MS seems to be finished with Windows

"mike" wrote

| That's a significant benefit to MS. .docx means that everybody
| to whom you send the document has to have a recent version of
| MSOFFICE. Since .docx, people like me using the perfectly
| adequate Office 2000, will be motivated to purchase newer
| versions or rent office365. Yes, I think you can load the
| compatibility pack and at least read .docx, but that's not
| what most people will know how to do. If you double-click
| a .docx file, the error message is much more likely to lead
| you to a page to buy something rather than a download of
| compatibility pack.
|
| This is another missed opportunity for open-source.
| A little more concession to FULL compatibility and user wants
| and some advertising might drive a wedge.
|

Have you tried Libre Office? My ladyfriend supervises
teacher trainees for early childhood education. Each
semester she gets maybe 5 students and has to assess
their efforts. They all send DOCX and none understands file
types. She finds that most DOCX work in LO, as long as
there aren't too many tables or other complications. In
those cases, she just asks them to resave as DOC.
But basic written papers as DOCX work fine in LO.
(And gives them instructions.

Is Office 365 is incapable of saving to DOC?

On 3/30/2018 6:16 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"mike" wrote

| That's a significant benefit to MS. .docx means that everybody
| to whom you send the document has to have a recent version of
| MSOFFICE. Since .docx, people like me using the perfectly
| adequate Office 2000, will be motivated to purchase newer
| versions or rent office365. Yes, I think you can load the
| compatibility pack and at least read .docx, but that's not
| what most people will know how to do. If you double-click
| a .docx file, the error message is much more likely to lead
| you to a page to buy something rather than a download of
| compatibility pack.
|
| This is another missed opportunity for open-source.
| A little more concession to FULL compatibility and user wants
| and some advertising might drive a wedge.
|

Have you tried Libre Office? My ladyfriend supervises
teacher trainees for early childhood education. Each
semester she gets maybe 5 students and has to assess
their efforts. They all send DOCX and none understands file
types. She finds that most DOCX work in LO, as long as
there aren't too many tables or other complications. In
those cases, she just asks them to resave as DOC.
But basic written papers as DOCX work fine in LO.
(And gives them instructions.

That's the position of linux and open-source advocates.
I've tried several versions, several times over the last
decade(s). In every case, it didn't take long to trip over
some formatting stumbling block. I'm not saying that
I couldn't have fixed it. I'm saying, why bother if I
have a 100% compatible solution in hand.

Do you want your kid learning about anatomy? Or do you want him
wasting time trying to format his biology paper into
something that his instructor will be able to view in
100% of its glory?

Same for job searches. Do you want your job application to
be dismissed because the screener thinks you can't format
a document and sends it to the round file?

Like the song says, ninety-nine and a half just won't do.

Is Office 365 is incapable of saving to DOC?
Never tried, so don't know.
Paul says the default is .docx, and that's all it takes to trap
the unsuspecting naive user.


The point is that MS is 'encouraging' people to upgrade.
Without .docx, MSOFFICE 2000, the last version that doesn't require
activation, works just fine. Few of us have any need for most
of the stuff that has been added since then.

They have a long history of changing formats, in my opinion, for
the sole purpose of impeding competition. It's not evil, it's
survival of the fittest. Somebody has to pay for the development
of all that tracking/monetizing software.
The one constant in software is that the dominant vendor will
use every technique in their power to discourage/eliminate
competition.

MS is responsible to shareholders, not users.
Open-source developers are responsible to nobody.

mike wrote:
On 3/30/2018 6:16 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"mike" wrote

| That's a significant benefit to MS. .docx means that everybody
| to whom you send the document has to have a recent version of
| MSOFFICE. Since .docx, people like me using the perfectly
| adequate Office 2000, will be motivated to purchase newer
| versions or rent office365. Yes, I think you can load the
| compatibility pack and at least read .docx, but that's not
| what most people will know how to do. If you double-click
| a .docx file, the error message is much more likely to lead
| you to a page to buy something rather than a download of
| compatibility pack.
|
| This is another missed opportunity for open-source.
| A little more concession to FULL compatibility and user wants
| and some advertising might drive a wedge.
|

Have you tried Libre Office? My ladyfriend supervises
teacher trainees for early childhood education. Each
semester she gets maybe 5 students and has to assess
their efforts. They all send DOCX and none understands file
types. She finds that most DOCX work in LO, as long as
there aren't too many tables or other complications. In
those cases, she just asks them to resave as DOC.
But basic written papers as DOCX work fine in LO.
(And gives them instructions.

