[OLUG] Misbehaving Microsoft products: what to do?

[Dave Burchell]

An old pal and former co-worker called me Monday.  She's got a problem,
and guess what?  It is a problem with a Microsoft product!  I know, I
was skeptical at first, too.  But apparently Microsoft Word has a bug
or two.  Whodaguessedit?

The story: my friend works in an all-Mac office.  A group of people are
collaborating on a 200+ page document using Word for Mac.  Word is
misbehaving, mangling the font changes, screwing up the pagination,
fouling up the headers, botching the table of contents, etc., etc.  I'm
no Word expert, but I've seen this before when merging sections of text
into one document: Word goes to pieces and try as you might you can't
fix up your text.  (Too bad it doesn't have a Word Perfect-style
"Reveal Codes" feature; that's how I always fixed WP 5.1 for DOS's
hissy fits.  But I digress...)  The victims whiled away many an hour
with Microsoft's tech support, but to no avail.

My friend's request: do I know any Mac and Microsoft Word experts she
could hire to get her people out of this mess?  I answered that I
didn't know, but I'd ask the closest bunch of people I could think of
-- you folks.

However, I suspect the answer is this:  No one can save you from
Microsoft Word when trying to do a big project.  It's just not robust
enough for the job.  The only answer is to ditch Word for this project
and use something else.  (Linux, LaTeX, and LyX come to mind.  Hmm,
visions of Yellow Dogs...)

However, my friend doesn't want to have to teach her users something
new (and I see her point).  And she doesn't want to abandon her Macs
(again, understandable).

If this were my project I'd go with XML.  A big document like this
makes XML worth the trouble; you won't have to change the font on 300
level-two headers by hand.  I'd either write a DTD or borrow one that
is already in use somewhere.  With the DTD in place and the right
editor, such as Xeena from IBM, the users don't have to learn to do
much -- just insert text into the XML editor with the right "tag"
(e.g., head1, footnote, blockquote).  Perhaps I'd use XSL to convert to
LaTeX, then produce final formats of PostScript and PDF.  (In my work
with XML I've just used Perl scripts to make HTML so far.)  Everything
is headed for XML, right, so why not beat the rush?  Does Microsoft
Office 2000 have XML support?  If so, then that is their migration
path.  (Of course, given Word's track record they may be better off
with clay tablets.)

That's my rant; what is your advice?

And does anyone believe they have the needed skills (or know someone
who does) to take on the consulting job?  (Does anyone have the
sadistic streak needed to take on Word's bugs where Microsoft Tech
Support has failed?  Or the bravery to recommend leaving Word for
something that works?)

By the way, since Paul is goading me, I guess I could give a talk on
XML at some OLUG meeting if the demand is there.  I could give a BRIEF
talk on where to get started with it and how I made it work for me and
my users.  Perhaps a half hour of me droning and then an installfest?

-- 
Dave Burchell                                          40.49'N, 96.41'W
Free your mind and your software will follow.              402-467-1619
http://incolor.inetnebr.com/burchell/                  burchell at acm.org     

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: olug-unsubscribe at bstc.net
For additional commands, e-mail: olug-help at bstc.net