 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
4731f6e1$1@news.povray.org...
> Word can only import from the previous 2, maybe 3, versions. If you have
> upgraded through more than that many versions, you can import from older
> versions, dating back about 2 versions before the first version that you
> actualy installed. The problem is that you loose that capacity if you get
> a new computer and forget to transfert all your old convertion filters.
> Whenever you need to access any old document that have not been accessed
> for more than 3 or 4 years, you run the risk of not been able do to it, as
> you may no longer have the appropriate filters.
Uh? For the fun of it, I just tested if I could open some Word files I wrote
in 1988 and apart warning me about the potential security issues with MS-DOS
Word 3/5 files, it opened them just fine and even recognised the style
sheets. I don't think that maintaining 20-year old conversion filters is
such a big hassle for Microsoft.
G.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> > What benefits would those be?
>
>> That everyone knows how to use them, they work with all your other
>> software,
>> and you can share files with your suppliers and customers hassle-free.
>
> It was a rhetorical question.
Bit of a stupid one then.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Hmm, my Word 2003 looks like it will open Word 6 files (1995?), which is 8
> years.
Duh! *12* years! I think my brain is fried.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:33:20 -0500, Alain wrote:
> Word can only import from the previous 2, maybe 3, versions.
Nope. The publishing industry (at least the part of it that I worked
with) uses Word 2.0 templates, and they work even in today's versions of
Word without having to install anything different - even with a fresh
install.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
scott wrote:
>> Hmm, my Word 2003 looks like it will open Word 6 files (1995?), which
>> is 8 years.
>
> Duh! *12* years! I think my brain is fried.
>
>
>
Actually, I think that 2003-1995 _is_ 8.. 1995+12 would be 2007,
wouldn't it?
-- Arttu Voutilainen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007 13:00:56 -0000, scott wrote:
> A million other people want to do exactly what you say, and actually do do
> it everyday in MS Word.
And I found the learning curve of using them in Word 2007 rather short.
Similarly for Openoffice 2.
--
Joel Yliluoma - http://bisqwit.iki.fi/
: comprehension = 1 / (2 ^ precision)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/07 18:12:
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:33:20 -0500, Alain wrote:
>
>> Word can only import from the previous 2, maybe 3, versions.
>
> Nope. The publishing industry (at least the part of it that I worked
> with) uses Word 2.0 templates, and they work even in today's versions of
> Word without having to install anything different - even with a fresh
> install.
>
> Jim
Maybe there was a change. Working with word 5, I could'nt open files from word
2: the programm complained about missing filters.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
PROPENSITY TO CHANGE
A woman marries a man expecting he will change, but he doesn't.
A man marries a woman expecting that she won't change, and she does.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Nov 2007 19:26:27 -0500, Alain wrote:
> Jim Henderson nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/07 18:12:
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:33:20 -0500, Alain wrote:
>>
>>> Word can only import from the previous 2, maybe 3, versions.
>>
>> Nope. The publishing industry (at least the part of it that I worked
>> with) uses Word 2.0 templates, and they work even in today's versions
>> of Word without having to install anything different - even with a
>> fresh install.
>>
>> Jim
> Maybe there was a change. Working with word 5, I could'nt open files
> from word 2: the programm complained about missing filters.
Perhaps, I woud've been using Word97 IIRC, at least the most recent time
around. Prior to that was some work I published in 1995.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain wrote:
> Maybe there was a change. Working with word 5, I could'nt open files
> from word 2: the programm complained about missing filters.
The filters on newer Words are optional installs. But they're there.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Remember the good old days, when we
used to complain about cryptography
being export-restricted?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/11/11 17:44:
> Alain wrote:
>> Maybe there was a change. Working with word 5, I could'nt open files
>> from word 2: the programm complained about missing filters.
>
> The filters on newer Words are optional installs. But they're there.
>
Not for all editions. Word from the Small Business Edition suite don't have a
full set of filters. At least the one that I did install for a friend.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you've been raytracing too long when you see the movie credits going by
and instead of seeing Lenses by Panaflex it always seems to say Lens Effects by
Chris Colefax.
Ken Tyler
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
