Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Removing Word 97
10 views
Skip to first unread message
Noreen
Jan 14, 2012, 11:44:24 PM1/14/12
to
I have recently purchased Microsoft Office Home & Student 2010.
Until this time I had been using Microsoft Word 97.
Now that the 2010 has been loaded onto my computer is it safe for me to
remove Word 97?. I am anxious that I might lose documents that were written
with 97.
Any help would be appreciated,
Noreen
Until this time I had been using Microsoft Word 97.
Now that the 2010 has been loaded onto my computer is it safe for me to
remove Word 97?. I am anxious that I might lose documents that were written
with 97.
Any help would be appreciated,
Noreen
Steve Hayes
Jan 15, 2012, 12:10:24 AM1/15/12
to
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:44:24 +0800, "Noreen" <noreen....@bigpond.com>
wrote:
>I have recently purchased Microsoft Office Home & Student 2010.
>Until this time I had been using Microsoft Word 97.
>Now that the 2010 has been loaded onto my computer is it safe for me to
>remove Word 97?. I am anxious that I might lose documents that were written
>with 97.
It shouldn't make much difference.
Word 2010 can open, read and save documents created by Word 97.
I have Wrod 2010 on my laptop computer and Word 97 on my desktop computer.
There are many documents that I write, read, and edit on both, using Dropbox.
I keep Word 97 because I am more familiar with it, and if I have urgent work
to do, it is easier to use it than to waste time trying to find out how to do
things in Word 2010.
So you might also find it useful to keep Word 97 until you've got the hang of
working with Word 2010.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
wrote:
>I have recently purchased Microsoft Office Home & Student 2010.
>Until this time I had been using Microsoft Word 97.
>Now that the 2010 has been loaded onto my computer is it safe for me to
>remove Word 97?. I am anxious that I might lose documents that were written
>with 97.
Word 2010 can open, read and save documents created by Word 97.
I have Wrod 2010 on my laptop computer and Word 97 on my desktop computer.
There are many documents that I write, read, and edit on both, using Dropbox.
I keep Word 97 because I am more familiar with it, and if I have urgent work
to do, it is easier to use it than to waste time trying to find out how to do
things in Word 2010.
So you might also find it useful to keep Word 97 until you've got the hang of
working with Word 2010.
--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk
Noreen
Jan 15, 2012, 6:56:02 AM1/15/12
to
"Steve Hayes" <haye...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
news:gln4h75ommgbe58rl...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:44:24 +0800, "Noreen" <noreen....@bigpond.com>
> wrote:
>
>>I have recently purchased Microsoft Office Home & Student 2010.
>>Until this time I had been using Microsoft Word 97.
>>Now that the 2010 has been loaded onto my computer is it safe for me to
>>remove Word 97?. I am anxious that I might lose documents that were
>>written
>>with 97.
>
> It shouldn't make much difference.
>
> Word 2010 can open, read and save documents created by Word 97.
>
> I have Word 2010 on my laptop computer and Word 97 on my desktop computer.
> wrote:
>
>>I have recently purchased Microsoft Office Home & Student 2010.
>>Until this time I had been using Microsoft Word 97.
>>Now that the 2010 has been loaded onto my computer is it safe for me to
>>remove Word 97?. I am anxious that I might lose documents that were
>>written
>>with 97.
>
> It shouldn't make much difference.
>
> Word 2010 can open, read and save documents created by Word 97.
>
> There are many documents that I write, read, and edit on both, using
> Dropbox.
>
> I keep Word 97 because I am more familiar with it, and if I have urgent
> work
> to do, it is easier to use it than to waste time trying to find out how to
> do
> things in Word 2010.
>
> So you might also find it useful to keep Word 97 until you've got the hang
> of
> working with Word 2010.
>
>
> --
> Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
> Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
> E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
> uk
Thank you, Steve, that seems to be a great idea. I will do the same. Word
> Dropbox.
>
> I keep Word 97 because I am more familiar with it, and if I have urgent
> work
> to do, it is easier to use it than to waste time trying to find out how to
> do
> things in Word 2010.
>
> So you might also find it useful to keep Word 97 until you've got the hang
> of
> working with Word 2010.
>
>
> --
> Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
> Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
> E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop
> uk
2010 does seem a little more complicated.
Many thanks,
Noreen
pblair
Jan 16, 2012, 12:25:26 AM1/16/12
to
On Jan 15, 10:56 pm, "Noreen" <noreen.coom...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> "Steve Hayes" <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
>
> news:gln4h75ommgbe58rl...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:44:24 +0800, "Noreen" <noreen.coom...@bigpond.com>
You've not indicated which version of Windows you are using. If it is
Windows 7, there may be compatibility issues.
Paul
> "Steve Hayes" <hayes...@telkomsa.net> wrote in message
>
> news:gln4h75ommgbe58rl...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 12:44:24 +0800, "Noreen" <noreen.coom...@bigpond.com>
Windows 7, there may be compatibility issues.
Paul
Steve Hayes
Jan 16, 2012, 4:19:31 AM1/16/12
to
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 21:25:26 -0800 (PST), pblair <pbl...@pcug.org.au> wrote:
>You've not indicated which version of Windows you are using. If it is
>Windows 7, there may be compatibility issues.
It seems as if both versions are working on her computer without problems, and
>You've not indicated which version of Windows you are using. If it is
>Windows 7, there may be compatibility issues.
she's just wondering if it is safe to delete the older version.
So the decision is really just a matter of convenience -- she might find the
older version easier to use until she becomes familiar with the new one. I
find myself in the same position.
Harrison Genealogy
Jan 16, 2012, 4:26:09 AM1/16/12
to gen...@rootsweb.com
Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
incl all Office formats!
Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
from the M/Soft product !
http://www.libreoffice.org/
regards
Bill
-------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GENCMP-...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message
alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
incl all Office formats!
Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
from the M/Soft product !
http://www.libreoffice.org/
regards
Bill
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
GENCMP-...@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes
in the subject and the body of the message
Joe Makowiec
Jan 16, 2012, 6:41:21 AM1/16/12
to
On 16 Jan 2012 in soc.genealogy.computing, Harrison Genealogy wrote:
> Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone
> and alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in
> many formats incl all Office formats!
>
> Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the
> difference from the M/Soft product !
>
> http://www.libreoffice.org/
For the record...
> Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone
> and alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in
> many formats incl all Office formats!
>
> Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the
> difference from the M/Soft product !
>
> http://www.libreoffice.org/
OpenOffice.org (OOo) still exists and is now a project of the Apache
Foundation. The latest stable version (3.3) was released in January
2011. It looks like development may have slowed.
http://openoffice.org/
Libre Office took OOo's code base (which is open source) for their
initial release. As of January 2012, it's up to version 3.4.5.
http://www.libreoffice.org/
While both will open Microsoft Office documents reasonably well, and
while I heartily endorse their use, you have to understand that:
- compatibility is not 100%, and you may get some glitches when you
open an Office document
- OOo will open but won't save .docx and .xslx files; according to the
documentation, Libre Office latest will both open and save.
--
Joe Makowiec
http://makowiec.org/
Email: http://makowiec.org/contact/?Joe
Usenet Improvement Project: http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
Denis Beauregard
Jan 16, 2012, 11:03:16 PM1/16/12
to
On Sun, 15 Jan 2012 21:25:26 -0800 (PST), pblair <pbl...@pcug.org.au>
wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:
>You've not indicated which version of Windows you are using. If it is
>Windows 7, there may be compatibility issues.
I am using Forte Agent (FA) to read mail and news.
Last year, I had to replace my old computer running Windows 98 by a
new one with Windows 7. I first installed FA which ran fine. A few
days later, I added MS-Office 97 and FA could no more run. So I
deleted MS-Office and replaced it with OpenOffice.org (this is the
official name btw) because I needed more FA than Word/Excel 97.
So, you may have this problem. I tried to run my FA (it doesn't need
to be installed and copying it to a directory will do the job) on the
computer of my girlfriend (she has MS-Office 2007 and Vista) and I
couldn't start FA, so I figure there is a problem between FA and
MS-Office, whatever version you are using. And obviously other
softwares may have the same problem of compatibility.
