atw: Re: More on Word 2010
- From: "Christine Kent" <cmkentau@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:14:41 +1000
Point taken, but the point I was trying to make has two components.
Maybe it is possible to make yourself expert on recovering documents that
have apparently corrupted in a current version of the software using an old
version of the software, but how do you know you even have to "recover"
them, if you are not using the new software to find out what is really
wrong?
I stand by the idea that the first port of call for any 2007 or 2010
document with which there is a problem is logically the product it was
created in.
Why would you go to that effort, when, as a professional, you will have to
upgrade anyway, and when you can run previous versions on the same computer
as new versions? Trainers have to do this all the time and are currently
doing it, heaven help them, with three versions. It doesn't make any sense.
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Neil Maloney
Sent: Monday, 18 July 2011 11:02 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: More on Word 2010
Christine,
Usually what you post makes a lot of sense, even if it isn't from my
keyboard-driven productivity perspective - not everyone does or needs to
share that view of the world - and even when I disagree with the things you
say, I can see where you are coming from and often agree with at least some
of what you are saying.
But I was stunned, is the word, that you would say "A person who is not
expert in 2007 or 2010 should not be trying to recover a corrupt document
using 2003 and more than they would try to recover it using FrameMaker or
Open Office." My question to you is, what on Earth made you say that, and
how much time have you spent learning how to use Word 2003 to recover
corrupt 2007 documents (note, I haven't yet received any corrupt 2010
documents to recover), to be justified in making a left-field statement like
that? I have spent one heap of a lot of time learning how to use Word 2003
to do exactly that, and have had many, many frustrating days doing different
things at random to find out things that work, all of which is part of my
business, worth money to me, and I don't advertise my methods.
My comment below was prompted by your post, and yes you were included in my
intended recipient group (if I can use those words) but it's certainly far
from just you that is doing this ... if you go over the last one to two
years' of posts, there are many 'technical' comments that could be phrased
as a question to find out what the situation is, but are instead made as
direct statements of universal truth. As one of the more senior and
experience technical writers on the list, I'm very, very surprised that
you'd fall into the trap of making what appear to be factual statements
without the required experience and knowledge to back up what you are saying
(in this case, experience and knowledge in using Word 2003 to recover Word
2007 documents). Usually you are very good at staying away from the
technical topics, saying that they don't interest you / apply to you (and no
problems with that, the mouse-driven usability topics and issues have no
interest for me). I am assuming it was a brain-burn moment ???
Neil.
On 18/07/2011 10:48 AM, Christine Kent wrote:
Are you having a dig at me Neil?
One thing I've noticed happening frequently on this list is that people who
aren't "technical" will make comments that go into the technical side of
using MS Word. Not a good idea.
************************************************** 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:
