Choosing between Word Formats

[annpeace]

Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Processor: Intel

I can't decide whether to save documents as .doc or .docx.

I do interchange documents frequently with people who have pc based operating systems; also, many of my documents were created on a pc based operating system.

What are the pros and cons of saving documents each way?

Thanks very much.

 

[Phillip Jones]

For now Doc is the more like to receive a safe trip. perhaps 90% of PC
users have remained with PC Office version below 2007 (the non XML type)

And 2008 isn't receiving a warm reception either due to leaving out VBA
and for all intents and purposes kill Macros depending upon VBA.

So I'd find out from the person you wan to send to if they have Office
2007 or Office 2008 (XML version or 2003 PC/2004 Mac. Send DOCX to
2007/2008 users and DOC to everyyyy one else.

And to be on safe side to keep from getting mangled in the Transfer Zip
the file before sending even if it makes the file larger.

Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Processor: Intel

I can't decide whether to save documents as .doc or .docx.

I do interchange documents frequently with people who have pc based operating systems; also, many of my documents were created on a pc based operating system.

What are the pros and cons of saving documents each way?

Thanks very much.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[annpeace]

For now Doc is the more like to receive a safe trip. perhaps 90% of PC

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Anne:

I would stick to 2008 format (.docx) always. For several reasons:
* It is one quarter the size
* It is much, much more robust
* Documents can be fixed if they do corrupt
* The format supports all the new features that you bought Office 2008 to
get.

So: I would always work in .docx. Most people in the world can now read
and write the new format (there are free converters available for older
versions of Word).

Occasionally, you will have to send a file to someone who is too silly to
install the converter. You can then Save As to the old format if you need
to. But first, send them the new format: chances are, they won't notice

And always keep the original in .docx format: it's much safer.

Cheers



--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[Juergen Fenn]

So: I would always work in .docx. Most people in the world can now read
and write the new format (there are free converters available for older
versions of Word).

Occasionally, you will have to send a file to someone who is too silly to
install the converter.

No need to install a converter because a docx filter will be included in
OpenOffice.org 3 due to be released in September -- native binaries
for the Mac will be available, Beta2 has already been released -- very,
very promising version. You can work with docx on the Mac in OOo then.

Jürgen.

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Jurgen:

Sure, but Open Office can't handle a lot of the things in a Word document,
so you might lose a lot of data.

Of course, you might not lose "any" -- it all depends on what the documents
you want to handle contain. Always worth evaluating, but users wanting to
share documents in an Office environment need to do just that: carefully
evaluate to ensure that Open Office gives them all they need.

For text, I am sure most content will survive (with some compatibility
issues) but the graphics stuff -- not such a good result.

Cheers

No need to install a converter because a docx filter will be included in
OpenOffice.org 3 due to be released in September -- native binaries
for the Mac will be available, Beta2 has already been released -- very,
very promising version. You can work with docx on the Mac in OOo then.

Jürgen.

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[Phillip Jones]

John its not necessarily Silly.

I could be case like mine. I've tried to upgrade from OSX.3.9 on this
machine (7 times in fact) and it just won't go from OSX.3.9 to OSX.4.
So I am stuck using 2004.

In the case of PC perhaps some are still using machine that can't even
be upgraded to use XP. and therefore stuck.

The are probably many in these situations.

Yes I do have 2008 on my Laptop. But I'd rather use my Desktop.

So unless you know they have 2007/2008 or have 2003/2004 with installed
converter or you know that have a dedicated program such as DataViz It
would be better to send in Docx you know have 2007/2008 and Doc to the
rest and to prevent strange things happening zip them.

Hi Anne:

I would stick to 2008 format (.docx) always. For several reasons:
* It is one quarter the size
* It is much, much more robust
* Documents can be fixed if they do corrupt
* The format supports all the new features that you bought Office 2008 to
get.

So: I would always work in .docx. Most people in the world can now read
and write the new format (there are free converters available for older
versions of Word).

Occasionally, you will have to send a file to someone who is too silly to
install the converter. You can then Save As to the old format if you need
to. But first, send them the new format: chances are, they won't notice

And always keep the original in .docx format: it's much safer.

Cheers

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Phillip:

John its not necessarily Silly.

Well, "misguided" then We could ask how such users came to be misguided

I could be case like mine. I've tried to upgrade from OSX.3.9 on this
machine (7 times in fact) and it just won't go from OSX.3.9 to OSX.4.
So I am stuck using 2004.

I am sure that it will if you first format the hard disk

In the case of PC perhaps some are still using machine that can't even
be upgraded to use XP. and therefore stuck.

No. There is no such PC still running An operating system later than
Windows 3.x will do them, and any copy of Word later than Word 95. They
will all install the free .docx converters.

The are probably many in these situations.

I simply do not believe there are ANY people in such a condition. Anything
too old to load Windows 95/Word 97 is too old to get on the Internet.

So unless you know they have 2007/2008 or have 2003/2004 with installed
converter or you know that have a dedicated program such as DataViz It
would be better to send in Docx you know have 2007/2008 and Doc to the
rest and to prevent strange things happening zip them.

I strongly disagree. I strongly believe that all users of Word 2008 are
best advised to save in and work in the latest .docx format.

I further believe they are best to SEND that format to other people, always.
Everyone else can find a way to open the .docx format. There are no
exceptions.

Suggesting that users use anything else with Word 2008 is just sentencing
them to a long period of irritation, misery, and lost data.

Sorry Phillip: I just think it is a really bad idea to give that advice.
Very few users know enough to know WHY they would be better off in .docx,
and very few of them want to know. We are here because we are supposed to
know the difference and be able to give the questioners responsible advice.

A year ago, I could make a case for bothering with the old file formats.
Not any more. In any large workplace, the .docx converters have already
been installed. Users can run any flavour of Word younger than Word 95 in
..docx if they choose. If they do, they will save a lot of disk space and
document corruption.

Cheers

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[Phillip Jones]

Hi Phillip:



Well, "misguided" then We could ask how such users came to be misguided



I am sure that it will if you first format the hard disk

Yes It would. But where would I put all the application and Folder pray
tell. :-(

No. There is no such PC still running An operating system later than
Windows 3.x will do them, and any copy of Word later than Word 95. They
will all install the free .docx converters.


I simply do not believe there are ANY people in such a condition. Anything
too old to load Windows 95/Word 97 is too old to get on the Internet.


I strongly disagree. I strongly believe that all users of Word 2008 are
best advised to save in and work in the latest .docx format.

I further believe they are best to SEND that format to other people, always.
Everyone else can find a way to open the .docx format. There are no
exceptions.

Suggesting that users use anything else with Word 2008 is just sentencing
them to a long period of irritation, misery, and lost data.

Sorry Phillip: I just think it is a really bad idea to give that advice.
Very few users know enough to know WHY they would be better off in .docx,
and very few of them want to know. We are here because we are supposed to
know the difference and be able to give the questioners responsible advice.

A year ago, I could make a case for bothering with the old file formats.
Not any more. In any large workplace, the .docx converters have already
been installed. Users can run any flavour of Word younger than Word 95 in
.docx if they choose. If they do, they will save a lot of disk space and
document corruption.

That may work fine in the windows environment. But fact on Mac platform
the converter will actually update (in fact my version of 2004 is now at
11.5. I don't know how that was managed. but when I went to use it. it
told me although the converter is installed it will only run on system
x.4.9 or higher.
So in order for me to open Docx in this machine I will have to fork
over $100 bucks the Dataviz program, or fire up my Laptop.

Cheers

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[Juergen Fenn]

I strongly disagree. I strongly believe that all users of Word 2008 are
best advised to save in and work in the latest .docx format.

I further believe they are best to SEND that format to other people, always.
Everyone else can find a way to open the .docx format. There are no
exceptions.

This advise will only serve to promote the interest of Microsoft Corp.,
not that of the ordinary user.

We know that doc is *not* a data interchange format
<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html>. Neither is
docx because it is not an agreed standard, neither. Vice versa, ODF is,
which Microsoft does not support for reasons beyond reason. :-(

Most people out there can open doc files now, so perhaps we could agree
that docx is best for working on your file, but before sending it out to
someone you should export it to RTF or doc. Be aware that every export
or import will come with some loss of formatting.

Regards,
Jürgen.

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Jurgen:

Well, you are welcome to continue this religious argument if you wish. Many
of the rest of us lost interest in it a while ago For those that
haven't:

1) Your argument promotes the interests of Sun Corporation and IBM
Corporation, right? Yep!! These two little companies happen to make
competing word-processors. Word-processors that, so far, do not have enough
power to edit all the content of a .docx file.

I can readily understand why they are anxious to try to get rid of .docx --
their applications can't edit it properly

On the other hand, Microsoft is assisting in a project currently underway to
produce an ODF converter for Microsoft Word. Ummm.... It's an Open Source
project!!

Would you care to do a shareholder's declaration before you start posting
commercials in here?

2) The Microsoft OXML Format is ISO/IEC DIS 29500 and ECMA-376. And has
been for months. Did you think we didn't know that? Yes, I am aware that
technological powerhouses such as Venezuela have appealed. Wonder who
funded the legal work for that?

3) The competing ODF standard CANNOT contain all of the features of a
Microsoft Word document. ODF was developed as a "lowest common denominator"
to enable the use of XML on under-powered computers. That was a few years
ago: unless you are talking about a cell phone, there is no such thing these
days. And I doubt if many people would be trying to do complex documents on
a cell phone. They wouldn't! Really!

4) So if you save to RTF or DOC format, you WILL lose data. Whether that
matters, depends on what you have in your document. But presumably the
reason the users sprung 500 clams for Office 2008 was to get the new
features it has? If they save to another format, they'll lose them!

5) Interesting that you recommend RTF and DOC as your preferred formats!
They're both proprietary Microsoft formats. There is no intention to make
either of them into "Open" standards. And both have been deprecated: in 20
years time you may not be able to find software that will open such
documents.

6) I recommend storing precious documents in .DOCX because a) It is
massively stronger against corruption, b) It is much, much more fixable if
corruption does occur, and c) It's one quarter the size on disk.

7) .DOC is up to four times the size of DOCX, RTF is up to eight times the
size.

Jurgen: Are you sure you're advising users responsibly?

I mean, I can understand how you may believe that Sun Corporation and IBM
Corporation need the help (although last time I looked, IBM seemed to be
doing a bit better than Microsoft). I can understand that your share
portfolio may be involved here.

But seriously, I am struggling to see how your advice benefits the
questioners in here?

Many of the readers in here may not actually understand the complexities of
XML well enough to realise that they are being misinformed!

I am happy to join you in kicking Microsoft in places they deserve it -- but
to my mind, this is not one of them.

Cheers

This advise will only serve to promote the interest of Microsoft Corp.,
not that of the ordinary user.

We know that doc is *not* a data interchange format
<http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html>. Neither is
docx because it is not an agreed standard, neither. Vice versa, ODF is,
which Microsoft does not support for reasons beyond reason. :-(

Most people out there can open doc files now, so perhaps we could agree
that docx is best for working on your file, but before sending it out to
someone you should export it to RTF or doc. Be aware that every export
or import will come with some loss of formatting.

Regards,
Jürgen.

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[CyberTaz]

Hi Juergen -

I'll leave rebuttal to others but I am compelled to make one general point:

This is a public newsgroup dedicated to assistance of those who *do* use MS
Word - for whatever reason. Use of this forum for *any* type of politically
based proclamations or promotion of personal agendas is wholly inappropriate
& unproductive.

Diatribe of this nature should be left to the blogs, chatrooms & other
forums intended for the purpose. I'm not challenging your "rights", but
questioning the propriety of how & where you exercise them. The first step
in having one's "rights" respected, however, emanates from one's respect for
the rights of others.

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[Juergen Fenn]

John,

Well, you are welcome to continue this religious argument if you wish. Many
of the rest of us lost interest in it a while ago For those that
haven't:

I'm glad you haven't because the question which format to choose when
you want to hand on your date is not a religious one, it is of high
practical importance.

1) Your argument promotes the interests of Sun Corporation and IBM
Corporation, right? Yep!! These two little companies happen to make
competing word-processors. Word-processors that, so far, do not have enough
power to edit all the content of a .docx file.

They don't need to do so because docx is a standard MS will no longer
promote as they have announced to switch to ODF as well. Neither Office
2007 nor Office 2008 is able to produce the XML format drafted in the
ISO specifications properly.

Would you care to do a shareholder's declaration before you start posting
commercials in here?

I won't beacause I am not working for Sun nor for IBM. I am doing
documentation work for TeX and friends, as you will probably know.

2) The Microsoft OXML Format is ISO/IEC DIS 29500 and ECMA-376. And has
been for months. Did you think we didn't know that? Yes, I am aware that
technological powerhouses such as Venezuela have appealed. Wonder who
funded the legal work for that?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML#Standardization

Could you please stop discriminating against other countries that have
as much say in the standardising process as have, say, the U.S. or the E.U.?

BTW, this legal action does make sense. MS apparently did not play
according to the rules. Reminds me of how the Olympic Games were given
to China or to Russia... :-(

3) The competing ODF standard CANNOT contain all of the features of a
Microsoft Word document. [...]

I never said so.

4) So if you save to RTF or DOC format, you WILL lose data.

That's what I said, too. Please see above.

