Comments on: Word Document Compatibility http://chris.pirillo.com/word-document-compatibility/ News and Reviews! Geek, Internet Entrepreneur, Hardware Addict, Software Junkie, Book Author, Once TV Show Host, Technology Enthusiast, Shameless Self-Promoter, Tech Conference Coordinator, Early Adopter, Idea Evangelist, Tech Support Blogger, Bootstrapper, Media Personality, Technology Consultant, Thicker Quicker Picker Upper. Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:17:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Paul http://chris.pirillo.com/word-document-compatibility/#comment-536835 Paul Thu, 23 Aug 2007 01:10:51 +0000 http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/08/18/word-document-compatibility/#comment-536835 I've been playing around with different file formats myself. For the last few months I've used rtf, but I do like to throw in clip art, tables, and what not, and that's where rtf simply loses compatibility among the various programs. Also, another problem with rtf is that there are different versions of it--MS just updated the standard to 1.9 earlier this year. Since rtf has fallen into such disuse, not many of the already strained for manpower open-source programs are going to update their reading/writing capabilites for it (as opposed to say, .odt format for Open Office). So I've fallen back on a new strategy--since it seems that Open Office's slowness is easier for me to deal with than Abiword's quirkiness (or Word's proprietariness) I'll just turn any doc I wanna share into pdf, and keep my own docs as .odt and run it off of Open Office. I’ve been playing around with different file formats myself. For the last few months I’ve used rtf, but I do like to throw in clip art, tables, and what not, and that’s where rtf simply loses compatibility among the various programs. Also, another problem with rtf is that there are different versions of it–MS just updated the standard to 1.9 earlier this year. Since rtf has fallen into such disuse, not many of the already strained for manpower open-source programs are going to update their reading/writing capabilites for it (as opposed to say, .odt format for Open Office). So I’ve fallen back on a new strategy–since it seems that Open Office’s slowness is easier for me to deal with than Abiword’s quirkiness (or Word’s proprietariness) I’ll just turn any doc I wanna share into pdf, and keep my own docs as .odt and run it off of Open Office.

]]> By: Jeff http://chris.pirillo.com/word-document-compatibility/#comment-538850 Jeff Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:16:47 +0000 http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/08/18/word-document-compatibility/#comment-538850 Word is the jackalope of Windows programs -- not good enough to be a really useful desktop publishing environment like Quark XPress or Adobe Pagemaker, and far too bloated to be a good writing environment. I'm forced to use Word at work, but often I save my work as plain ASCII text or UTF-8 so I can more easily import it and format it in Pagemaker (for print publications) or Dreamweaver (for the Web). At home, I use a 1980s vintage word processor called XyWrite. It runs in DOS, and it's fast and efficient for me. But it's getting harder to emulate DOS anymore in Windows and Linux, so sometimes I use Note Tab Light. Any of these will make for a much smaller filesize than Word, but they are also readable in a huge number of programs and platforms. Cross-platform compatibility is bad for Microsoft's sales, so they discourage it, but it's possible if you use your head. Microsoft insists on making Swiss army knives, even where one simple blade will suffice. No matter what the work process, though, you're wise to identify and stick with the common denominators. Word is the jackalope of Windows programs — not good enough to be a really useful desktop publishing environment like Quark XPress or Adobe Pagemaker, and far too bloated to be a good writing environment.

I’m forced to use Word at work, but often I save my work as plain ASCII text or UTF-8 so I can more easily import it and format it in Pagemaker (for print publications) or Dreamweaver (for the Web). At home, I use a 1980s vintage word processor called XyWrite. It runs in DOS, and it’s fast and efficient for me. But it’s getting harder to emulate DOS anymore in Windows and Linux, so sometimes I use Note Tab Light. Any of these will make for a much smaller filesize than Word, but they are also readable in a huge number of programs and platforms. Cross-platform compatibility is bad for Microsoft’s sales, so they discourage it, but it’s possible if you use your head.

Microsoft insists on making Swiss army knives, even where one simple blade will suffice. No matter what the work process, though, you’re wise to identify and stick with the common denominators.

]]> By: Jeff http://chris.pirillo.com/word-document-compatibility/#comment-538848 Jeff Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:16:47 +0000 http://chris.pirillo.com/2007/08/18/word-document-compatibility/#comment-538848 Word is the jackalope of Windows programs -- not good enough to be a really useful desktop publishing environment like Quark XPress or Adobe Pagemaker, and far too bloated to be a good writing environment. I'm forced to use Word at work, but often I save my work as plain ASCII text or UTF-8 so I can more easily import it and format it in Pagemaker (for print publications) or Dreamweaver (for the Web). At home, I use a 1980s vintage word processor called XyWrite. It runs in DOS, and it's fast and efficient for me. But it's getting harder to emulate DOS anymore in Windows and Linux, so sometimes I use Note Tab Light. Any of these will make for a much smaller filesize than Word, but they are also readable in a huge number of programs and platforms. Cross-platform compatibility is bad for Microsoft's sales, so they discourage it, but it's possible if you use your head. Microsoft insists on making Swiss army knives, even where one simple blade will suffice. No matter what the work process, though, you're wise to identify and stick with the common denominators. Word is the jackalope of Windows programs — not good enough to be a really useful desktop publishing environment like Quark XPress or Adobe Pagemaker, and far too bloated to be a good writing environment.

I’m forced to use Word at work, but often I save my work as plain ASCII text or UTF-8 so I can more easily import it and format it in Pagemaker (for print publications) or Dreamweaver (for the Web). At home, I use a 1980s vintage word processor called XyWrite. It runs in DOS, and it’s fast and efficient for me. But it’s getting harder to emulate DOS anymore in Windows and Linux, so sometimes I use Note Tab Light. Any of these will make for a much smaller filesize than Word, but they are also readable in a huge number of programs and platforms. Cross-platform compatibility is bad for Microsoft’s sales, so they discourage it, but it’s possible if you use your head.

Microsoft insists on making Swiss army knives, even where one simple blade will suffice. No matter what the work process, though, you’re wise to identify and stick with the common denominators.

]]>