That's the position of linux and open-source advocates.
I've tried several versions, several times over the last
decade(s). In every case, it didn't take long to trip over
some formatting stumbling block. I'm not saying that
I couldn't have fixed it. I'm saying, why bother if I
have a 100% compatible solution in hand.

Do you want your kid learning about anatomy? Or do you want him
wasting time trying to format his biology paper into
something that his instructor will be able to view in
100% of its glory?

Same for job searches. Do you want your job application to
be dismissed because the screener thinks you can't format
a document and sends it to the round file?

Like the song says, ninety-nine and a half just won't do.

Is Office 365 is incapable of saving to DOC?
Never tried, so don't know.
Paul says the default is .docx, and that's all it takes to trap
the unsuspecting naive user.


The point is that MS is 'encouraging' people to upgrade.
Without .docx, MSOFFICE 2000, the last version that doesn't require
activation, works just fine. Few of us have any need for most
of the stuff that has been added since then.

They have a long history of changing formats, in my opinion, for
the sole purpose of impeding competition. It's not evil, it's
survival of the fittest. Somebody has to pay for the development
of all that tracking/monetizing software.
The one constant in software is that the dominant vendor will
use every technique in their power to discourage/eliminate
competition.

MS is responsible to shareholders, not users.
Open-source developers are responsible to nobody.

Here's a picture of my "session".

https://s17.postimg.org/4c4biinxr/ms...ge_version.gif

I'm sure someone will enjoy doing documents that way.

Paul

On 2018-03-30, Mayayana wrote:
They did a similar thing on OEM computers for
a long time, along with Symantec. Remember that?
Stickers on the computers would announce that they
came with Office and/or Norton, but it was actually
just a trial.

For a while some computers came with a very basic, free edition of
Microsoft Office 2010. (It was called "Starter Edition" or something
like that.) As I recall it came with verions of Word and Excel that
had reduced functionality, plus screen area dedicated to advertisements.
It was not trial software. If you could live with the limitations
you were free to use it as long as you liked.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Posts from Google Groups killfiled due to excess spam.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
Don't talk to cops! -- http://www.DontTalkToCops.com
Badges don't grant extra rights -- http://www.CopBlock.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Wolf K" wrote

| WordPerfect, Open Office and Libre Office (both free) can read *.docx.
| WP can write *.docx.
|

As can Libre Office. It works pretty well except
with some complex formatting like tables.

On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 19:00:10 -0700, mike wrote:

Same for job searches. Do you want your job application to
be dismissed because the screener thinks you can't format
a document and sends it to the round file?

Like the song says, ninety-nine and a half just won't do.

Good to see another CCR fan, but every time you make the reference I get
the song stuck in my head for the rest of the day.

On 3/31/2018 6:52 AM, Wolf K wrote:
On 2018-03-30 22:00, mike wrote:
On 3/30/2018 6:16 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"mike" wrote

| That's a significant benefit to MS. .docx means that everybody
| to whom you send the document has to have a recent version of
| MSOFFICE. Since .docx, people like me using the perfectly
| adequate Office 2000, will be motivated to purchase newer
| versions or rent office365. Yes, I think you can load the
| compatibility pack and at least read .docx, but that's not
| what most people will know how to do. If you double-click
| a .docx file, the error message is much more likely to lead
| you to a page to buy something rather than a download of
| compatibility pack.
|
| This is another missed opportunity for open-source.
| A little more concession to FULL compatibility and user wants
| and some advertising might drive a wedge.
|

Have you tried Libre Office? My ladyfriend supervises
teacher trainees for early childhood education. Each
semester she gets maybe 5 students and has to assess
their efforts. They all send DOCX and none understands file
types. She finds that most DOCX work in LO, as long as
there aren't too many tables or other complications. In
those cases, she just asks them to resave as DOC.
But basic written papers as DOCX work fine in LO.
(And gives them instructions.

That's the position of linux and open-source advocates.
I've tried several versions, several times over the last
decade(s). In every case, it didn't take long to trip over
some formatting stumbling block. I'm not saying that
I couldn't have fixed it. I'm saying, why bother if I
have a 100% compatible solution in hand.
[etc]

PDF is readable by anybody with one of the usual PDF reader/editors
installed. You can "print" to a PDF file. For text-only, RTF preserves
font formatting and such, which makes it usable for most academic papers.
PDF is one of the first things I tried the last time I tried libre office.
I opened a random PDF that I'd downloaded. The format was completely
hozed. Looked like there was a font substitution without taking into
account the difference in line length that it caused.
Tried another. As I recall, The left half of the page was populated,
but the right half was completely missing.

The main reason I don't use MS Office is that its page formatting has
been unreliable. I don't know about Office 365.

FWIW, I've always found it possible to deal with *.doc and *.docx, but
there have been occasional hassles. Pretty well all of the hassles have
resulted from people developing bad habits, such as creating a new page
by hitting Enter until a new blank page appears, or using multiple
spaces instead of tabs. I always check page layout with "print preview".

Compatibility does NOT mean that it looks OK if you follow someone
else's restrictions.
Compatibility means that you get the EXACTLY the same result
no matter what keys the writer pressed...PERIOD!

That's the reason that desktop linux and open source alternatives
will never be able to dethrone Microsoft. Doing the easy part and
ignoring the subtleties is not compatibility.
The ability to create a document that looks perfect with the alternative
tool is insufficient. You don't live in a vacuum.
Your result must look exactly the same when viewed
by the incumbent tool. It doesn't matter if the incumbent tool is
flawed. If the alternative doesn't reproduce that fault, it won't
gain traction.

Take a look at Firefox. It does the same thing in windows and linux.

But they rearranged the menus in the linux version.
You can argue that it's a tiny point, but it MATTERS!
Doesn't take many of those tiny points spread all over the desktop linux
biosphere to convince me that it's not worth the trouble.
I don't wanna have to go searching for a menu when I already know
where it should be in exactly the same application.
More better is not necessarily a good thing for the
new tool. More the same must be the goal.

Back in the early days, I thought Gates was crazy going after Word Perfect.
Boy, was I wrong. He wanted world domination and had the persistence
and $$ to make it happen. His individual pieces may not have been the
best, but the combination took over the world.

On 3/31/2018 9:27 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 19:00:10 -0700, mike wrote:

Same for job searches. Do you want your job application to
be dismissed because the screener thinks you can't format
a document and sends it to the round file?

Like the song says, ninety-nine and a half just won't do.

Good to see another CCR fan, but every time you make the reference I get
the song stuck in my head for the rest of the day.

I was thinkin' Wilson Pickett, but CCR works too.

mike wrote:

PDF is one of the first things I tried the last time I tried libre office.
I opened a random PDF that I'd downloaded. The format was completely
hozed.

Everyone seems to have forgotten that PDF was designed as an output
format, not for editing ...

On 3/31/2018 11:18 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
mike wrote:

PDF is one of the first things I tried the last time I tried libre
office.
I opened a random PDF that I'd downloaded. The format was completely
hozed.

Everyone seems to have forgotten that PDF was designed as an output
format, not for editing ...

OK, so how does one create that file that's for output?
And how does one consume the content without inputting it,
even if it's input to a printer?

Original intent is irrelevant. Common usage is what matters in
the marketplace.
If you can't conform to the standard, don't create the tool...
unless you're the market leader and you can do anything you want.

"Char Jackson" wrote in message
...
Good to see another CCR fan, but every time you make the reference
I get the song stuck in my head for the rest of the day.

Well, more appropriately for many of our thread discussions in this group
which sometimes evolves into a bunch of hound dogs barking looking for
something that may or may not exist...
= "...chasing down a hoodoo there"


--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018

mike wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Everyone seems to have forgotten that PDF was designed as an output
format, not for editing ...

OK, so how does one create that file that's for output?

Print2PDF drivers generally, some people may need closer control of the
output and use Adobe Distiller or Acrobat Professional.

And how does one consume the content without inputting it,
even if it's input to a printer?

After outputting your content to PDF, feel free to view it or print it.

Original intent is irrelevant.
If you try to edit a PDF, or import it into something else, people will
tell you "don't do that" ...

Paul wrote:
Mayayana wrote:
"Paul" wrote

| I thought there was some web page you could go
| to, to design an Office document ? I haven't tried
| it, and just remembered it exists. The page says this
| is "free", whatever that means. Does it use watermarks ?
| Does it insist on OneDrive (and an MSA) ? Dunno.
|
|
https://products.office.com/en-ca/of...-office-online

|

Â* I'm not going to allow microsoft.com to run script in
my browser, in order to find out what that page is
about. I assume it's an entry into their trial scam:
You give them personal information, create a Microsoft
account, give them a credit card number, and
basically you've bought into Office 365. The first 3
months are free. After that you have to remember
to cancel it or they start charging your credit card.