As to keep old documents with the same format, keep in mind that the
size of letters depend on the printer so even if you have the same
word processor, you may find that the pages are not the same if you
change the printer.
Denis
--
Denis Beauregard - généalogiste émérite (FQSG)
Les Français d'Amérique du Nord - www.francogene.com/genealogie--quebec/
French in North America before 1722 - www.francogene.com/quebec--genealogy/
Sur cédérom à 1780 - On CD-ROM to 1780
Denis Beauregard
Jan 16, 2012, 11:09:48 PM1/16/12
to
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:41:21 +0000 (UTC), Joe Makowiec
<mako...@invalid.invalid> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:
>On 16 Jan 2012 in soc.genealogy.computing, Harrison Genealogy wrote:
>
>> Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone
Actually openoffice.org (OOO, not OO), apparently because someone
owns the brand openoffice.
>> and alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in
>> many formats incl all Office formats!
>>
>> Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the
>> difference from the M/Soft product !
>>
>> http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>For the record...
>
>OpenOffice.org (OOo) still exists and is now a project of the Apache
>Foundation. The latest stable version (3.3) was released in January
>2011. It looks like development may have slowed.
>
>http://openoffice.org/
>
>Libre Office took OOo's code base (which is open source) for their
>initial release. As of January 2012, it's up to version 3.4.5.
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>While both will open Microsoft Office documents reasonably well, and
>while I heartily endorse their use, you have to understand that:
>- compatibility is not 100%, and you may get some glitches when you
>open an Office document
>- OOo will open but won't save .docx and .xslx files; according to the
>documentation, Libre Office latest will both open and save.
I have a lot of xls files with genealogical data. Typically, 2 kinds
of files, individuals and couples. Sometimes, I edit the files with
Excel 2007 (not on my computer). There is one file (not the largest)
I couldn't open when back home with OpenOffice.org 3 but could with
OOO 2 and LibreOffice.
With large XLS-like files, I found that it can be very slow if you
have a lot of different formats. To do a search, the search dialog
needed 7 seconds to open with a 20 MB file, but less than 1 secode
if I remove all the formatting (colors, boldface, etc.). Something
useful to know if you have very large files !
<mako...@invalid.invalid> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:
>On 16 Jan 2012 in soc.genealogy.computing, Harrison Genealogy wrote:
>
>> Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone
owns the brand openoffice.
>> and alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in
>> many formats incl all Office formats!
>>
>> Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the
>> difference from the M/Soft product !
>>
>> http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>For the record...
>
>OpenOffice.org (OOo) still exists and is now a project of the Apache
>Foundation. The latest stable version (3.3) was released in January
>2011. It looks like development may have slowed.
>
>http://openoffice.org/
>
>Libre Office took OOo's code base (which is open source) for their
>initial release. As of January 2012, it's up to version 3.4.5.
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>While both will open Microsoft Office documents reasonably well, and
>while I heartily endorse their use, you have to understand that:
>- compatibility is not 100%, and you may get some glitches when you
>open an Office document
>- OOo will open but won't save .docx and .xslx files; according to the
>documentation, Libre Office latest will both open and save.
of files, individuals and couples. Sometimes, I edit the files with
Excel 2007 (not on my computer). There is one file (not the largest)
I couldn't open when back home with OpenOffice.org 3 but could with
OOO 2 and LibreOffice.
With large XLS-like files, I found that it can be very slow if you
have a lot of different formats. To do a search, the search dialog
needed 7 seconds to open with a 20 MB file, but less than 1 secode
if I remove all the formatting (colors, boldface, etc.). Something
useful to know if you have very large files !
cecilia
Jan 17, 2012, 7:10:25 AM1/17/12
to
"Harrison Genealogy" wrote:
>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>incl all Office formats!
>
>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>from the M/Soft product !
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
I have not used Libra Office, but after using Open Office for all
>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>incl all Office formats!
>
>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>from the M/Soft product !
