41–50 of 72 posts
No, I won't stop. There is nothing better than Word to collaboratively work on a manuscript in a research environment. Yes, this is "Editing - Emailing - Editing" cycle, but no one has suggested anything better that actually works.
Use version control, or wikis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might be surprised how many people simply won't read a long email, their eyes sort of glaze over, but will happily read a much longer document when the email just says "please see attached". It's like flipping a mental switch between "short note" and "real document".
How about attaching text files then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In theory there are some features in word processing packages for security (either password to open or password to edit) and for collaborative working (edits are marked) that you don't get with HTML. In practice, those security features are often broken. HTML and CSS would be an excellent solution, and in tune with the original idea (device-agnostic) of HTML. You don't know what software, or OS, or machine the receiv…
Unfortunately, HTML isn't a rich enough container. If you try to add a diagram to HTML, suddenly you need two files. The "webarchive" file formats get around this, but they're not standard. It seems to me that we need something like PDF, but that isn't so hung up on the idea of formatting physical pages. If I'm reading on a phone, I want it to reflow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, HTML isn't a rich enough container. If you try to add a diagram to HTML, suddenly you need two files. The "webarchive" file formats get around this, but they're not standard. It seems to me that we need something like PDF, but that isn't so hung up on the idea of formatting physical pages. If I'm reading on a phone, I want it to reflow.
I bet you're wrong. There is nothing more than just a container, a space and memory hog, that word processors and Adobe suites provide. I believe that HTML is far more powerful than currently tapped.
Which is exactly what OP was complaining about. HTML documents need multiple files to work correctly. .DOC and .PDF provide this. There is no standard for HTML containters.
I believe that HTML is far more powerful than currently tapped.
Key term for this chapter is "than currently tapped". The problem is, .DOC and .PDF solve all the problems HTML documents have.
The take-home assignment is to make an HTML container that can be read and edited in software that everyone has, then convince the world (and hiring managers) that everyone should stop using Word even though it works perfectly fine. Extra credit if you make it as rich and feature filled as Word without making it more bloated than Word.
Actually, at work i try to send restructuredText + a neatly generated .pdf. Looks better, is easily editable. As one of the few Linux/LibreOffice users i HATE(HATEHATEHATEHATE) .doc and especially .docx. It's a nightmare to work with and collaborate on it between MS Word and LibreOffice Writer. Something always gets screwed up. Please, Office people in the world: Uninstall the nightmare that is called MS Office. Libr…
What is the difference between sending a .doc or a .odt? I say this as someone who has not used office since staroffice released working binaries for redhat (3.0.3 I think).
Now, do you think i would pay money for MS Office? Even if i would, i couldn't because it's Windows/Mac only anyway.
I'd say, sending .odt/.docx around is the least preferable option but .docx additionally has far more downsides for me as well..
Editable PDF files are better than .DOC? Wow. Please don't send me an editable PDF instead of a DOC. wtf. PDF files are designed to load slow and make my hard disk thrash. If you send me a DOC at least I can edit it in google docs.. Much better send me a link to a google doc or some other online document.. zoho or whatever
> PDF files are designed to load slow and make my hard disk thrash. You are aware you don't have to use Adobe software to read PDFs right? I've got 7+MB PDF books (as in 500 pages or so), OSX's Preview loads them in a fraction of a second. Even "The Macintosh Way" (40MB of scanned images) takes barely half a second. That's not enough time to start an empty instance of Word
Actually, at work i try to send restructuredText + a neatly generated .pdf. Looks better, is easily editable. As one of the few Linux/LibreOffice users i HATE(HATEHATEHATEHATE) .doc and especially .docx. It's a nightmare to work with and collaborate on it between MS Word and LibreOffice Writer. Something always gets screwed up. Please, Office people in the world: Uninstall the nightmare that is called MS Office. Libr…
Such crap. This only gets voted up because it bashes Microsoft.
It doesn't matter where you put blame, or if there's any blame at all; it's still a problem.
Are you kidding me. I would love .DOC since Whenever I get documents from family (especially the Mum!) they send my .DOCX Despite telling them hundreds of times to stop!
Changing every time is a pain, since Word has a dozen different options (Word 95, Word 98, Word 2000/2003, .docx, rtf, txt, etc). It gets confusing.