Â* They did a similar thing on OEM computers for
a long time, along with Symantec. Remember that?
Stickers on the computers would announce that they
came with Office and/or Norton, but it was actually
just a trial.

There's no credit card.

A session worked in Firefox. My test session looked like a
copy of Word with a ribbon bar at the top.

It asked for my MSA, to login and start the session. It
needs to open my OneDrive, before we can begin. It salts
a Document.docx in my OneDrive, so there will be an assurance
of something to edit.

You cannot just download the freshly created document to your
disk, without a copy being kept on OneDrive. I did download
my new document to disk, and it was 39KB.

You can "delete" the file on OneDrive, but it probably sits
in your trash can for 30 days before "being hidden from you",
while the actual document stays on OneDrive... forever.

You will receive a prompt for a Skype Chat. I didn't answer
that, to see if it's yet another boring bot. Chances are my
Skype status was "online" for as long as I was using that
crap. There was a Word tab in Firefox, plus a OneDrive tab.
You can see the saved document in the OneDrive "drive contents"
representation, but, because the file is "open in Word" in
the other tab, now you cannot delete it. You'll need to visit
OneDrive when the Word tab is closed, to delete the file.
If you use the "Signout" button in the Word tab, it closes
the OneDrive tab next to it. Not exactly a friendly interface
for Grandma (too much head-scratching causes hair loss).

On your re-opening of the file, you'll receive an advert for
the paid version.

Did I mention if was FREE (and comes with its own handcuffs).
Houdini would love it.

Yeah, I could see me running my business out of that now.
It feels so so... I don't know... private. I felt so warm
and fuzzy, I put more cat pictures on my Facebook page :-/

Â*Â* Paul

Office Online first appeared in 2009(yes, it's been available for just
shy of 9 years).
- Office Web Apps(2009)Windows Live Office(2010)Office Online(2014)
* Of note - coincidental with Windows Live Essentials development and
suite of programs integration with SkyDrive(OneDrive). Base development
of both started in 2006)...and just like the 'Live' platform of products
the design intent was for use with a MSFT account(MSA, formerly Live ID).
- incidentally the above integration across the Live Platform of
products, Office Online, Office Desktop(first with the Hotmail/Outlook
Connector) via a MSA(Live ID) was the initial 'inkle' to Windows users
on where Windows was headed in the future. Each and everyone of these
early integration type programs was focused towards the 700 million
Hotmail and Messenger users(Contacts, Calendar, Live ID/MSA) with that
same focus today on Windows 10 using an MSA.

Office Online automatically saves files to OneDrive.
- i.e. any user doesn't need to save work(Word, Excel, etc. documents)
to OneDrive before having the option to save locally. As soon as an
online document is created the ability to save to the local device, in a
user chosen folder is available.

Any document created in Office Online, even if not previously saved
locally can be selected and downloaded and saved locally to the pc(used
to access OneDrive) or a networked shared folder. Similar methods are
available for smart devices(e.g. iPhone using the Office Online app,
optionally download via the iPhone OneDrive app)

A created document can be saved to OneDrive with a new name. A document
does have to be closed to delete from OneDrive(not much different than
trying to delete an open file on Windows). Optionally, any file can be
renamed, downloaded, download as a PDF or ODT, Printed, or Shared.

While MSFT does provide the option to sign up for Office 365, as you've
noted, 'no credit card' is necessary contrary to many peoples perception
of the service.

One does not need to revisit OneDrive after closing the document tab in
their browser - creating a document opens a new tab in the browser
unless end-user intervention tab setting configuration overrides.

Reopening an Office file stored on OneDrive does not prompt with an
advert for Office 365.

OneDrive has a functional Recycle Bin.

No Skype Chat prompt was encountered when signing on to OneDrive with 3
different MSA's(Outlook.com type or 3rd party email account registered
as a Live ID.) and each account was using the default 'Available' option.
-

If Grandma signs out her MSA account...she should be glad her work was
also closed and not available for the next person using the pc...she
might have easily been crafting a letter for her lawyer to remove the
nosy relative from her will.


