Of All Things Why Aren't Microsoft Products Fully Compatible With Each Other???

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by E. Scrooge, Oct 7, 2005.

  1. E. Scrooge

    E. Scrooge Guest

    Small problem for starters on brand new PC was despite having MS Works 8 the
    spell checker in OE wouldn't work. A search of the Net suggested making
    sure a certain file or 2 was in Proof and Outlook Express.

    Soon fixed the OE spell check by uninstalling Works 8 (Works 7 has the same
    problem going by what's on the Net about it), and then installing Works
    2000.

    Only trouble is MS Works 2000 (Word) could no longer make any sense of MS
    WPS files that were created and saved by MS Works 8 (Word).

    Problems with software running on products from completely different
    companies are hardly too surprising, but MS Works 2000 and MS Works 8 are
    identical products both from the same very outfit.

    Fortunately it only involved 3 files, but if anyone is sharing Word WPS that
    they've created with other Word users, then they're completely stuffed if
    they're not all using exactly the same version instead of versions which are
    only a few years apart.

    That's just crazy that 2 Word processors from the same company can't even
    understand the files that each of them has created.

    The small stuff up of the spell checker not working in OE6 with Works 7/8 is
    a backwards step or 2 as well, and not a sign of a damn update to fix it.

    E. Scrooge
     
    E. Scrooge, Oct 7, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. E. Scrooge

    Peter Guest

    try moving files between different versions of MS Publisher

    The other common problem is moving database data between MS Works and MS
    Access.


    Peter
     
    Peter, Oct 7, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. E. Scrooge

    GraB Guest

    I can't believe this is still happening. I had MS Works 3 ages ago
    and found that Word couldn't open a Works document. Installed
    ClarisWorks instead.

    I wonder if the latest OpenOffice will open both those files? Would
    be interesting to find out.
     
    GraB, Oct 7, 2005
    #3
  4. E. Scrooge

    E. Scrooge Guest

    Hardly any excuse for it to purposely create such incompatibilities between
    products which Microsoft had created in the first place.

    No doubt they'll make sure any old XBox game will play the next version of
    the XBox even though they don't to make sure similar PC products are fully
    compatible.

    Somehow it must go against the anti trust laws for Microsoft to making sure
    that similar products aren't even compatible.

    There's something about ULA (or whatever) for other products of software
    from other companies to be able to work on XP OS, while Microducts doesn't
    worry if their own products are conpatible with each other or not.
    It's hardly the way to help link most PCs together when they can't even
    understand the files created on very similar Microsoft products.
    Of course the problem goes right to back to MS HQ in the US which do all the
    designing of the products in the first place.

    E. Scrooge
     
    E. Scrooge, Oct 7, 2005
    #4
  5. E. Scrooge

    Rob J Guest

    Actually, Works could be a buy-in - the Mac version certainly was
    (Productivity Software)
     
    Rob J, Oct 7, 2005
    #5
  6. Remember Conway's Law: any piece of software reflects the organizational
    structure that produced it.

    The fact that different versions of Works have so much trouble exchanging
    documents obviously reflects the fact that they are produced by different
    groups at different times within Microsoft, with little or no communication
    between them.

    And why don't they communicate? Because they don't need to. Obviously
    Microsoft's marketing department has determined that Works users rarely
    upgrade, and hence each version can effectively be considered to be a
    different product, while there are no large Microsoft customers running a
    mixture of versions of Works, with the buying clout to insist that they
    interoperate properly.

    Remember the rule with closed-source vendors: you either do things the way
    they want you to do them, or you don't do them at all.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Oct 7, 2005
    #6
  7. E. Scrooge

    GraB Guest

    So, though they intended to produce a software 'horse' they produced a
    software 'camel'.
     
    GraB, Oct 7, 2005
    #7
  8. E. Scrooge

    E. Scrooge Guest

    I had a version of Claris Works years ago. It was great what could be done
    with it.

    E. Scrooge
     
    E. Scrooge, Oct 7, 2005
    #8
  9. E. Scrooge

    GraB Guest

    I can't believe this is still happening. I had MS Works 3 ages ago
    I have kept the discs with ClarisWorks 1, 3, and I think I might have
    version 5 somewhere. Good to install on low-end PCs for people who
    just want a simple word processor that is light on resources.
     
