[austechwriter] Re: Footers in Word: Is look-ahead possible?
- From: Michael Edward Granat <megranat@xxxxxxxx>
- To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 11:41:04 +1000
Well excuse me, Steve.
All I was doing was acknowledging that Word and the WinDoze platform on
which it (mostly) runs have some limitations.
I'm not trying to be a Framemaker, flame-maker here, but anything with only
one level of undo should never be seriously considered as a usable tool for
any purpose. Get real, Adobe!
Acknowledging Word's secretarial prowess doesn't make it a lesser
documentation tool. In fact many of the secretarial features are what make
it such a good and versatile word processor. It's just that Word is simply
not accurate enough (or object oriented enough) for serious desktop
publishing work, where type size output accuracy, overlays with varying
levels of transparency and colour separations control is required.
In most cases, the relationships between WinDoze display, printer and other
device drivers is simply not good enough to provide any semblance of
accuracy in the output, no matter what software application one is using.
Measure the type size that prints compared to the type size that Word and
WinDoze tells you it is and you'll see what I mean.
As I said, I like using Word for many things, but I am realistic enough to
recognize its limitations so that I don't make promises to a client, about
what can be done with that tool, which either cannot be kept or cannot be
readily achieved without making a ridiculous and brain-warping effort that
can have negative impacts on the delivery of the finished product and the
stability of its files.
Word is a great and versatile word processing application, albeit with some
serious limitations.
It simply cannot be all things to all people. To try an make it be that is
akin to beating one's head against the screen.
Regards,
Michael Granat
Write Ideas
Carnegie, Victoria, Australia.
At 22:43 15/5/2003 +1000, you wrote:
><Naively asks>
>
>Really, can you just set some option in Framemaker to make this so? Please,
>do enlighten me.
>
>Plus, that secretarial tool thing. Really? Do you really need me to list the
>places where Word is used as the professional document platform or are you
>just bored and looking for the obvious reply from the obvious responder?
>
>I feel the latter, yet shall address the former whilst dealing with the
>latter for the sake of brevity lest I rave for months ceaselessy.
>
>So, Boulderdash still feels that Word is only suited for secretaries. Uh
>huh. I do assume you go to hospital every now and again Micky? And you
>probably have a BANK account, you look like the most obvious banker, err,
>excuse the consonant. Perhaps you even fly in planes, drive cars or -
>heavens forbid - pay tax. My poor, deluded, ignorant, deluded with
>self-grandeur fellow - wake up. The good Word is all around you very day.
>Check out the next lift that resets whilst you are in it. Do ANYTHING to
>open your eyes to the real world.
>
>To get closer to the point, please, although there is a dearth of tech
>writing jobs, the immediate short term being the first exception in a year,
>do peruse whatever archives looking for frame experience vs word. Uh huh.
>Good. Now look at the job descriptions. Of course, we are all over-glorified
>secretaries as discussed by myself many times, but do you really think some
>IQ 80 Bimbo (male in its original usage please!) is capable of that?
>
>Of course not, which leads me to believe that deep down you feel that you
>are under-achieving. One of the ways you propogate this is through your
>disparaging and negative criticisms. If you would be more positive in your
>output, your input will reflect this and make your system stabler. Maybe you
>are just frustrated because all the work you can find is merely secretarial,
>that's ok Micky. We have to support the business or we are useless! If they
>specify Notepad and you have experience, help the poor bastards get their
>thing doned. That's all that matters. Not maligning 80%+ of the workforce.
>
>Take me as a case in point. I am, primarily, a Word user. So, by your
>definition, I must be a secretary. Cool, for $15/hr temp work (like $22k pa)
>I should be able to ask for: <inserts a complete list of skills>. Uh huh.
>Now, what then differentiates our dear flamemaker users? Oh bugger Mickey -
>they have the same skillset or less!
>
>Let's even dare go this far. Please count the Word add-ins vs the flamemaker
>addins? Hmmmm, of course you easily argue that flame doesn't need 3rd party
>patching, I counter with sure, but isn't the product + these set of 3rd
>party tools more flexible than the other? Don't the Word tools do much more
>than flamemaker native?
>
>Despite all these obvious argumenmts, I think the most cogent is this Mikey.
>Dope's semi-legal in your state and you're whacked silly. No, errr. You
>can't load flame without a MS OS error of some sort. Errrr, no. You have had
>an unsatisfactory hex life lately. Nope. What was it? Oh yes, that's it. A
>bad workman blames his tools and a fool expects to float forever on a
>balloon of hot air.
>
>Steve Hudson
>
>Word Heretic, just begging for the Write idea
**************************************************
To post a message to austechwriter, send the message to
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe to austechwriter, send a message to
austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with "subscribe" in the Subject field.
To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field.
To search the austechwriter archives, go to
www.freelist.org/archives/austechwriter
To contact the list administrator, send a message to
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************
Other related posts:
