I hate sodding Windows XP and I hate PCs
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Bruce Horrocks on 22 May 2010 13:11 On 22/05/2010 10:08, Pd wrote: > Jim<jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > >> <http://i.msdn.microsoft.com/Cc872782.Ribbon01(en-us,MSDN.10).png> > > Perhaps this is a silly question, but how much screen is left for actual > document? Whenever I boot into Windows, I'm surprised by how much real > estate is used for UI controls, and usually quite wastefully. One of the things about the Word ribbon bar that annoys me is that the spaced used for styles seems very wasteful. There are samples for Heading 1, Heading 2 etc but, seemingly, never the one you want at the time. After all, how many times do you insert a heading 1 in a document for example? A dozen at most. Compared to how many lines of footnotes, callouts, normal text etc.? Well, I discovered by chance that if you make the window narrower, eventually Word stops displaying example styles and displays a single 'tile' labelled 'Quick Styles' and, typically, this is rather more use than the normal display. So well done Word interface designers - you've managed to annoy me twice with one feature. -- Bruce Horrocks Surrey England (bruce at scorecrow dot com)
From: Woody on 22 May 2010 13:19 Bruce Horrocks <07.013(a)scorecrow.com> wrote: > On 22/05/2010 10:08, Pd wrote: > > Jim<jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > > > >> <http://i.msdn.microsoft.com/Cc872782.Ribbon01(en-us,MSDN.10).png> > > > > Perhaps this is a silly question, but how much screen is left for actual > > document? Whenever I boot into Windows, I'm surprised by how much real > > estate is used for UI controls, and usually quite wastefully. > > One of the things about the Word ribbon bar that annoys me is that the > spaced used for styles seems very wasteful. There are samples for > Heading 1, Heading 2 etc but, seemingly, never the one you want at the > time. After all, how many times do you insert a heading 1 in a document > for example? A dozen at most. Compared to how many lines of footnotes, > callouts, normal text etc.? You can scroll it, or even organise it. I tended to use it for my OU stuff, so yes, I did all the styling at the end. The rest of the time the ribbon was up. -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: Dr Geoff Hone on 23 May 2010 04:49 On Sat, 22 May 2010 12:36:41 +0100, real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: <snip> > >Rowland. >(who once saw productivity and morale etc reduced by the old Amstrad >PC8512/8256s running Wordstar 2000 under blah-DOS vIforget being >replaced by Win 3.11 for Workgroups and MS Word v2. V numbers might be >slightly wrong. Thing was, the old rig worked, the staff could use it, >the new stuff was installed improperly configured and the staff given no >training on the new software.) This I doubt very much. (The Amstrad bit, anyway) The Amstrad 8256 and 8512 machines ran on CPM, and the native WP package was Locoscript. To get a Locoscript file onto a DOS machine, it was neccessary to pass a text file through a CPM to DOS rig (U of Surrey in the late '80s used an Amstrad back-to-back with a PC, linked via the serial ports). At the same time, my department had a WP Facility using Northstar CPM machines, using Wordstar 3 for CPM. The Computer Unit recommended WP package was Wordstar 4 for DOS. I still have WordStar 5, and used it regularly for writing datafiles that could be exported direct into SPSS on a PC or uploaded direct (FTP) to SPSS on the mainframe. The only Word facility at that time was on the 68k Macs, shortly to be supported by Word 2 on the 486 machines in two computing labs. Personally, I was using WordPerfect 5.2 at that time as a package of Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS, and Lotus Freelance, and WP5.2 gave me quick statistical analysis, and a graphing facility and an ability to edit the graphs (very useful if your graph does not start from Zero on one axis) and transfer straight into the WP program. As for WfW and Word 2 In the mid-'90s, in a "Government Department" usin Win for Workgroups (which was brilliant - never crashed - could work direct to a colleague ocross the corridor or in Scotland) and Word 2 became mandatory. No training - no manuals - not user friendly - most of us knew a bit of "how to do it" and spent a lot of time roaming the corridors trying to find the person who knew the bit that you wanted. Geoff
From: Rowland McDonnell on 23 May 2010 08:42 Dr Geoff Hone <gnhone(a)globalnet.co.uk> wrote: > real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > > <snip> > > > >Rowland. > >(who once saw productivity and morale etc reduced by the old Amstrad > >PC8512/8256s running Wordstar 2000 under blah-DOS vIforget being > >replaced by Win 3.11 for Workgroups and MS Word v2. V numbers might be > >slightly wrong. Thing was, the old rig worked, the staff could use it, > >the new stuff was installed improperly configured and the staff given no > >training on the new software.) > > This I doubt very much. (The Amstrad bit, anyway) Oh aye? And on what basis do you think you're in a position to have an opinion? > The Amstrad 8256 and 8512 machines ran on CPM, The PCW machines *could* boot into CP/M. I never used one like that. Had one at home. Might have one here somewhere. > and the native WP > package was Locoscript. That describes the Amstrad PCW machines. I had one at home; the Amstrad PC clones I was using at work couldn't run CP/M, had 5.25" floppy drives, and booted up into MS-DOS and ran Wordstar 2000 like I told you. Having just looked some things up, I've concluded that I've mis-identified the particular Amstrad PC clones in question, not sure quite how I managed it, but there you go. Whatever the bloody things were, they were Amstrad, and they ran Wordstar 2000 from MS-DOS and they had 5/25" floppy drives. [snip] Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Jim on 23 May 2010 10:08
Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > Whatever the bloody things were, they were Amstrad, and they ran > Wordstar 2000 from MS-DOS and they had 5/25" floppy drives. Sounds like the PC1512 and PC1640 machines. Quite good machines overall. As I recall, they used the old-style MFM hard drives. I never found out why, but they always -sounded- lovely - they made quite, melodic chirping noises when in use. <http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Amstrad_PC1512.jpg> Jim -- "Microsoft admitted its Vista operating system was a 'less good product' in what IT experts have described as the most ambitious understatement since the captain of the Titanic reported some slightly damp tablecloths." http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/ |