Stuart wrote:
"
*Word *can* be used very effectively by motivated pros, but it's
*optimized* for people who just want to walk up and start typing, possibly
after they've had a couple of drinks."*
-- Think that's "possibly" as spelled "p-r-e-f-e-r-a-b-l-y"
* ??*
*-Peter M*
On 27 July 2017 at 16:34, Stuart Burnfield <slb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I doubt whether the Frame folks ever realistically thought they were in a
war with Microsoft for the "two-page office memo and student essay" market.
(Unless InDesign was also at war with MS Publisher for the "make your own
greeting card and church newsletter" market.)
Frame is a niche product that's optimized for people (such as TWs) who are
motivated to learn how to use it properly and reap the benefits. Word *can*
be used very effectively by motivated pros, but it's *optimized* for people
who just want to walk up and start typing, possibly after they've had a
couple of drinks.
An obvious solution would be a simpler, cheaper version that has 95% of
the features that 95% of users actually use. That was Microsoft Works, and
people didn't want it. In my experience office workers didn't want to be
'deskilled' Works users, so they demanded to be unskilled Word users.
There are a couple of modern approaches to this problem. Office 365 has a
slightly pared back Web interface. It's Word looks just like Word, with
some missing options that most people probably wouldn't notice. And the
integration with email and cloud storage looks nice (so far; I've only been
using it for a week). In theory only people who need to use full Word have
to open the full, traditional Word client.
For law firms and other large corporates the sanest solution by far is
something like Suzy Davis's template automation package. It's still
familiar to Word users, but it hides or puts cushions in front of the sharp
edges that commonly cause grief to the unwary.
--- Stuart
----- Original Message -----
From:
austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To:
"austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent:
Thu, 27 Jul 2017 13:12:04 +1000
Subject:
atw: Re: Word processing is dead
"If Framemaker was the answer, it would already have won the word
processing
wars. It hasn't so clearly there is another problem that Adobe is not."
Like, pricing, perhaps.
On 27 July 2017 at 11:51, Christine Kent <cmkentau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think this is a fairly nonsensical article. Sure, Word is too hard for
most people to extract a decent document from. That is a given. But it is
a
far stretch to jump to the conclusion that word processing per se is dead.
Of course it isn't.
While lawyers continue to want numbered clauses and contract documents
require all manner of numbered layouts, the only way to get them cost
effectively is through word processing. Word processing simply has to
learn
to do them better. A point will come were some other cost effective and
accessible package will knock Word off it's pedestal, not because it does
simple documents better - there have been lots of shots at that, that have
failed commercially - but because it does complex documents better.
If Framemaker was the answer, it would already have won the word
processing
wars. It hasn't so clearly there is another problem that Adobe is not
addressing with Framemaker. So either Word has to fix the nonsense or
another package - that is better presented and marketed than Framemaker -
will.
Until then, we stay in work fixing corrupted documents. And surely that
is a
good thing - for us!
Bye the way, I am available to fix up bad documents if anyone can't do it
for themselves. I am technically retired but I take itty bitty work to top
up the coffers.
Christine
-----Original Message-----
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Daryl Colquhoun
Sent: Thursday, 27 July 2017 10:10 AM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Word processing is dead
Woody's Watch has just alerted me to an interesting article by Peter Moon
in
the Australian Financial Review, 24 July.
http://www.afr.com/technology/apps/sorry-microsoft-but-word-
processing-is-de
ad-20170721-gxgbgl
<http://www.afr.com/technology/apps/sorry-microsoft-but-word-processing-is-de%0Aad-20170721-gxgbgl>
Documents are being created by people with inadequate skills. Perhaps
you've
at some point received a Word doc that was set up as US letter size, with
US
margins. I once received a contract to sign that had broken
cross-references, and I don't need to explain how that happened. Moon says
that when "law firms are starting to rely on manually typed numbers and
references, word processing is dead".
Some may remember Peter Moon's name. He had an article on much the same
subject in the AFR on 21 October 2008, which was reprinted (with
permission)
in the ASTC newsletter.
