On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:



Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic

On Jan 14, 12:39*pm, HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:30:07 -0500, John H.
wrote:

Mrs H got an almost free MS Office Enterprise 2007 from her job. We've
not
had any problems with Office 2000. Running XP.

Would you install or not install?
It's been a few days since I looked at this thread but I certainly
won't be installing this. I'm not ready to take my vows
I have the "full" MS Office 2007, which I installed on my desktop. I
uninstalled it and went back to Office 2003. I did not like the
interface in the 2007 version, and I could not see any "improvements"
that made a difference for me.

These big office suites are really bloatware. I rarely use anything in
2003 except Excel. For WP, I use Wordperfect. It's a little "lighter"
than WORD, and for me it seems faster, too. There's no problem saving
files in any file format others might need.

How fast does a word processor need to be? *It spends 99% of its
existence waiting for humans to type of press a button. What does
Wordperfect do faster?

I'm not asking because I dislike Wordperfect. But, if I already had one
word processor installed, I wouldn't bother installing another unless the
first one was screwed up in a major way.

Fewer commands, fewer options, easier and faster to set up and use or not
use "defaults," *a lot less of doing it Microsoft's way or no way at all.
It's a feeling, as I stated, that it seems faster to me. I find WORD
clunky, obtuse, and overstuffed.

Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

There's a lot less drill down in Word Perfect. Let's just say it is more
a word processor for writers than it is for those in huge organizations
who "process" documents. It is also a hell of a lot easier to customize
and to automate functions, those within the program and new ones, via
macros.

I started with WordStar for DOS in the 1980s, dumped that for
Volkswriter, dumped that for Xywrite for DOS, learned WordPerfect 4.1,
moved to Xywrite for Windows, didn't like that, picked up WORD, hated it
and still don't like it much, and moved onto Wordperfect for Windows
while the programmers were still in Orem, Utah. Then Corel bought it
out, it went downhill for a while, but in the last year or two, has
gotten better.

I have dozens and dozens of macros in WP that I use professionally.
Doing the same sorts of things in WORD is either impossible, or very
cumbersome.

Here you go...this will help:

http://wptoolbox.com/- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you need help with Word macros, let me know. I use them every day
without any trouble!

wrote:
On Jan 14, 12:39 pm, HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Sat, 12 Jan 2008 08:30:07 -0500, John H.
wrote:
Mrs H got an almost free MS Office Enterprise 2007 from her job. We've
not
had any problems with Office 2000. Running XP.
Would you install or not install?
It's been a few days since I looked at this thread but I certainly
won't be installing this. I'm not ready to take my vows
I have the "full" MS Office 2007, which I installed on my desktop. I
uninstalled it and went back to Office 2003. I did not like the
interface in the 2007 version, and I could not see any "improvements"
that made a difference for me.
These big office suites are really bloatware. I rarely use anything in
2003 except Excel. For WP, I use Wordperfect. It's a little "lighter"
than WORD, and for me it seems faster, too. There's no problem saving
files in any file format others might need.
How fast does a word processor need to be? It spends 99% of its
existence waiting for humans to type of press a button. What does
Wordperfect do faster?
I'm not asking because I dislike Wordperfect. But, if I already had one
word processor installed, I wouldn't bother installing another unless the
first one was screwed up in a major way.
Fewer commands, fewer options, easier and faster to set up and use or not
use "defaults," a lot less of doing it Microsoft's way or no way at all.
It's a feeling, as I stated, that it seems faster to me. I find WORD
clunky, obtuse, and overstuffed.
Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.
There's a lot less drill down in Word Perfect. Let's just say it is more
a word processor for writers than it is for those in huge organizations
who "process" documents. It is also a hell of a lot easier to customize
and to automate functions, those within the program and new ones, via
macros.

I started with WordStar for DOS in the 1980s, dumped that for
Volkswriter, dumped that for Xywrite for DOS, learned WordPerfect 4.1,
moved to Xywrite for Windows, didn't like that, picked up WORD, hated it
and still don't like it much, and moved onto Wordperfect for Windows
while the programmers were still in Orem, Utah. Then Corel bought it
out, it went downhill for a while, but in the last year or two, has
gotten better.