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
normal purposes for 3 years, I returned to M/S Office for two family
history reasons (which may both merely have been solutions to my
inability to use Open Office):
1. In M/S Word, I could see, cut and paste index markers, rather than
create each one as I went along and thhen "poke" it to see what I had
done, which made it much easier to create indexes to digital versions
of family histories such as my great-uncle's, in which e.g. "John
Sm1th V", "John", "his son", "her father", "his brother" should all
have markers "Sm1th, John (1735-1787)".
2. In Powerpoint, I could place text boxes closer to each other -
which was highly desirable when I found myself putting names of about
190 people on an A4 slide showing a family chart (for my niece's
wedding).
Peter
Jan 25, 2012, 8:59:17 AM1/25/12
to
On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:26:09 -0000, "Harrison Genealogy"
<bi...@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote:
>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>incl all Office formats!
>
>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>from the M/Soft product !
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>regards
>
>Bill
Probably because the OP already has Word 07/2010.
<bi...@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote:
>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>incl all Office formats!
>
>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>from the M/Soft product !
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>regards
>
>Bill
Now if you'd made your suggestion earlier...
--
Peter Thomas
Researching: Hone - Oxfordshire & Glam; Samuel(s)- Swansea Llanelly & Gower;
Thomas - Morriston & Clydach; Harris - Aberdare; Pope, Parker & Broome - Salop
Wain(e) - Cardiff
(Reply-to address is a spam trap, please reply to the group)
Charlie Hoffpauir
Jan 25, 2012, 9:55:38 AM1/25/12
to
>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>incl all Office formats!
>
>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>from the M/Soft product !
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>regards
>
>Bill
>
<snip>
>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>incl all Office formats!
>
>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>from the M/Soft product !
>
>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
>regards
>
>Bill
>
Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
I just missing something?
herman...@invalid.be.invalid
Jan 25, 2012, 10:25:21 AM1/25/12
to
Tables" and the help items on these.
Herman Viaene
--
Veel mensen danken hun goed geweten aan hun slecht geheugen. (G. Bomans)
Lots of people owe their good conscience to their bad memory (G. Bomans)
Tim Powys-Lybbe
Jan 25, 2012, 12:39:28 PM1/25/12
to
Microsoft's paragraph numbering system. All the paragraphs get numbered
from 1.1 to 1.99 when even Microsoft 97 takes them through 1.1 to 8.1,
etc. This is on some documents from a lawyer and they may just have
done something special.
--
Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org
for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
Charlie Hoffpauir
Jan 25, 2012, 8:51:47 PM1/25/12
to
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:25:21 +0100, herman...@invalid.be.invalid
wrote:
>Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:26:09 -0000, "Harrison Genealogy"
>> <bi...@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>>>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>>>incl all Office formats!
>>>
>>>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>>>from the M/Soft product !
>>>
>>>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>>>
>>>regards
>>>
>>>Bill
>>>
>> <snip>
>> Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
>> alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
>> handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
>> also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
>> I just missing something?
>
>Apparently yes, you must have missed it. See menu "Insert - Indexes and
>Tables" and the help items on these.
>
>Herman Viaene
Thanks Herman, for that information. I guess I was "mis-remembering"
the problems I had when I tried Libra Office. I downloaded it again
today and sure enough, the index is there. But it seems that wasn't
really the problem I had.
My genealogy program (RootsMagic) produces a publication in either PDF
or RTF form. I use RTF so I can then work with the "book" in Word
before publishing it to my web site. The problem is seems is simply
that Libra Office just won't read the RTF file. It "says" it reads it,
but the bulk of the file is blank, including the index. I guess this
is why I was thinking that it didn't include an index.
wrote:
>Charlie Hoffpauir wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 09:26:09 -0000, "Harrison Genealogy"
>> <bi...@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
>>>alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
>>>incl all Office formats!
>>>
>>>Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
>>>from the M/Soft product !
>>>
>>>http://www.libreoffice.org/
>>>
>>>regards
>>>
>>>Bill
>>>
>> <snip>
>> Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
>> alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
>> handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
>> also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
>> I just missing something?
>
>Apparently yes, you must have missed it. See menu "Insert - Indexes and
>Tables" and the help items on these.
>
>Herman Viaene
the problems I had when I tried Libra Office. I downloaded it again
today and sure enough, the index is there. But it seems that wasn't
really the problem I had.
My genealogy program (RootsMagic) produces a publication in either PDF
or RTF form. I use RTF so I can then work with the "book" in Word
before publishing it to my web site. The problem is seems is simply
that Libra Office just won't read the RTF file. It "says" it reads it,
but the bulk of the file is blank, including the index. I guess this
is why I was thinking that it didn't include an index.
Steve Hayes
Jan 25, 2012, 1:30:57 PM1/25/12
to
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:55:38 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir <inv...@invalid.com>
wrote:
>Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
>alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
>handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
>also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
>I just missing something?
I just pulled a Word 97 document into Open Office 3.3, saved it as .odt
format, and the indexes came through perfectly.
A lot of the indexing of the document was actually done using Word 2010.
But I think your probl;em is similar to the OP - don't delete the version you
are used to until you are familiar with the new version. I can index a
document using either Word 97 or Word 2010, but when it comes to styles, I'm
clueless about OpenOffice and Word 2010, and prefer Word 97. And styles are
one thing that doesn't make a happy transition from one word processor to
another. You can easily end up with 25 different versions of Heading 2 -- and
when you try to make a table of contents out of that, a horrible mess ensues.
wrote:
>Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
>alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
>handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
>also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
>I just missing something?
format, and the indexes came through perfectly.
A lot of the indexing of the document was actually done using Word 2010.
But I think your probl;em is similar to the OP - don't delete the version you
are used to until you are familiar with the new version. I can index a
document using either Word 97 or Word 2010, but when it comes to styles, I'm
clueless about OpenOffice and Word 2010, and prefer Word 97. And styles are
one thing that doesn't make a happy transition from one word processor to
another. You can easily end up with 25 different versions of Heading 2 -- and
when you try to make a table of contents out of that, a horrible mess ensues.
J. Hugh Sullivan
Jan 26, 2012, 9:47:14 AM1/26/12
to
On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:51:47 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir
<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
>Thanks Herman, for that information. I guess I was "mis-remembering"
>the problems I had when I tried Libra Office. I downloaded it again
>today and sure enough, the index is there. But it seems that wasn't
>really the problem I had.
>
>My genealogy program (RootsMagic) produces a publication in either PDF
>or RTF form. I use RTF so I can then work with the "book" in Word
>before publishing it to my web site. The problem is seems is simply
>that Libra Office just won't read the RTF file. It "says" it reads it,
>but the bulk of the file is blank, including the index. I guess this
>is why I was thinking that it didn't include an index.
Have you purchased the new RM update?
<inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
>Thanks Herman, for that information. I guess I was "mis-remembering"
>the problems I had when I tried Libra Office. I downloaded it again
>today and sure enough, the index is there. But it seems that wasn't
>really the problem I had.
>
>My genealogy program (RootsMagic) produces a publication in either PDF
>or RTF form. I use RTF so I can then work with the "book" in Word
>before publishing it to my web site. The problem is seems is simply
>that Libra Office just won't read the RTF file. It "says" it reads it,
>but the bulk of the file is blank, including the index. I guess this
>is why I was thinking that it didn't include an index.
Seems to me like Bruce is having some problems as reported several
times a day on the user group. I never buy an update until the
problems are sorted out, but they are not getting sorted very fast
this time.
What say you?
Hugh
herman...@invalid.be.invalid
Jan 27, 2012, 6:36:13 AM1/27/12
to
Steve Hayes wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:55:38 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir
> <inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
>>alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
>>handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
>>also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
>>I just missing something?
>
> I just pulled a Word 97 document into Open Office 3.3, saved it as .odt
> format, and the indexes came through perfectly.
>
> A lot of the indexing of the document was actually done using Word 2010.
>
> But I think your probl;em is similar to the OP - don't delete the version
> you are used to until you are familiar with the new version. I can index a
> document using either Word 97 or Word 2010, but when it comes to styles,
> I'm clueless about OpenOffice and Word 2010, and prefer Word 97. And
> styles are one thing that doesn't make a happy transition from one word
> processor to another. You can easily end up with 25 different versions of
> Heading 2 -- and when you try to make a table of contents out of that, a
> horrible mess ensues.
