atw: Re: MS Word 2010 and change-tracking
- From: "Dan Goldstein" <DGoldstein@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:12:58 -0400
A few thoughts as to "why we put up with it":
This isn't specifically a TW problem. Experienced consumers of all stripes
already know that retail software is usually shipped with known defects. In the
world of consumer products, software is the king of mediocrity.
Occasionally, as with Firefox, a product will capture significant market share
without significant marketing, simply because it is somewhat less defective
than the market leader.
But unlike a coffee maker, when you return defective software, the retail
vendor often has no means of knowing whether or not you're still using it after
you "returned" it.
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoffrey Marnell
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2011 6:57 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: MS Word 2010 and change-tracking
Many thanks to everyone who responded to my cry for help. It appears that my
original document had numerous swollen lymph glands caused by many cancerous
graphics-related corruptions.
What this exercise has shown me yet again is how extraordinarily accepting many
of us in the technical writing profession are of the structural weaknesses in
yet another version MS Word, the tool most of us use most of our time to earn
our living. (X has failed because MS Word can't handle manual formatting; Y has
failed because MS Word is not good at handling floating graphics. Z has failed
because of ... some feature that we were sold on but, alas, doesn't work as
advertised.)
Crikey, If TEAC, Sony or LG advertises a feature of, say, a PVR and that
feature doesn't work, don't we feel- nay, know-that we can take that PVR back
to the retailer and get our money back? Why do we accept first-level software
that doesn't work as advertised (MS Word, for example) and not second-level
software (the software, for instance, that sits behind a PVR or a set-top
box)? Why aren't we more rebellious?
I'm getting tired of having to continually upgrade our MS products to match the
software our clients have upgraded to, only to spend eras of unpaid time trying
to work out what aberrant tumors Microsoft has left gnawing away at its
supposedly saleable code.
Isn't it time we started to expect, to demand, that the implied warrant of
merchantability that applies to all other retailable products-cars, couches,
coffee-makers and the like-applied to software as well?
In a word: why do we put up with it?
This message contains confidential information intended only for the use of the
addressee(s). If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for
delivering it to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading,
disseminating, distributing, copying, electronic storing or the taking of any
action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message by mistake, please notify us, by replying to the
sender, and delete the original message immediately thereafter. Thank you.
**************************************************
To view the austechwriter archives, go to
www.freelists.org/archives/austechwriter
To unsubscribe, send a message to austechwriter-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
"unsubscribe" in the Subject field (without quotes).
To manage your subscription (e.g., set and unset DIGEST and VACATION modes) go
to www.freelists.org/list/austechwriter
To contact the list administrator, send a message to
austechwriter-admins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
**************************************************
Other related posts:
