult to use to it's full power.
==No, it's not. Apparently for you it is, but I seriously feel that's your closed mind speaking, not reality. I've taught a lot of people to use a lot of different apps, and your comparison, to use your own word, is crap.

>
> Make 4 graphics. Enter your text and graphics into the graphics (not
> jpeg type but VECTOR).
So?
> Arranfe them on the page. Hold down alt key to
> see measurements on the ruler or use any of the hundreds of tools to
> lay it out exactly (like entering auto for some entries to make word
> just fix it).
==I have no idea what that's about. Is there something meaningful there?

>
> If you only used 97 or later set it to 95 compat mode (or Use Printer
==You are being facetious, right? I hope!

> Metrics sub option) and set your default printer to what it will be
> printed on. There are some options in 2000 and later that may need to
> be turned off (I have printed 2 web pages in last 4 years from IE.
==Uhh, is "IE" Internet Explorer there? Or were you being vague on purpose?

> I'm all electronic these days so I have never printed with MS last
> two versions of Word) about scaling to fit paper etc. Users found
> exactness too hard so it was disabled as the default.
Then how, in your earlier comments, did you know that the word =="canvas" was in Word's repertoire? It didn't make it there until Word 2xxx. fail to see any evidence that your memory is that good.

>
> I could make a greeting card but it would require trial and error and
> relearning layout while being trapped by 2000/2002/2003's efforts to
> help me.
==My gosh man, I haven't made a greeting card in anything in years, I think, and I could still do it in any of the apps talked about here within minutes, excepting possibly Pagemaker, and have it fold properly, be oriented properly, and look pretty danged good, even if I do say so myself, and I DO!

==Now, lastly, assuming you're still reading, your posting is purportedly a response to Cerridwen: and yet, the below quote begins with David Candy wrote:. Are you trying to make things even more confusing than you already have? I don't see your point, whatever it might be. Why did you leave your name there and remove his?

> >
>> David Candy wrote:
>>> Well I've done CMYK in Word (Word 1 at that) in doing posters for
<blah, blah, blah ... >

[David Candy]

Got one of these have we?



--
----------------------------------------------------------
And the band played ....
http://www.livejournal.com/users/aldon/74121.html
"PopRivet" > wrote in message ...
> Cerridwen wrote:
> >> David Candy wrote:
> >>> Well I've done CMYK in Word (Word 1 at that) in
> doing posters for
> ...
> >> Have you tried
> >> setting up a greeting card accurately in Word?!
>
> IMO, it's highly likely this blowhard has any actual
> experience with anything remotely related. It likes to
> drop its own personal references and seemingly personal
> resume around a lot, but there has been absolutely
> nothing even close to demonstrating an actual
> experience or knowledge in anything actually relevant.
> It does have entertainment value, however.
>
> Regards,
>
> Pop
>
>