Skip to main content

Office 2007 and Blogging

I finally started running my copy of Office 2007, and I wish I had abandoned Open Office earlier.

Everything is a lot more snappy and responsive than I expected. The common wisdom of each new version of Office requiring hardware upgrades seems unwarranted in face of this. Certainly, it is furiously faster than Open Office. I don't expect to make as much use of Google Docs and Spreadsheets, either. Word is taking up 20 megabytes in memory, while Firefox is eating 300 MB. Which one I prefer to keep running is obvious.

Now, I tried to write blogs with Open Office, but I found no plug-ins to get it to post to Blogger. You would really think I could use Google Docs, but somehow they don't properly support posting to their own blogging service from their own word processor service! Multiple blogs on one account is not supported. Posting draws the title from the first line in the document, even if the title is present and differs from this, meaning the title appears repeated in the final post. Meanwhile, Word 2007 actually includes support to operate with Blogger, a competitor's service, and supports multiple blogs. This is out of the box, as well.

Lately, I took some heat for my hard views on the whole IronPython versus Python issue, so I want to clear up some things about my opinion and my open mindedness. I will be looking at IronPython for writing plug-ins for Office, and here it doesn't bother me that things will be missing, because I am not using the other things. My first hopeful project: a free, and actually available version of Scout, the ribbon search that politics killed.

One thing that has disappointed me is the static nature of the Ribbon, which is not how I understood it to be. This could be the product of my usage patterns thus far, but I have several times expected it to adapt to me, if it really did that. For example, when I select some text during the writing of a blog post, the hyperlink options should appear. It just seems that is not how the Ribbon works, but am I alone in thinking that was the whole idea?

Comments

Fuzzyman said…
I look forward to reading about your explorations. :-)
da newb said…
Nice. Do you know if they are planning on releasing Office 2007 for Macs anytime soon?

Popular posts from this blog

Interrupting Coders Isn’t So Bad

Here’s a hot take: disrupting coders isn’t all that bad.

Some disruptions are certainly bad but they usually aren’t. The coder community has overblown the impact. A disruption can be a good thing. How harmful disruption might be a symptom of other problems.

There are different kinds of disruptions. They are caused by other coders on your team, managers and other non-coders, or meetings throughout the day.

The easiest example to debunk is a question from a fellow developer. Imagine someone walks over to your desk or they ping you on Slack, because they have “one quick question.” Do you get annoyed at the interruption when you were in the middle of something important? You help out your teammate quickly and get back to work, trying to pick up where you left off. That’s a kind of interruption we complain about frequently, but I’m not convinced this is all that bad.

You are being disrupted but your team, of which you are only one member of the whole unit, is working smoothly. You unstuck …

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…