    GraB, Oct 7, 2005
    #9
  10. E. Scrooge

    E. Scrooge Guest

    Funny thing is, as far as Word goes at least, there's hardly any difference
    in the look and use of them between the early ones and Word 8. Instead
    Microsoft has made damn sure that they're not compatible, as far as any file
    sharing goes even if the files have the same "WPS" extensions.

    Other products get along a damn sight better. Imagine if saved jpeg images
    created on PSP won't work on any other product from any other company other
    than on PSP.
    And that's exactly what the nonsense with these Microsoft Works products is
    like.

    E. Scrooge
     
    E. Scrooge, Oct 7, 2005
    #10
  11. E. Scrooge

    E. Scrooge Guest

    You can take it to same waterhole but don't expect the fussy bugger to drink
    out of it, especially if the camel's older brother has already had a drink
    from the waterhole only a few days earlier.

    E. Scrooge
     
    E. Scrooge, Oct 7, 2005
    #11
  12. E. Scrooge

    -=rjh=- Guest

    It doesn't; I just tried (using OOo 2.0 and Works 3.0). Sun's version
    might - I think it may have more conversion plugins. The only migration
    path for documents is to convert to an intermediate format that OOo can
    read (usually .doc and xls).
     
    -=rjh=-, Oct 7, 2005
    #12
  13. E. Scrooge

    shannon Guest

    http://www.abiword.org/ is way lighter than openoffice.
    Its native XML
    Its simple and free and works on Windows (95b onwards) OSX and Linux distros
    Its got import export filters for most old file formats, claris,
    wordperfect, word, rtf, palm, html
     
    shannon, Oct 7, 2005
    #13
  14. E. Scrooge

    Bling Bling Guest

    That incompatibility is deliberately done - to force people to "upgrade"
    to the most recent versions of Micro$oft' software.


    Bling Bling
     
    Bling Bling, Oct 7, 2005
    #14
  15. E. Scrooge

    Bling Bling Guest

    .... unless, like the Commonwealth of Massitucits (sorry for phonetic
    spelling) you're not threatened or bullied by Micro$oft and have specified
    what software suppliers need to do in order to be elligible to win your
    contract.


    Bling Bling
     
    Bling Bling, Oct 7, 2005
    #15
  16. E. Scrooge

    Gordon Guest

    Massachusetts, Mass a chu etts. Okay the sits/etts is open for debate ;-)
    There is a heck lot more at stake than this. MS is claiming that it's XML
    is open but then they plan to charge you for doing things with it unless
    you have paid them $US.

    Read the URL below, for it is interesting.

    I care not which OS platform you may chose, or otherwise run, but if you
    send me a file from it I *expect* that I shall be able to read it easily.

    The Open Document format/cursade is picking up speed like an idea whose
    idea has come.

    All right ASCII, American Standard Code of Information **Interchange**,
    you rule okay until now, and I guess you will always will. Okay URL tell
    it to them,

    http://www.dwheeler.com/essays/why-opendocument-won.html
     
    Gordon, Oct 8, 2005
    #16
  17. E. Scrooge

    Gordon Guest

    Joint Pictures Expert Group, jpeg for short. A *group* of people who had
    the aim of making a picture format first, not money.

    Jpeg is an open standard and thus everyone/anyone can use it, freely.

    I am glad you see the advantages of open standards.
     
    Gordon, Oct 8, 2005
    #17
  18. E. Scrooge

    Gordon Guest

    No, NO. Two departments in the aircraft industry of the same company
    produced a fighter jet and a mass people mover and then expected their
    customers to move/travel freely between them.
     
    Gordon, Oct 8, 2005
    #18
  19. E. Scrooge

    Gordon Guest

    Ah, I rest my case. (Yes, there is no Smiley icon)
     
    Gordon, Oct 8, 2005
    #19
  20. E. Scrooge

    Gordon Guest

    As it is only a word processor. Nothing wrong with that *nix* philisophy
    says that every programme should do one thing, but do it *very* well.
    So is Open Office 2
    Ah, as a word processor only, it can "afford" to drill down into history.
    Still there we go people doing what they think is important; not what
    their wallet says.
     
    Gordon, Oct 8, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.