>
>
It is the same in OpenOffice (or LibreOffice for that matter) as in Word:
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:55:38 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir
> <inv...@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>>Sorry to join this discussion so late, but I'm looking for an
>>alternative to Word, but I really need a word processor that can
>>handle word's indexing. I tried Open Office some time ago, and think I
>>also tried Libre Office, and it seems neither will handle indexing. Am
>>I just missing something?
>
> I just pulled a Word 97 document into Open Office 3.3, saved it as .odt
> format, and the indexes came through perfectly.
>
> A lot of the indexing of the document was actually done using Word 2010.
>
> But I think your probl;em is similar to the OP - don't delete the version
> you are used to until you are familiar with the new version. I can index a
> document using either Word 97 or Word 2010, but when it comes to styles,
> I'm clueless about OpenOffice and Word 2010, and prefer Word 97. And
> styles are one thing that doesn't make a happy transition from one word
> processor to another. You can easily end up with 25 different versions of
> Heading 2 -- and when you try to make a table of contents out of that, a
> horrible mess ensues.
>
>
the only place to change a style is in the Styles window. If you start
meddling with its formatting in the actual document itself, you're creating
a whole mess, yes sure, but that is your own fault.
BTW, that's the reason why I keep saying that the mayor load of Word
processing tutorials and courses (including those from Microsoft and OO) are
worthless, because they teach the users to meddle first instead of working
in a structured way.
Charlie Hoffpauir
Jan 27, 2012, 10:54:10 AM1/27/12
to
Yes, I have version 5. There's quite a lot to like about it. I waited
over a month after it came out before I upgraded for the same reasons
you wait.... but as you say, there's still a lot of chatter about
problems. The "good" thing (for me) is that I never see those
problems. It's probably because I don't use a lot of the new features.
J. Hugh Sullivan
Jan 27, 2012, 2:41:55 PM1/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 09:54:10 -0600, Charlie Hoffpauir
Or, maybe you are being too modest and it's your expertise.
Hugh
Hugh
Charlie Hoffpauir
Jan 27, 2012, 8:28:25 PM1/27/12
to
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 19:41:55 GMT, Ea...@bellsouth.net (J. Hugh
LOL!
Hardly.
I'm really kind of "stuck" with the features that were in RM back at
version 3 (I think), since I had so much data already using the
original means of inserting places and sources, and used the version 3
form for sources.... which are now "free form" sources under ver 4 and
5.
I checked my life expectancy on the social security site, and I'm not
expected to live long enough to change all the sources and places to
the new formats. <VBG>
Hardly.
I'm really kind of "stuck" with the features that were in RM back at
version 3 (I think), since I had so much data already using the
original means of inserting places and sources, and used the version 3
form for sources.... which are now "free form" sources under ver 4 and
5.
I checked my life expectancy on the social security site, and I'm not
expected to live long enough to change all the sources and places to
the new formats. <VBG>
Harrison Genealogy
Jan 28, 2012, 7:20:14 AM1/28/12
to gen...@rootsweb.com
Roots Magic Essentials was FREE recently on one of the Family History
Magazines ....
I know it's a cut down version but well worth the cost of the Mag .... I
have the RM version 5 as an upgrade (not as expensive!)
Regards
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: gencmp-...@rootsweb.com [mailto:gencmp-...@rootsweb.com] On
Behalf Of Charlie Hoffpauir
Sent: 28 January 2012 01:28
To: gen...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Removing Word 97
Magazines ....
I know it's a cut down version but well worth the cost of the Mag .... I
have the RM version 5 as an upgrade (not as expensive!)
Regards
Bill
-----Original Message-----
From: gencmp-...@rootsweb.com [mailto:gencmp-...@rootsweb.com] On
Behalf Of Charlie Hoffpauir
Sent: 28 January 2012 01:28
To: gen...@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: Removing Word 97
Ian Goddard
Jan 28, 2012, 9:33:22 AM1/28/12
to
Harrison Genealogy wrote:
> Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
> alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
> incl all Office formats!
