From: Snit on 10 Jan 2010 13:52
Rick stated in post 5eqdnZk-_6E3vdfWnZ2dnUVZ_uli4p2d(a)supernews.com on
1/10/10 11:47 AM:
>> You mangled my text and yours there. But, yes, they are about equal in
>> their compatibility with MS Office, though Pages does offer the benefit
>> of telling you where there were incompatibilities.
>>> It was a question, even though I left off the question mark by mistake.
>> What an odd question! The only way I can even see where you would have
>> such a thought is if you believed MS Office compatibility was the only
>> requirement for "serious work"!
> Your words: "Not good enough for serious work...", hence the question.
Already established that you missed the context. No big deal - below I give
you more detail to help you understand.
>> Neither is good enough for an environment where you need to be able to
>> reliably read and write MS Office files - at least not as the tool to do
>> so! I use Pages for a number of things where it is better than MS
>> Office... but I also use MS Office for working with MS Office files (and
>> for other purposes). Each has benefits.
>> Same can be said of OpenOffice, though since it is very much made to be
>> a copy of MS Office, its benefits compared to MS Office are limited in
>> ways Pages are not. Still, it handles different file formats than MS
>> Office and presumably has other benefits. I admit - I cannot think of
>> any off hand... can you? Serious question: what intrinsic benefits do
>> you think OpenOffice has over MS Office? I can list some of Pages if you
> As you said, it does read/write different formats. In addition, I don't
> have to worry about licensing issues. The cost is much less. It ranges
> from $0 to whatever I want to send them. And, I consider the fact that I
> am not supporting Microsft a benefit.
Ok, so file format is the only intrinsic reason you can think of - at least
>>> You said:"I use Apple's Pages quite to that of OO. Not good enough for
>>> serious work...". Notice the "Not good enough for serious work...".
>>> Are, or are you not saying Pages is not good enough for serious work?
>> Ah, you missed the context. OK.
>>>>> OpenOffice is.
>>>> In your opinion.
>>> Is it your opinion that the organizations listed in the following link
>>> do not do serious work?
>> Herd mentality.
> There is absolutely no use in trying to have a rational discussion with
In your opinion.
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
From: Snit on 10 Jan 2010 14:15
Phil Stovell stated in post
pan.2010.01.10.19.05.37.570753(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk on 1/10/10 12:05 PM:
>> You DID claim that OO works fine with all Office docs. Which makes you
>> ignorant of reality, stupid or a liar.
>> Which is it?
> It doesn't even work in other Microsoft products! So, to view a MS Word
> document, you MUST have MS Word installed!
> ISO/IEC 26300:2006
Yes, the best way to work with MS Word files is to use MS Word. Neither
OpenOffice, Pages nor any other tool I know handles them well.
[INSERT .SIG HERE]
From: Baron on 10 Jan 2010 14:20
Tony Houghton Inscribed thus:
> In <50DCF36114%news(a)youmustbejoking.demon.cu.invalid>,
> Darren Salt <news(a)youmustbejoking.demon.cu.invalid> wrote:
>> I demand that Baron may or may not have written...
>>> Looking forward to the new "ARM based tablets"...
>> Me too. Would be nice to have _new_ ARM-based desktop boxes too...
> Personally I'd like an ARM netbook so it can have decent battery life
> without being heavy. Unfortunately they seem to be targetting
> something significantly smaller than a netbook, whereas I'd want
> something a teensy bit bigger if anything. A 1024x600 desktop is too
> small, but I can live with 1280x800 or 1366x768 on a portable.
At less than £160, I won't complain ! At least Wincrap won't run on it.
From: Phil Stovell on 10 Jan 2010 14:24
On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 12:15:49 -0700, Snit wrote:
> Phil Stovell stated in post
> pan.2010.01.10.19.05.37.570753(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk on 1/10/10 12:05 PM:
>>> You DID claim that OO works fine with all Office docs. Which makes you
>>> ignorant of reality, stupid or a liar.
>>> Which is it?
>> It doesn't even work in other Microsoft products! So, to view a MS Word
>> document, you MUST have MS Word installed!
>> ISO/IEC 26300:2006
> Yes, the best way to work with MS Word files is to use MS Word. Neither
> OpenOffice, Pages nor any other tool I know handles them well.
It's a totally closed environment then. Proprietary software saving data
to an open standards file (ODF) in a proprietary format (DOCX) that even
other Microsoft software can't read.
From: Snit on 10 Jan 2010 14:32
§nühw€£f stated in post Xns9CFC7D4DBA780snuhwolfyahoocom(a)22.214.171.124 on
1/10/10 12:17 PM:
>> It doesn't even work in other Microsoft products! So, to view a MS
>> Word document, you MUST have MS Word installed!
> No, not really. you can use WinVi to look at word documents just
> fine. it strips out the formatting but will display the text.
Well, OS X has that capability (and more) by default. You can "QuickLook"
attachments, for example, and have them look *largely* correct in most
[INSERT .SIG HERE]