I have been Tiggered from the get go. I never see either of those as a
Mac bug. I don't see the second one at all, since I don't edit files
from an external server. I'd always use some kind of source control to
check the whole thing out, edit locally and check it back in. The
problem appears to be related to Word's cavalier choice of directories
for work files without checking whether it has write access to the
directory as well as its contents. Not what I'd call a Tiger bug.
Corrupt fonts? I have only seen as a corrupt font cache, and the only
evidence was a beach ball at startup while Word, and Word alone,
claimed it was optimising fonts. I saw that in Panther too.
Other font issues flowed from the transition to Word 2004 from v.X.
Nothing to do with Panther to Tiger. All of those were due to
Microsoft's cavalier attitude to my font collection as it sprayed new
Unicode versions of its own identically named little favourites into
the wrong directories, unbidden and unannounced.
Some common sense in this discussion at last... John McGhie, due, no doubt
to his mastery of and authority in [almost] all things Word, seems to have a
whole collection of people who should know better flummoxed into not
upgrading to Tiger, without his ever trying it. It's all superstition, as
far as I can see.
I had a play with Word on an Intel iMac in the London Apple store. Its
performance under Rosetta is no worse than on my 1GHz Powerbook G4. Not
much better either. On those grounds, if you must buy a lappy at the
end of the month, you might as well get a PC at half the price.
I wouldn't agree at all. Probably better not to get a new computer at all
for the moment - wait until next year. But if it's someone else's budget,
which must be spent _now_, get the best MacIntel you can afford. You'll be
using it for several years and it will be already to go in optimized fashion
when Office, Adobe CS and Mac OS 10.5 all debut. In the meantime, you'll
still get all your startup, your Apple apps and the OS running much faster
(4 times or so) than with any G4 PowerBook, and as you (Elliott) say, Office
2004 apps will be running in Rosetta at about the same speed as they do on
the PB. (Not to mention that John actually currently has an iBook, not a
PowerBook - any MacBook is going to race compared to that. And it can take
up to 2 GB RAM as well.) The only caveat would be if you need to use
something like Photoshop (I don't believe John does) - for that you're
better off sticking with the PB, of course.
Myself, I'm waiting until next year. Well, I'm looking forward to seeing
what the new Mac Pro desktop line turns out to be...
I gotta say that equating once off font corruption to the malware
maelstrom over on the dark side has me puzzled.
Indeed.
I'm keeping my PowerBook till Microsoft and Adobe have universal binary
versions of Office and CS respectively.
If you pay for your own computers, that makes sense. The MacIntels will be
several stages more advanced than they are now at that time, which is the
first point where someone like you you uses Office and CS way more than any
Apple apps will get any significant benefit.
However, if the rumoured 8-way Conroe makes its way into a Mac sometime
soon, I might break down and buy a quad G5 killer desktop for video
editing. I'd never buy a new machine till it is at least 4 times
quicker than the one I have already.
Right...
--
Paul Berkowitz
MVP MacOffice
Entourage FAQ Page: <
http://www.entourage.mvps.org/faq/index.html>
AppleScripts for Entourage: <
http://macscripter.net/scriptbuilders/>
Please "Reply To Newsgroup" to reply to this message. Emails will be
ignored.
PLEASE always state which version of Microsoft Office you are using -
**2004**, X or 2001. It's often impossible to answer your questions
otherwise.
