Word 2007
Comments
-
Greg66 wrote:Wrath Rob wrote:dhope wrote:Greg66 wrote:will3 wrote:Greg66 wrote:will3 wrote:dhope wrote:You mean you don't just know the keyboard shortcuts?
Call yourself a power user?! :twisted:
No I don't call myself a power user, and yes I do know quite a few keyboard shortcuts, but I mainly learned these years and years ago when computer mice had balls and didn't work very well.
A mouse? I remember when a mouse had whiskers and liked cheese.
Dude, unless you can claim to have memorised the keyboard shortcuts for WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS, and written DOS batch files, you ain't no legacy user.
Paging ITB...
Good heavens man, just how old are you?
My first PC (which I bought when I was past the "spring chicken" stage") had a 20 meg hard drive. 20 Meg. I receive emails bigger than that now. Hell, I can take a photo bigger than that. If you google "20MB" most of the results are for SD cards that transfer data at 20MB per second.
And 3.5 inch floppy discs were a big ol' innovation.
Hang on, I'm 30 next month and I remember frisbeeing around 5.25" discs.
First PC I think had a 10MB of RAM, but this was about 5x the normal. 2x4MB and 2x1MB. 386 DX (none of this SX rubbish), 16MHz. Dos 5 I think. I was probably about 10, clearly I'm a geek to remember that much.
BBC B Micro. 32k of RAM and that was it. Yet you could still play Elite on it. After loading it from the casette player. Young whipper-snappers.
Hmm.
You see, that's for games.
When I was a kid, PCs hadn't been invented.
At Dad's work they had an IBM mainframe. It was huge. And it did sums.
TBH, I am very glad that the internet hadn't been invented when i was at University. I think it would have severely reduced what passed for my industry.
'course we had a Spectrum too, think the ZX81 - the first 'Modern' PC I can remember was the 386DX
Ahh, Jet Set Willy...0 -
I think you'll find the 386DX was a processor not a computer
Noob.Chunky Cyclists need your love too! :-)
2009 Specialized Tricross Sport
2011 Trek Madone 4.5
2012 Felt F65X
Proud CX Pervert and quiet roadie. 12 mile commuter0 -
Kieran_Burns wrote:FFS....
let's make getting a solution to an easy to solve problem complicated.
http://download.cnet.com/Classic-Menu-f ... 37180.html
yeesh.
Oooh!
Like.0 -
Chunky Cyclists need your love too! :-)
2009 Specialized Tricross Sport
2011 Trek Madone 4.5
2012 Felt F65X
Proud CX Pervert and quiet roadie. 12 mile commuter0 -
Kieran_Burns wrote:
I win (so far), my Dad used to bring one of these babies back from work at the weekends for us to play Nightmare Park on...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_pet0 -
No you couldn't; I'm sure you needed a disk drive for Elite. Very clever use of limited resources though; used interrupts to dynamically change the screen mode half way through every scan...Wrath Rob wrote:BBC B Micro. 32k of RAM and that was it. Yet you could still play Elite on it. After loading it from the casette player. Young whipper-snappers.
Our local radio station used to have an evening program devoted to home computing; they actually had a section where they broadcast programs (in schreeching/warbling mode) and in theory you could record them to cassette and download to your computer. Never got that to work, but did key in several BASIC games from Teletext...
Edit: Some kid at my school actually knew how to do a "poke" which would destroy some crucial part of the screen hardware on a Pet. Rumour was that it caused something to switch too quickly, and overheat...Pannier, 120rpm.0 -
ZX80.... Kit build version too... 8)0
-
20? You were lucky. I had a 6 meg HDD on my first PC, and when it was compiling a COBOL program it was easy to debug as the source scrolled through on screen and you could spot the error lines. Moved onto a 286 and couldn't see the text at all it was just so blindingly fast.Greg66 wrote:My first PC (which I bought when I was past the "spring chicken" stage") had a 20 meg hard drive. 20 Meg. I receive emails bigger than that now. Hell, I can take a photo bigger than that. If you google "20MB" most of the results are for SD cards that transfer data at 20MB per second.
And 3.5 inch floppy discs were a big ol' innovation.0 -
Kieran_Burns wrote:I think you'll find the 386DX was a processor not a computer
Noob.
Naturally, the make was a Honeywell Bull, but who cares who puts the pieces together? Current PC is a Dual Xeon 5345, not an HP0 -
No you couldn't; I'm sure you needed a disk drive for Elite{/quote]TGOTB wrote:Wrath Rob wrote:BBC B Micro. 32k of RAM and that was it. Yet you could still play Elite on it. After loading it from the casette player. Young whipper-snappers.
You need orthotics so that you can stand corrected.
I had Elite for the BBC and the Acorn Electron and it was on tape.Mud - Genesis Vapour CCX
Race - Fuji Norcom Straight
Sun - Cervelo R3
Winter / Commute - Dolan ADX0 -
I'll set up an appointment with the podiatrist :-)Pannier, 120rpm.0
-
will3 wrote:
Well, the reason why you're struggling is because you were very comfortable with the Office 2003 UI. And this was in itself pretty unintuitive, you've just gotten used to the idiosyncrasies over time. I've found that for people who aren't experienced users of Office, the learning curve for 2007/10 is far less steep than for 2003. Loads of stuff that you'd have to go into obscure menus to find are right there on the ribbon.
Its not just the ribbon aspect of 2010's "Fluent UI" that make it easier to use. For example they've really done a great job with the menu that handles printing (a single window that contains properties and options that used to be hidden away).
And don't get me started with Sharepoint 2010 integration. Its pretty cool stuff (for someone who spends a lot of time deploying it as part of their job). Office 2007/10 seems pretty archaic once you're used to 2003.0 -
notsoblue wrote:will3 wrote:
Well, the reason why you're struggling is because you were very comfortable with the Office 2003 UI. And this was in itself pretty unintuitive, you've just gotten used to the idiosyncrasies over time. I've found that for people who aren't experienced users of Office, the learning curve for 2007/10 is far less steep than for 2003. Loads of stuff that you'd have to go into obscure menus to find are right there on the ribbon.
Its not just the ribbon aspect of 2010's "Fluent UI" that make it easier to use. For example they've really done a great job with the menu that handles printing (a single window that contains properties and options that used to be hidden away).
And don't get me started with Sharepoint 2010 integration. Its pretty cool stuff (for someone who spends a lot of time deploying it as part of their job). Office 2003 seems pretty archaic once you're used to 2003.
OK so not anything that I;m going to find an improvement then.
How is doing away with toolbars progress? Now everything is two clicks instead of one (although now it's all on the so called quick toolbar thingy)0 -
will3 wrote:OK so not anything that I;m going to find an improvement then.
You seem pretty determined to dislike new stuff, so I'm gonna leave it right there :P0 -
I liked having my own toolbars arranged as I liked with buttons grouped together. I tend to write technical documents so needed fairly complex tasks that were a lot quicker in earlier versions of word and excel.
I grant that it *might* be quicker to learn to do something slowly, but that's what the menu was for before.
If I didn't know how to do something, then that's what google was for; it's still available, so there is no real gain.0 -
jimmypippa wrote:I liked having my own toolbars arranged as I liked with buttons grouped together. I tend to write technical documents so needed fairly complex tasks that were a lot quicker in earlier versions of word and excel.
I grant that it *might* be quicker to learn to do something slowly, but that's what the menu was for before.
If I didn't know how to do something, then that's what google was for; it's still available, so there is no real gain.
Wot he said
I see that it might be easier for a new user, but why totally ignore the current user base?0 -
UndercoverElephant wrote:Kieran_Burns wrote:
I win (so far), my Dad used to bring one of these babies back from work at the weekends for us to play Nightmare Park on...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodore_pet
http://www.old-computers.com/museum/default.asp
I believe I have the dubious honour (not verified) of being the first person in the UK to have an IBM PC/XT (640kb RAM, 10Mb HD, 5.25 floppy and a green screen!) - although it shipped in March 1983 we had one where I then worked 'for evaluation' in Oct/Nov 1982
I had (still have) my own home built Z80 and 6502 based machines, a ZX80, a ZX81 and a Spectrum (all in original boxes)
My current PC is a Core-i7/970 24Gb RAM, 2Tb HD and twin 1200x1080 screens... currently running Windows7 64bit Ultimate and 3 copies of Windows XP simultaneously...Invacare Spectra Plus electric wheelchair, max speed 4mph
0 -
TGOTB wrote:
Edit: Some kid at my school actually knew how to do a "poke" which would destroy some crucial part of the screen hardware on a Pet. Rumour was that it caused something to switch too quickly, and overheat...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killer_pokeInvacare Spectra Plus electric wheelchair, max speed 4mph0 -
Joelsim wrote:I had a Sinclair Spectrum 16k, which I upgraded to 48k!
To be honest there were some great games for it like Jetpac and Manic Minor.
ah the evocative screech of tape games loading for 5 minutes.
I upgraded to a spectrum. me & my brother built a ZX80 as they sold them in kit form then a ZX81, 1k with a 16k memory add on that was massive. My mum still has the 81 & spectrum in a cupboard.
Manic Miner & jet set willy were brill. but I think my mates commodore 64 was a better machine for games.0 -
Kieran_Burns wrote:
Late to the thread, but that's me, that is!
This was the first "proper" computer I used, and I also remember using a PC that had no hard drive; one floppy drive for the OS, and one for personal files.
Kids today. Shakes head sadly...0 -
Wrath Rob wrote:BBC B Micro. 32k of RAM and that was it. Yet you could still play Elite on it. After loading it from the casette player. Young whipper-snappers.
Ditto.Le Cannon [98 Cannondale M400] [FCN: 8]
The Mad Monkey [2013 Hoy 003] [FCN: 4]0 -
notsoblue wrote:will3 wrote:OK so not anything that I;m going to find an improvement then.
You seem pretty determined to dislike new stuff, so I'm gonna leave it right there :P
Been thinking about this. I don't think I'm determined to dislike new stuff, I just reserve the right to make my own decision about wether the new stuff is better than the old stuff.
Or to put it another way, I'm not interested in new stuff just because it's new.
With the word ribbon thing, it just needs an expert mode and it'll all be fine.
Another piece of software I use has big buttons with descriptions under them. This works well for new users, but as they get familiar with what they do, you can switch to small buttons with just the icon on to free up screen space and/or make more buttons available on screen without having to go to a different menu.0 -
will3 wrote:Been thinking about this. I don't think I'm determined to dislike new stuff, I just reserve the right to make my own decision about wether the new stuff is better than the old stuff.
Or to put it another way, I'm not interested in new stuff just because it's new.
Yeah, I think thats fair enough.
I mean, what really matters is what you do with the software rather than the software itself, right? I have a bias because I tend to like stuff just because its new, and my job requires me to keep up with developments like this. I'd recommend you give it a chance though.
Oh, and this was my first PC back in '86. I still get nostalgic about the sound the HDD used to make.
0 -
will3 wrote:
OK so not anything that I;m going to find an improvement then.
How is doing away with toolbars progress? Now everything is two clicks instead of one (although now it's all on the so called quick toolbar thingy)
FOr me, the keyboard shortcuts are even more annoying. I used to have particular ones assigned for common actions, now I have to go through the sequence of commands that MS thinks I should use.
It is still quicker that moving my mouse, but not by much. This is especially the case in Excel.0
