How to select the compatibility mode?

[Bill C.]

For some unknown reason, I'm getting a smaller version of the new document
page. Previously, it was a full screen page and had (Compatibility Mode) at
the top. The small screen makes it harder to view when preparing and editing
a newly prepared document. How can I get the full size document as I have
done previously?

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

Click the middle of the three boxes in the upper right corner (next to
the red box with the X)?

Click and drag on any of the four edges of the window?

 

[Stefan Blom]

Or change the zoom?

--
Stefan Blom
Microsoft Word MVP



Click the middle of the three boxes in the upper right corner (next to
the red box with the X)?

Click and drag on any of the four edges of the window?

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

The label "(Compatibility Mode)" has nothing to do with the window size or
zoom ratio (not sure which is the issue here); it merely indicates that you
have opened a Word 97-2003 document (.doc format) in Word 2007.

If the entire Word window is smaller than desired, click the Maximize button
at the top right corner to fill the screen with the window, or drag the
edges to make the window larger.

If the issue is that the Word document is displayed too small in the Word
window, use the Zoom slider on the status bar to increase the Zoom ratio
(the default, denoted by the mark in the center, is 100%).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

 

[Stefan Blom]

If the issue is that the Word document is displayed too small in the Word
window, use the Zoom slider on the status bar to increase the Zoom ratio
(the default, denoted by the mark in the center, is 100%).

FWIW, I must say that I find the Zoom slider to be a poor replacement for
the Zoom drop down of previous versions.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

I miss the ability to type in a specific number. And then there are the
issues people have had with Word insisting on displaying multiple pages at
certain zooms (I see that in Print Preview even in Word 2003). It's nice to
have it readily available without having to click on the Zoom dropdown,
though. But I haven't used 2007 enough to really form an opinion.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

You type a specific Zoom number by clicking on the Zoom percent number
to the left of the slider. A panel opens with three (all of three!)
preset figures, and a place to type the zoom you want.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Ah, very clever. I hadn't moused over the number to see that it was a
button. This is actually the classic View | Zoom dialog, which handily
offers the "page width" and "text width" (formerly "margin width") options.
Another good feature is that the preview shows how the text will actually
appear at that ratio.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

You type a specific Zoom number by clicking on the Zoom percent number
to the left of the slider. A panel opens with three (all of three!)
preset figures, and a place to type the zoom you want.

 

[Stefan Blom]

But it is still more work than the Zoom drop down, which enabled you to
either select one of the choices offered or directly type in a percentage.

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

And I was used to FrameMaker, where the list of presets included IIRC
8 values, every one of them customizable. (Plus, the next time you
open the dropdown, they're reordered -- so if you had no use for, say,
40% and changed it to 160%, the 160 would appear after the 150, not
before the 50.)

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Wow, that sounds incredibly intelligent! So far I'm content with the slider,
but admittedly I'm using Word 2007 only very sparingly (mostly for blog
posts).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

And I was used to FrameMaker, where the list of presets included IIRC
8 values, every one of them customizable. (Plus, the next time you
open the dropdown, they're reordered -- so if you had no use for, say,
40% and changed it to 160%, the 160 would appear after the 150, not
before the 50.)

 

[Peter T. Daniels]

FrameMaker was the Rolls Royce of desktop publishing. They catered
primarily to huge corporate clients, which needed to be able to
completely reformat materials at the click of a button (for next
year's catalog, say). One of them was United Airlines, so they
regularly had demonstrations of new features in Chicago; and there was
an active Users Group (whatever happened to Users Groups?).

I learned about it from my publisher friend, who used it for all his
books, when we began production on _The World's Writing Systems_ for
Oxford, in 1992, before Unicode. It's an awfully complicated book, 67
chapters that got reordered once in a while, filled with tables and
illustrations that need to float as the text changes around them, and
all sorts of cross references.

(And I once did a book that needed word-indexes for about 20 different
Indo-European languages, and some of them use different alphabetical
orders. All that could be rather easily customized in FrameMaker.)

In those days Windows wasn't an option for complicated graphics and
typography; but creating PostScript fonts for a number of exotic
scripts was not terribly difficult in Fontographer.

My current project needs as many different fonts, but FrameMaker was
taken over by Adobe (which saw it as competition for PageMaker), and
only with the very latest release (8 or 9) did they make it Unicode-
compliant -- but I'm told it can't handle right-to-left scripts at
all. Thus the publisher is insisting on Adobe InDesign, which until v.
4 (2008) didn't support _any_ kind of cross referencing!

But FrameMaker didn't make the transition to Windows elegantly (7.2,
neither Unicode nor r-to-l). A very large number of commands had to be
relearned, and the GUI was just different enough to be frustrating.

The aforementioned publisher's offices are becoming a Mac Museum,
because they also didn't release an OS X version of FrameMaker, so he
collects computers that can run on OS 9.

 

[Suzanne S. Barnhill]

Yes, I can't recall whether I've had any direct experience with FrameMaker,
though I think I saw it demo'd at a trade show once. The first heavy-duty
DTP app I became (vicariously) familiar with was Quark Xpress for Mac. Being
totally Windows-centric, I had some difficulty preparing copy for the
designer who was using it because in those days Mac didn't easily
accommodate fractions and some other types of formatting that seemed simple
to me (and I can still recognize, from the fractions, when copy has been set
on a Mac).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

FrameMaker was the Rolls Royce of desktop publishing. They catered
primarily to huge corporate clients, which needed to be able to
completely reformat materials at the click of a button (for next
year's catalog, say). One of them was United Airlines, so they
regularly had demonstrations of new features in Chicago; and there was
an active Users Group (whatever happened to Users Groups?).

I learned about it from my publisher friend, who used it for all his
books, when we began production on _The World's Writing Systems_ for
Oxford, in 1992, before Unicode. It's an awfully complicated book, 67
chapters that got reordered once in a while, filled with tables and
illustrations that need to float as the text changes around them, and
all sorts of cross references.

(And I once did a book that needed word-indexes for about 20 different
Indo-European languages, and some of them use different alphabetical
orders. All that could be rather easily customized in FrameMaker.)

In those days Windows wasn't an option for complicated graphics and
typography; but creating PostScript fonts for a number of exotic
scripts was not terribly difficult in Fontographer.

My current project needs as many different fonts, but FrameMaker was
taken over by Adobe (which saw it as competition for PageMaker), and
only with the very latest release (8 or 9) did they make it Unicode-
compliant -- but I'm told it can't handle right-to-left scripts at
all. Thus the publisher is insisting on Adobe InDesign, which until v.
4 (2008) didn't support _any_ kind of cross referencing!

But FrameMaker didn't make the transition to Windows elegantly (7.2,
neither Unicode nor r-to-l). A very large number of commands had to be
relearned, and the GUI was just different enough to be frustrating.

The aforementioned publisher's offices are becoming a Mac Museum,
because they also didn't release an OS X version of FrameMaker, so he
collects computers that can run on OS 9.