🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:12:50 -0500, Dave Garland
<dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:

>On 4/23/2018 1:04 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
>> On Monday, April 23, 2018 at 12:00:04 AM UTC-6, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> 
>>> 	However the Word solution came with a bit of paper that said it
>>> would work and the Star Office one didn't and the bit of paper was deemed
>>> more important than evidence.
>> 
>> Yes, because the evidence only shows you about the documents that already exist,
>> while the bit of paper shows you about documents that will be generated in the
>> future.
>> 
>> Microsoft does come out with new versions of Word from time to time, other
>> companies will use them, and they will likely make changes that it will take
>> time for the open-source community to keep up with.
>> 
>Not just LO, but the changes will threaten everyone with older 
>versions of Word, too. And in 3 decades of supporting individuals and 
>small businesses, I can count on one hand (maybe one finger) the 
>number of times that any of those new features were ever used. I can't 
>remember a single client who used macros (most would have stared 
>blankly and said "what's that?"). I interoperated with them for a 
>decade or more using a copy of Word 97 and never experienced an 
>incompatibility greater than not having the same fonts installed.
>
>Near as I could tell, the new MS versions were mostly a way to goad 
>people into unnecessary "upgrades" and generate repeat sales. Some 
>people just  want the new shiny, and some were frightened when the 
>popup appeared that said "if you save in the old format, you're 
>probably going to break things". And some because people were sending 
>them documents they couldn't open any more.

After my employer left the caost after Katrina, I apllied for a number
of jobs. Those that wanted a Word document of my resume, all wanted a
different year version of Word to be used.

I used Open Office and submitted to each of them in the Word format
they wanted.