I have dozens and dozens of macros in WP that I use professionally.
Doing the same sorts of things in WORD is either impossible, or very
cumbersome.

Here you go...this will help:

http://wptoolbox.com/- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you need help with Word macros, let me know. I use them every day
without any trouble!


No thanks.

Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic


Just when I think I have all the WORD automated crapola turned off,
another example of it rears its ugly head.

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:



Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic


That's a user problem, not a software problem. You should also avoid using
the mouse whenever possible. If you use only the menus, it's next to
impossible to screw things up unless you WANT to.

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic


That's a user problem, not a software problem. You should also avoid using
the mouse whenever possible. If you use only the menus, it's next to
impossible to screw things up unless you WANT to.



Why would you presume your experience with WORD to be the same as
someone else's who probably uses the program entirely differently, and
for different purposes? These big "office productivity" suites are
complex, and users interface with them differently.




--
George W. Bush - the 43rd Best President Ever!

On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:08:54 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic


That's a user problem, not a software problem. You should also avoid using
the mouse whenever possible. If you use only the menus, it's next to
impossible to screw things up unless you WANT to.



Why would you presume your experience with WORD to be the same as
someone else's who probably uses the program entirely differently, and
for different purposes? These big "office productivity" suites are
complex, and users interface with them differently.

He's taking a technical perspective.
Some writers still won't use anything but their 1927 Corona.
Some boaters won't buy anything but a Parker, or a GB.
Personal preference.

--Vic

"HK" wrote in message
...
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need.
And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic


That's a user problem, not a software problem. You should also avoid
using the mouse whenever possible. If you use only the menus, it's next
to impossible to screw things up unless you WANT to.

Why would you presume your experience with WORD to be the same as someone
else's who probably uses the program entirely differently, and for
different purposes? These big "office productivity" suites are complex,
and users interface with them differently.


Maybe I misunderstood what Vic said. My interpretation was that he wanted
just words on the page. He said "a simple doc". If all you want to do is
type some words, save the doc and maybe print it, those actions take you
nowhere near the menus for graphic features. They're all on the File menu. I
suppose a spastic mouse movement could cause you to hit toolbar buttons, but
that's one of many reasons why professional typists don't use the mouse for
the vast majority of work.

Gene Kearns wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:23:53 GMT, JoeSpareBedroom penned the following
well considered thoughts to the readers of rec.boats:


|How fast does a word processor need to be? It spends 99% of its existence
|waiting for humans to type of press a button. What does Wordperfect do
|faster?
|
|I'm not asking because I dislike Wordperfect. But, if I already had one word
|processor installed, I wouldn't bother installing another unless the first
|one was screwed up in a major way.
|


"Speed" may not be the best word. It is all about the intuitiveness of
the GUI... the perceived speed.

I actually kinda like Word 2007, but it *is* buggy. It has lost track
of the "default" printer and, now, refuses to print anything. 2003,
whoever, works fine.

There is a learning curve with 2007.


They are selling the Microsoft Office Ultimate, complete package through
my daughters school for something like $59. She wanted to buy it
(meaning she wanted me to buy it) until I sent her the reviews.

http://www.theultimatesteal.com/home.asp

Between Vista and Office they are not having a good year.

Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:08:54 -0500, HK wrote:

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 17:31:56 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:


Fewer commands? You don't have to use commands that you don't need. And,
does your version of Word have the "Hide less-used commands on menus"
feature? If you don't use them, you don't see them, at least the more
obscure commands.

Look, I've fat-fingered Word while writing a simple doc and suddenly
had a database, tables, pie chart, and hyperlinks communicating with
the space shuttle. That's when I'd give it to somebody else to
straighten it out and e-mail it back to me so I could send it out.

--Vic

That's a user problem, not a software problem. You should also avoid using
the mouse whenever possible. If you use only the menus, it's next to
impossible to screw things up unless you WANT to.


Why would you presume your experience with WORD to be the same as
someone else's who probably uses the program entirely differently, and
for different purposes? These big "office productivity" suites are
complex, and users interface with them differently.

He's taking a technical perspective.
Some writers still won't use anything but their 1927 Corona.
Some boaters won't buy anything but a Parker, or a GB.
Personal preference.

--Vic

Why would someone buy a Parker?