Transforms only work with Enterprise version of Office 2003

[Gerry Hickman]

As an MVP, Milly, isn't that tantamount to treason?!
Hehe!

;o) Having said that,
I've been Windows-free for 24 days and I've not gone back to my PC for
anything (save to transfer files). I don't understand what took me so long to
switch.

Yes, I'm doing this too for all friends/family etc, but there are a few
programs at work that are only available for Windows, so it may be some
time before being able to move completely.

 

[Gerry Hickman]

As an MVP, Milly, isn't that tantamount to treason?!
Hehe!

;o) Having said that,
I've been Windows-free for 24 days and I've not gone back to my PC for
anything (save to transfer files). I don't understand what took me so long to
switch.

Yes, I'm doing this too for all friends/family etc, but there are a few
programs at work that are only available for Windows, so it may be some
time before being able to move completely.

 

[Gerry Hickman]

As an MVP, Milly, isn't that tantamount to treason?!
Hehe!

;o) Having said that,
I've been Windows-free for 24 days and I've not gone back to my PC for
anything (save to transfer files). I don't understand what took me so long to
switch.

Yes, I'm doing this too for all friends/family etc, but there are a few
programs at work that are only available for Windows, so it may be some
time before being able to move completely.

 

[Gerry Hickman]

As an MVP, Milly, isn't that tantamount to treason?!
Hehe!

;o) Having said that,
I've been Windows-free for 24 days and I've not gone back to my PC for
anything (save to transfer files). I don't understand what took me so long to
switch.

Yes, I'm doing this too for all friends/family etc, but there are a few
programs at work that are only available for Windows, so it may be some
time before being able to move completely.

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Gerry Hickman]

Hi Milly,

And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future, just a
comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.

I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is not
free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So personally, I
think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux have far more
potential for the future.

The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the bug
the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...

 

[Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]]

If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?

As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."

If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.

--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.


After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:

| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...