However, it does not change anything about the fact that docx is not a
suitable format for exchanging data because very few people out there
will be able to use it. E.g., no publishing house in my field of
research accepts docx files. If they accept word processor files they
ask for MS DOC or OOo RTF.

5) Interesting that you recommend RTF and DOC as your preferred formats!
They're both proprietary Microsoft formats. There is no intention to make
either of them into "Open" standards. And both have been deprecated: in 20
years time you may not be able to find software that will open such
documents.

Please don't be ridiculous. Twenty years' time is almost eternity in IT.
RTF is at least a plain text format. MS has hardly provided an
application that was able to read the file format of its direct
predecessor. Please remember the problems by switching from MSO2004 to
MSO2008 we discussed over the last months...

6) I recommend storing precious documents in .DOCX because a) It is
massively stronger against corruption,

ZIP archives do not tolerate any kind of error...

b) It is much, much more fixable if
corruption does occur,

...provided your archive does not get corrupt...

and c) It's one quarter the size on disk.

...which is not exactly what we were looking for in times of decreasing
cost per storage space unit...

The most important reason why ZIPped archives were introduced as a file
format in OpenOffice was that it was easy to handle for users as a
single file while it contains several XML files with all the data.
Despite the disadvantages this entails... MS has drawn on this idea and
now also uses ZIP archives for its docs formats now.

I recommended you store and to work on your data in DOCX in Office 2008
and to hand on your data in RTF and DOC, and that's perfectly right,
unless you know for sure your counterpart prefers the DOCX format.

Regards,
Jürgen.

 

[Juergen Fenn]

Bob,

Diatribe of this nature should be left to the blogs, chatrooms & other
forums intended for the purpose. I'm not challenging your "rights", but
questioning the propriety of how & where you exercise them.

I am very sorry that Microsoft Corp. does restrict the freedom of speech
on its newsserver.

The first step
in having one's "rights" respected, however, emanates from one's respect for
the rights of others.

Could you please elaborate on how the posting you replied to did violate
the rights of others?

Regards,
Jürgen.

 

[CyberTaz]

Bob,


I am very sorry that Microsoft Corp. does restrict the freedom of speech
on its newsserver.

Microsoft Corp. does NOT restrict freedom of speech, nor did I suggest that
they do. Further, I am not Microsoft Corp. nor am I an agent of the
corporation. Both points are explicit in that passage.

Could you please elaborate on how the posting you replied to did violate
the rights of others?

There is nothing in this passage that alleges "violation" - the issue is one
of *respect* - exactly as stated.

Regards,
Jürgen.

I don't intend to continue this conversation on the very same grounds - it
has no place in this group.

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Jurgen:

I'm glad you haven't because the question which format to choose when
you want to hand on your date is not a religious one, it is of high
practical importance.

It is: You have two choices: Lose data, or don't.

In here, my recommendation to everyone who needs to ask is "Choose .docx,
you won't lose any data." I might give a much longer discussion if I were
talking to an industry professional, and if I knew what was in the document
in question. But my advice is likely to be the same: use the native format.

However, industry professionals are generally not who we are helping in this
forum. So my advice in here is much simpler: "Always use .docx -- so you
won't lose any data."

They don't need to do so because docx is a standard MS will no longer
promote as they have announced to switch to ODF as well.

Rubbish Can I have an ounce of whatever you're smoking

Could you please stop discriminating against other countries that have
as much say in the standardising process as have, say, the U.S. or the E.U.?

I am not discriminating against anyone. I am simply pointing out that the
countries who have objected could not afford the legal costs of doing so,
unless one of Microsoft's competitors paid their way.

However, it does not change anything about the fact that docx is not a
suitable format for exchanging data because very few people out there
will be able to use it. E.g., no publishing house in my field of
research accepts docx files. If they accept word processor files they
ask for MS DOC or OOo RTF.

Well, I guess your publishing houses must be a bit behind the times. This
is actually a silly argument. Most professional publishing houses want
"camera-ready" PDF.

If the publishing house is going to do the finishing work, then they will
ask for an editable format. In that case, they will negotiate. For a
$30,000 print job, trust me, they WILL negotiate. The print shops I use
most of the time will go out and BUY a PC or a Mac if that's what it takes
to win the business

Please don't be ridiculous. Twenty years' time is almost eternity in IT.
RTF is at least a plain text format. MS has hardly provided an
application that was able to read the file format of its direct
predecessor. Please remember the problems by switching from MSO2004 to
MSO2008 we discussed over the last months...

{Gales of laughter} You REALLY don't know much about this, do you? Have a
look in a .docx and come back when you're a little better informed.

Cheers

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]