>
> Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
> from the M/Soft product !
>
> http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
One way to tell the difference is using the spreadsheet to use timelines
> Why not use Libra Office ... (used to be Open Office) the FREE clone and
> alternative to M/Soft Office Suite will load and save docs in many formats
> incl all Office formats!
>
> Bar from the names of the Office Suites you will not tell the difference
> from the M/Soft product !
>
> http://www.libreoffice.org/
>
to sort out multiple families with he same surname. I import lists of
baptism events, baptismal date in one column, child's name in the next,
father's name in the next, then mother's name, father's occupation &
abode if available and establish a list of years in column A. I then
select the strip of names for an event & place in against the
appropriate year. If there are chronologically overlapping families
distinguished by different parental details they are placed in separate
blocks of columns side-by-side.
It's a very effective way of sorting data. Providing you use OO or LO.
I can't find a way to select a block of cells in Excel & drag it.
--
Ian
The Hotmail address is my spam-bin. Real mail address is iang
at austonley org uk
Charlie Hoffpauir
Jan 28, 2012, 10:08:54 AM1/28/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:20:14 -0000, "Harrison Genealogy"
<bi...@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote:
>Roots Magic Essentials was FREE recently on one of the Family History
>Magazines ....
>
Actually RootsMagic Essentials is and always has been free... no need
<bi...@harrisongenealogy.co.uk> wrote:
>Roots Magic Essentials was FREE recently on one of the Family History
>Magazines ....
>
to buy any magazine. Just go to
http://www.rootsmagic.com/try/rootsmagic/
J. Hugh Sullivan
Jan 28, 2012, 11:10:25 AM1/28/12
to
both programs and had several mutually interesting (apparently)
conversations with Bruce. I bought a copy of Legacy years ago and, for
a long time, used both in parallel.
>
>I checked my life expectancy on the social security site, and I'm not
>expected to live long enough to change all the sources and places to
>the new formats. <VBG>
I still have RM4 and use it for special purposes but, for the reasons,
>I checked my life expectancy on the social security site, and I'm not
>expected to live long enough to change all the sources and places to
>the new formats. <VBG>
you mention plus others, it is not now my preferred program. My life
expectancy is considerably less than yours. :)
I will hasten to add that RM is better in some respects than Legacy
(speed for one) and someone choosing to use either program, in my
opinion, is way ahead of every other program except perhaps TMG.
Hugh
J. Hugh Sullivan
Jan 28, 2012, 12:19:30 PM1/28/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:33:22 +0000, Ian Goddard
<godd...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>It's a very effective way of sorting data. Providing you use OO or LO.
> I can't find a way to select a block of cells in Excel & drag it.
>
>--
>Ian
I don't understand. My use of Excel requires me to drag and drop or
<godd...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
>It's a very effective way of sorting data. Providing you use OO or LO.
> I can't find a way to select a block of cells in Excel & drag it.
>
>--
>Ian
copy and paste in both financial and genealogy records.
Hugh
Denis Beauregard
Jan 30, 2012, 3:54:58 PM1/30/12
to
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 14:33:22 +0000, Ian Goddard
<godd...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in soc.genealogy.computing:
>It's a very effective way of sorting data. Providing you use OO or LO.
> I can't find a way to select a block of cells in Excel & drag it.
of cells. Something better than Excel where you have to select a
group using the thin line around the group. However, with Excel,
you use the same method to select one cell while you have to use
some combination of keys to move one cell.
I prefer to use Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V with LO because you are told if
there is something in the cell before erasing it (Excel won't tell
you). But with Excel, you can move and be advised with the mouse,
no need to press a key.
pbl...@pcug.org.au
Feb 3, 2012, 3:37:38 PM2/3/12
to
Given the recent announcement at http://blogs.office.com/b/office-exec/archive/2012/01/30/quot-office-15-quot-begins-technical-preview.aspx, I'd be inclined to move to your newer version without looking backwards to a product that reached End of Life 6 or 7 years ago.
Paul
Paul
0 new messages