Prev: Office 2003 and Windows 7
Next: Trail on Office 2007
From: ToolPackinMama on 6 Apr 2010 20:00
On 4/6/2010 4:46 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> It also helps in cross-pollination if you have the Windows fonts available.

To my mind, the professional thing to do is to ensure that your
documents are cross-compatible. After all, one doesn't always know whom
one is dealing with, does one?

If the program is needed by your business, then I suppose you can simply
write off the expense as a business expense, yes?

I am trying to picture exactly what sort of document a person must avoid
to avoid compatibility problems. I don't think that the solution is to
simply have everybody everywhere use Microsoft Office. Even the many
versions of Microsoft Office aren't 100% compatible with each other.




From: ToolPackinMama on 6 Apr 2010 20:02
On 4/6/2010 6:03 PM, 7 wrote:

> Open office is the only thing that now opens older
> micoshaft format documents because micoshaft don't supply
> any software that works.

That looks like a point for Open Office.


From: undisclosed on 6 Apr 2010 22:39

Interesting, my experience is that OO changes colors and formatting, I
can create a spreadsheet in Excel 2007 shoot it off to a colleague and
when it returns the formatting and all of the color in the thing has
changed and looks like hell. I would not hand a spreadsheet to a client
in the shape it is returned to me from OO.

I can't comment on OO document formating compatibilty with Word though.
After seeing what it does with spreadsheets, I have no interest in
finding out if it can hold the formating of a complex document from
Word.

Oh and the colleague was not aware of the changes in formatting in the
spreadsheets. It seems the original formatting was never correctly
viewed by OO software.


--
AndreaK
From: ceed on 7 Apr 2010 05:57
On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:59:30 -0500, RayLopez99 <raylopez88(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

> I've heard that Open Office is at best "99%" the same as Office Word,
> but I'm concerned with it being 100%, since many of my Word documents
> are complex.

I am negotiating legal contracts and the last (less than) 1%
incompatibility forces me to run Word under Crossover Linux. My employer
let's me use Linux as my work OS, but I am required to support Word 100%.
The main issues are little formatting differences when I edit a word
document and save it with OpenOffice, and change tracking which doesn't
always work reliably.
>
> Anybody have experience in OpenOffice with complex documents? Is it
> true that somethings just won't translate properly to and from Office
> Word?

If keeping formatting exactly like it was in the word document is
important you will see some problems using OpenOffice. There's good advice
here for getting OO to play as nice as possible when working with Word
documents:

http://is.gd/bilIL-
>
> Thanks,
>
> RL


--
//ceed
From: ceed on 12 Apr 2010 02:30
On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 08:48:03 -0500, RayLopez99 <raylopez88(a)gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Apr 7, 11:57 am, ceed <cdposter-use...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 14:59:30 -0500, RayLopez99 <raylope...(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I've heard that Open Office is at best "99%" the same as Office Word,
>> > but I'm concerned with it being 100%, since many of my Word documents
>> > are complex.
>>
>> I am negotiating legal contracts and the last (less than) 1%
>> incompatibility forces me to run Word under Crossover Linux. My
>> employer let's me use Linux as my work OS, but I am required to support
>> Word 100%. The main issues are little formatting differences when I
>> edit a word document and save it with OpenOffice, and change tracking
>> which doesn't always work reliably.
>
>>
>> > Anybody have experience in OpenOffice with complex documents? Is it
>> > true that somethings just won't translate properly to and from Office
>> > Word?
>>
>> If keeping formatting exactly like it was in the word document is
>> important you will see some problems using OpenOffice. There's good
>> advice here for getting OO to play as nice as possible when working
>> with Word documents:
>
> Yep, yep, yep.
>
> Ladies and Gentlemen--I introduce for your consideration Exhibit A,
> marked "Ceed".
>
> Ceed is a skilled white collar professional, dealing with multi-
> million dollar negotiations. You just don't put anybody in charge of
> this kind of work, as I've been there and done that.
>
> Ceed has an open mind about Linux--as you can see, he's not prejudiced
> against Linux but to the contrary uses Linux (which is more than I
> would do).
>
> But Ceed knows who butters their bread--and it's Microsoft Office
> suite, specifically Word. You don't play games by sending a document
> to the other side in "Open Office format" anymore than you would play
> games by sending it in "WordStar", "WordPerfect" (which ironically was
> the de facto standard for legal documents years ago), or Unix "LaTex"
> for that matter.
>
> Basketball analogy: when you have a open unopposed shot at the basket
> and you need two points to win, you dunk. You don't try a fancy three
> pointer. No need for that.
>
> Baseball analogy: you cleanly catch a pop fly ball to get the last
> out with both hands in front of your face. You don't do a one-handed
> 'basket' catch from the waist level.
>
> Football (soccer) analogy: when you have an open goal, unopposed as
> the goalie has fallen down, you kick it in with your shooting foot,
> you don't try and scissor kick behind your back, kick it up in the air
> and head it in, or kicking it in with your non-kicking foot, or, God
> forbid, pass the ball to a teammate.
>
> Football (American) analogy: First and goal from the 1 yard line to
> win: you have a future Hall of Fame running back who has already run
> against the opposing team successfully all day. Give him the ball.
> You don't try passing or a trick play.
>
> Race car analogy: you are in the lead and the checkered flag has been
> given on the straightaway. Full throttle to victory; you don't give
> up the lead and let somebody get ahead of you so you can "slingshot"
> off their slipstream to regain the lead in the last few yards.
>
> Office analogy: OFFICE. That's why they call it OFFICE. It does not
> get simpler than that.
>
> I rest my case.
>
> RL

You pretty much sum it up but you use far too many words.

--
//ceed
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2
Prev: Office 2003 and Windows 7
Next: Trail on Office 2007