Prev: Why isn't the iSlate destined to be a failure?
Next: T-Mobile/Chitter Chatter iPhone deal
From: Debbie Wilson on 26 Jan 2010 10:10
Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote:

> Debbie: I am in an incapable state at the moment. I should not offer to
> do anything for anyone. I am too unreliable.
>
> But: I have CW4 (and CW 1) and AW 6 and a shedload of translators. An
> old version or two of MacLinkPlus is included in that. Also MS Office
> (not on this machine, but more than one version) and iWork '09.
>
> If you are unable to solve this problem some other way, let me know.

Thanks Rowland - that is a very kind offer indeed.

> [1] You wanna argue about that use of an apostrophe? All right then,
> come and have a go if you think you're hard enough.

No way :-)
Having just dealt with the dreadful mess otherwise known as the Inland
Revenue website, I will ignore my own misgivings about 'SS's' and bow to
Lynne Truss' superiority on that issue. :-)

> I've got Lynne Truss on my side and she's a serious heavyweight bruiser.

Well, quite.

Deb.
--
http://www.scientific-art.com

"He looked a fierce and quarrelsome cat, but claw he never would;
He only bit the ones he loved, because they tasted good." S. Greenfield
From: Rowland McDonnell on 26 Jan 2010 10:43
Debbie Wilson <djmaizels(a)mac.com> wrote:

> Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Debbie: I am in an incapable state at the moment. I should not offer to
> > do anything for anyone. I am too unreliable.
> >
> > But: I have CW4 (and CW 1) and AW 6 and a shedload of translators. An
> > old version or two of MacLinkPlus is included in that. Also MS Office
> > (not on this machine, but more than one version) and iWork '09.
> >
> > If you are unable to solve this problem some other way, let me know.
>
> Thanks Rowland - that is a very kind offer indeed.

<crooked grin> vaguely. I didn't forget to mention my lack of
reliability, did I? (and other current complicators).

> > [1] You wanna argue about that use of an apostrophe? All right then,
> > come and have a go if you think you're hard enough.
>
> No way :-)
> Having just dealt with the dreadful mess otherwise known as the Inland
> Revenue website, I will ignore my own misgivings about 'SS's' and bow to
> Lynne Truss' superiority on that issue. :-)

She's not superior, it's just that she's a convenient big gun firing in
well documented directions and if I happen to want some firepower in
that direction myself, I'll lean on Lynne. I'm sure she's sexier than
Eric Partridge (another big gun I use from time to time).

[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: Adrian Tuddenham on 26 Jan 2010 15:07
Gareth John <g.john(a)PLUG.btinternet.com> wrote:

> Gareth John <g.john(a)PLUG.btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > Debbie Wilson <djmaizels(a)mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Does anyone who uses iWork know if you can directly open or import
> > > Claris Works 5 spreadsheets in Numbers without loss of cell formatting,
> > > calcuations etc? I really need to get my (very simple) tax spreadsheets
> > > into an OSX program, it's stupid firing up Classic once a year just for
> > > these - but want to avoid any mess-ups in the process!
> >
> > Gulp. On 25th January, It sounds like you're leaving things later than
> > even I'm comfortable with...
> >
> > Does exporting the CW5 sheets to SYLK format help? Excel, at least can
> > import those, with formulas, but Numbers I don't know.
>
> Doh!
>
> Scratch that. I just checked with the two versions I've got available,
> and neither CW4 nor AppleWorks 6 will save as SYLK. So presumably CW%
> won't either.

CW4 spreadsheet will save as SYLK (at least, it does on OS8.6).

The SYLK translator should be in a folder called "ClarisWorks 4.0
Folder" in the Appications folder (not in the Claris Works Folder
itself). Check to see if it's there on your system.


--
~ Adrian Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk
From: Gareth John on 27 Jan 2010 08:53
Debbie Wilson <djmaizels(a)mac.com> wrote:

> Gareth John <g.john(a)PLUG.btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> > David Empson <dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> > >
> > > AppleWorks 5 can also save as SYLK. (I've done it.) ClarisWorks 5 should
> > > be identical.
> > >
> > > Numbers doesn't appear to be able to sensibly import SYLK files (despite
> > > taking ownership of that extension), but Excel can, as you noted.
> >
> > Ah, that's a relief. I wasn't dreaming, then. In my haste I had only
> > tried CW4 (not CW5) under Classic, and AW6 under OSX.
> >
> > But it still sounds as though Debbie will need to go via Excel to
> > Numbers.
>
> Thank you Gareth and David for your very useful suggestions. ClarisWorks
> 5 can indeed 'save as' SYLK and Excel has successfully opened this
> format with no loss of formatting. I don't have Numbers so will stick
> with Excel for now, but at least it's opening in an OS X environment.

That's a relief.

> Gareth, yes I am leaving it late. As usual :-) But thanks to the online
> tax return wizardry, the worst part is adding up all my expenses, which
> takes a few hours at most. Completing the actual return is a breeze
> compared to the old paper version. Should all be done and submitted by
> this evening.

I did mine about a week ago, and it took about 10 minutes online. But
(because I'm VAT-registered, and therefore compile expenses, by type,
every quarter) the adding up was already available as the sum of my
quarterly VAT returns.

My sole annoyance is that the Income Tax online return ends up giving me
a 'total to pay' which is just wrong - because it takes no account of
the two 'payments on account' that I've already made for that year. So I
end up having to do a manual subtraction of those. Should be more
simples, neh?

Good luck with yours!

G.
--
From Gareth John
Please pull out the plug if you want to reply by email
From: Debbie Wilson on 27 Jan 2010 11:05
Gareth John <g.john(a)PLUG.btinternet.com> wrote:

> I did mine about a week ago, and it took about 10 minutes online. But
> (because I'm VAT-registered, and therefore compile expenses, by type,
> every quarter) the adding up was already available as the sum of my
> quarterly VAT returns.

Yes, this is the case with my OH, which speeds things up a lot.

> My sole annoyance is that the Income Tax online return ends up giving me
> a 'total to pay' which is just wrong - because it takes no account of
> the two 'payments on account' that I've already made for that year. So I
> end up having to do a manual subtraction of those. Should be more
> simples, neh?

I couldn't agree more! It gives you a horrible shock when you see the
humungous total on the screen, before you realise that you have already
paid most/all of it already. Definitely can do without that!

> Good luck with yours!

Thank you - it is done!

Deb.
--
http://www.scientific-art.com

"He looked a fierce and quarrelsome cat, but claw he never would;
He only bit the ones he loved, because they tasted good." S. Greenfield
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Why isn't the iSlate destined to be a failure?
Next: T-Mobile/Chitter Chatter iPhone deal