Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<316efe1de12954903ea5b66113fc89f2@www.novabbs.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Microsoft makes a lot of money, Is Intel exceptionally unsuccessful as
 an architecture =?UTF-8?B?ZGVzaWduZXI/?=
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 17:17:05 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <316efe1de12954903ea5b66113fc89f2@www.novabbs.org>
References: <memo.20240913205156.19028s@jgd.cix.co.uk> <vcd7lo$3op6a$2@dont-email.me> <vcdele$293s$1@gal.iecc.com> <vcdstq$3vei1$1@dont-email.me> <vcfdld$525$1@gal.iecc.com> <vcfu73$9bc9$2@dont-email.me> <vcgiq7$fmaa$3@dont-email.me> <87h6ab33p3.fsf@localhost> <vcid1g$ov66$5@dont-email.me> <ca3a58a82e35cb494662818a4c8f3e2a@www.novabbs.org> <vcj2ln$vddu$2@dont-email.me> <vcm6jn$1igur$1@dont-email.me> <vcrflb$2lnor$4@dont-email.me> <vct2hp$2tic0$12@dont-email.me> <451b6f3b701e89f1664e6594ce8bfead@www.novabbs.org> <vctv0g$34v5t$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3318430"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$138bMeFEmAQy63dLHMYnF.eNZc.1KenOj1ea7eEb/XikK85GdV136
Bytes: 4346
Lines: 62

On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 8:58:56 +0000, David Brown wrote:

> On 24/09/2024 05:05, MitchAlsup1 wrote:
>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 0:53:14 +0000, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> Anybody producing large amounts of high-quality, complex textual
>>> material > (e.g. technical documentation) is inevitably going to
>>> have to move beyond WYSIWYG tools and adopt some kind of markup
>>> system.
>>
>> I disagree.
>>
>> Word is just fine as long as all your drawings are *.jpg.
>>
>> What feature do you think is missing ??
>
> My experience with MS Word (mainly supporting it and helping others) is
> that a major missing feature is "can handle large documents without
> trashing them or exponential growth of file sizes".  Perhaps that's been
> improved in the last decade or so, but it certainly used to be the case
> that any Word document of more than about 20 pages was a gamble.  If the
> same file was edited by people using different versions of MS Office, or
> on machines where the fonts used in the document were not available, you
> were pretty much guaranteed disaster.

I happen to be using Word from Student 2003 CD-ROM
I have used it to create documents up to 500 pages in length
Nobody but me does any editing
These contain:
a) headers and footers
b) Paragraph index
c) Figures index
d) Table index
e) lots of cross references
f) appendixes

But I do notice that when converted to *.pdf the file shrinks by 5×

> The most impressive case I have seen of file size explosion was from
> Excel, rather than Word.  There was a common file on one of our servers
> that was used for lists of some type of document and numbers.  There
> were perhaps a half-dozen people that edited that file on occasion, over
> a period of many years.  Then someone asked me for help because they
> couldn't open the file.  It turned out the file was over 600 MB in size.
>   I opened it with LibreOffice without trouble, saved it again in xlsx
> format, and it was now about 40 KB and worked fine with Excel again.

I had one case where I broke my 500 page document into 2 (later 3)
documents that the combined size dropped by a factor of 2.5×. The
original had become large than I could e-mail (and before I discovered
the 5× size advantage of *.pdf.)

> Word is okay for quick, short and low-quality documents.  It's rare to
> see good typography in a Word document because it is a lot of effort, or
> at least a lot of effort to learn.  You /can/ use outline mode and make
> a half-decent structured document, but few people do.

Would you care to read one of mine and address whether is it
"of quality" or not ??

> There are, of course, other WYSIWYG tools that do a better job.  But
> learning to make quality documentation is a skill few people seem to
> appreciate, regardless of the tools they use.