![]() |
Install or not install...
|
Install or not install...
|
Install or not install...
|
Install or not install...
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. |
Install or not install...
"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. |
Install or not install...
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. Harry runs Vista so it slows everything down to a crawl. |
Install or not install...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:27:06 -0500, HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote: 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. People who do a lot of writing often prefer WordPerfect. I prefer notepad. --Vic |
Install or not install...
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/ |
Install or not install...
Vic Smith wrote:
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:27:06 -0500, HK wrote: JoeSpareBedroom wrote: 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. People who do a lot of writing often prefer WordPerfect. I prefer notepad. --Vic I use wordpad for really simple stuff. No fuss, no muss. I like it a bit better than notepad. My fav of all times was XyWrite for Dos. Used the same front end as the typesetters of those days. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:00 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com