--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018

"...w¡ñ§±¤ñ" wrote

| - incidentally the above integration across the Live Platform of
| products, Office Online, Office Desktop(first with the Hotmail/Outlook
| Connector) via a MSA(Live ID) was the initial 'inkle' to Windows users
| on where Windows was headed in the future.

You seem to be forgetting a few notables.
The tragically named Hailstorm was going to be
a "storm of services". Before that there was
Passport, which was going to be a universal
sign-in. Microsoft was going to "Rule the Web!",
as Mr. Ballmer boasted to Business Week. They
were going to be the central authority.

Before that there was Active Desktop.
Remember that?

Microsoft were genuinely ahead of their time
with that one. Folder windows were literally IE
browser windows. People were invited to stick
"channels" to their desktop. And the ChannelBar,
a billboard full of ads, came pre-affixed to the
desktop.

Channels were expected to be push webpages.
(Even now, push is a new-ish and not entirely
accepted trend.)

So, for example, you might subscribe to CNN and
get news updates in a CNN channel rectangle, which
would be a framed webpage on your desktop.
Or you could subscribe to Disney and perhaps
get movie trailers, or some of that famous child
exploitation marketing that Disney is so good at.

There were perhaps a hundred corporate logo
icons in the Windows\Wed folder, all ready for
channelizing.

Microsoft were way ahead in terms of their view
of the future. Bill Gates really was, arguably, a genius
in that sense. Unfortunately, Gates was sort of an
"evil genius" (if indeed he wants to take credit).
True to form, Microsoft had great ideas and wrote
clever code to make it happen, but their vision was
in the gutter. It was all based on getting corporations
to pay fees in order to get ads in front of what MS
regarded as their own private, captive audience.
What they failed to consider, as usual, was that they
didn't actually have a product there. No one was
interested in subscribing to ads. Nor did anyone
understand the whole bizarre scam. Most people I
knew didn't even notice the Channel Bar on their
desktop. They neither interacted with it nor tried to
remove it!

That's why Microsoft fails with public-facing features
and Apple succeeds. Apple seduces. They lie in delightful
ways. You can see it in action this week. Tim Cook is out
in the media proclaiming that Apple doesn't spy. Unlike
everyone else, he seems to say through tears, Apple
loves people and is giving up billions of dollars in
potential profits for that love.... By not spying... "Oh,
that iPhone tracking and the myriad ways we actually
do spy on you?... That's not spying. It's service. You're
welcome.
(I suspect Cook may actually believe what he says.
He's AppleSeed #1, seemingly the most devoted devotee
of Lord Steve "Barnum" Jobs.)

Cook, as camp counselor, will actually convince Apple
fans that they get religious fulfillment from a deeply caring
relationship with their iPhone and with Tim Cook himself....
Only then will Apple vacuum their wallets.

Microsoft, by contrast, just marches in with semi-
literate, nearly indecipherable, marketing jargon:

"We've developed a next-gen leveraging of experiencing
technology with our Active-Z, version X1 productification
of relevancy. It provides enhanced experiences across
device contexts."

Then they almost endearingly expect people will
hold their wallets open for vacuuming. But they make
no sense. No one outside of Redmond uses the English
language in such a tortured, twisted manner.
(Raymond Chen, a Mirosoftee with a well known
blog, actually posts humorously about examples of
"Microspeak", which is a hybrid dialect combining
teenage slang, marketing terms, geek illiteracy,
and a clunky attempt at valorizing the message
through the excessive use of technical abstruseness.)

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/old...8-00/?p=10473/

No one understands "experience" to mean "fulfilling
existential pleasure provided through a computerized
device". So it makes no sense when Microsoft shows
a TV ad with lots of tablets being handled and brags
about how many "experiences" those tablets can
provide.

Interestingly, the announcement about profit and
loss noted that it's not so much online that Microsoft
is doing well with, but rather specifically business
services online. In that respect it looks a lot like
Amazon, which seems to be losing money on everything
but their web services.

I guess the moral of the story is that there's a
great deal of money to be made providing robust,
scalable, retail websites for companies with no
tech expertise.

On Sat, 31 Mar 2018 13:13:42 -0700, ...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
wrote:

"Char Jackson" wrote in message
.. .
Good to see another CCR fan, but every time you make the reference
I get the song stuck in my head for the rest of the day.

Well, more appropriately for many of our thread discussions in this group
which sometimes evolves into a bunch of hound dogs barking looking for
something that may or may not exist...
= "...chasing down a hoodoo there"

Excellent. ;-)