Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 13th May 2006 18:17 UTC, submitted by JCooper
Features, Office The developers behind Word 12 have added a blogging feature to Word 12. They have promised that the blogging feature wil output clean, unmangled HTML: "That's right. No more verbose Word HTML. The goal for this feature is not pure fidelity, but the right fidelity for your blog."
Order by: Score:
Microsoft's Obsession
by MikeGA on Sat 13th May 2006 19:32 UTC
MikeGA
Member since:
2005-07-22

Yet another example of Microsoft's obsession with the "One tool to do them all" approach.

Why one Earth would I want to use a word processor (which is already trying hard to pretend it can do page layout) to do blogging?

A document is a completely different thing to a blog post. And anyway, a post needs more than the actual content, it needs the other parts of the blog such as the comments etc. Is Word going to magically generate them all for me and replace my usual blogging tool?

As for the guy saying he wants to do this because of Word's spell checker, has it not occurred to Microsoft that perhaps Apple have got it right with system-wide spell checking?

Reply Score: 5

RE: Microsoft's Obsession
by chemical_scum on Sat 13th May 2006 20:57 UTC in reply to "Microsoft's Obsession"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

Yet another example of Microsoft's obsession with the "One tool to do them all" approach.

Sorta like EMACS, uh! sorry rms.

Reply Score: 4

RE[2]: Microsoft's Obsession
by n4cer on Sun 14th May 2006 01:17 UTC in reply to "Microsoft's Obsession"
n4cer Member since:
2005-07-06

As for the guy saying he wants to do this because of Word's spell checker, has it not occurred to Microsoft that perhaps Apple have got it right with system-wide spell checking?

Vista has system-wide spell checking as well (must be enabled by the developer on whatever controls they want however). On XP and previous, other applications can use Office's dictionary to have spell checking.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Microsoft's Obsession
by BryanFeeney on Sun 14th May 2006 13:51 UTC in reply to "Microsoft's Obsession"
BryanFeeney Member since:
2005-07-06

Why one Earth would I want to use a word processor (which is already trying hard to pretend it can do page layout) to do blogging?

You wouldn't, but if you installed a website for a small organisation, or an intranet for a large one, most users would be freaked out by having to type stuff into a web-interface (it's surprising how mechanical and limited most people's knowledge of computing is).

However if you hook in one of the supported blogging APIs, people will be able to use MS Word, the program they know all along, to update the site. It sure seems a lot easier than trying to write some giant text-editor in JavaScript. And what's more, it'll provide automatic spell-checking, which is not available on Windows.

And anyway, a post needs more than the actual content, it needs the other parts of the blog such as the comments etc. Is Word going to magically generate them all for me and replace my usual blogging tool?

No, it's not, no more than the New Post page in Blogger does. Word allows you to write up the post, and then the normal blogging software will take care of the comments. Read the article, it's actually a neat little idea.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Microsoft's Obsession
by MikeGA on Sun 14th May 2006 15:41 UTC in reply to "RE: Microsoft's Obsession"
MikeGA Member since:
2005-07-22

Alright, but then you surely can't use all of the features of Word in a blog post, so won't this later confuse the user as to why there is a difference?

And they still have to get the HTML output uploaded to the right place - have fun with that!

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Microsoft's Obsession
by eMagius on Sun 14th May 2006 16:59 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Microsoft's Obsession"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

Alright, but then you surely can't use all of the features of Word in a blog post, so won't this later confuse the user as to why there is a difference?

You can use what is feasible on the web. Obviously the [e.g.] collaborative features aren't going to work -- just as when the user prints out a hard-copy, the paper doesn't magically update itself when Sarah over in accounting updates the numbers.

And they still have to get the HTML output uploaded to the right place - have fun with that!

It's automatic. That's the point.

Reply Score: 1

clean HTML
by evert on Sat 13th May 2006 19:37 UTC
evert
Member since:
2005-07-06

Still I like the idea that I can finally export Word documents to clean HTML.

And face it, Word offers a nice interface and a good environment to create content.

Reply Score: 2

Just what the web needs
by Riddic on Sat 13th May 2006 19:52 UTC
Riddic
Member since:
2005-10-05

... more blogs :/

Reply Score: 3

RE: Just what the web needs
by Get a Life on Sat 13th May 2006 22:46 UTC in reply to "Just what the web needs"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

Before blogs, idiots never expressed their half-baked opinions in public!

Reply Score: 4

RE: Just what the web needs
by ApproachingZero on Sun 14th May 2006 12:53 UTC in reply to "Just what the web needs"
ApproachingZero Member since:
2005-11-10

... more blogs :/

Is that you, Bill O'Reilly?

Yeah, it really sucks that people are allowed to easily publish their own reports, thoughts, and opinions to a worldwide audience without having to be filtered by News Corporation or one of the other four global media giants. Damn you, Internet!

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Just what the web needs
by Get a Life on Sun 14th May 2006 20:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Just what the web needs"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

The RIAA/MPAA were big nags about P2P technology because so many people used the fruits of that technology to engage in behavior they disliked. The technology consisted of some good ideas, and the uses people were finding for it were just applications of what they were already doing to new technology. Rawwr bad grrr.

The anti-blogger sentiment strikes me as similar. People have been communicating their vapid lives and ignorant opinions to each other forever. Letters to newspapers, social groups, protests, telephones, magazines, television, and of course the one-time ubiquitous "under construction" personal website. People are annoyed by the self-important, self-absorbed "blogosphere" that fancies itself the death of news organizations and criticize the technology and opportunity for individuals to express themselves through writing to anyone interested in reading what they think.

The thing that's funny is people posting their opinions on subjects in comments on web forums, complaining about blogs. Yes, I'm sure your opinion is the valuable one, dear forum-goer.

Reply Score: 1

RE: clean HTML
by archiesteel on Sat 13th May 2006 19:52 UTC
archiesteel
Member since:
2005-07-02

And face it, Word offers a nice interface and a good environment to create content.

Word 2000 did, certainly. That's why I'm still using it at home, and why I won't switch to Word 12 when it comes out. I am really annoyed with MS changing the location of some features with every new release. It took me a good 15 minutes to figure out where I could import styles from another document in Word 2003...

Reply Score: 1

OpenOffice
by Drune on Sat 13th May 2006 19:53 UTC
Drune
Member since:
2005-12-04

I hope OpenOffice doesnt go this way. Blogging in a word processor is complety useless.
I hope OpenOffice can trace its own way, not follow MS-Office steps. An office suite should be simple and efficient to make the job faster and clean.
People dont use 50% of a word processor, and they dont need a blogging feature. They go to the browser, login and write is text. But well, office suites are in bloat boat for years.

Reply Score: 5

Seems good to me
by UglyKidBill on Sat 13th May 2006 20:29 UTC
UglyKidBill
Member since:
2005-07-27

*Every* single person I know outside the geek world uses Word for almos every single task that has more than 20% text in it.
Moving that to the web is always a PITA when every word processor creates html pages full of "custom" css styles whithin the page, clashing with any other style already in the site or CMS; and I've never found a way to get a _clean_ old-fashion html output.
So I for one would welcome such feature in word processors, specially in OO and Abiword.

Reply Score: 3

RE: Seems good to me
by Alex Forster on Mon 15th May 2006 02:38 UTC in reply to "Seems good to me "
Alex Forster Member since:
2005-08-12

"*Every* single person I know outside the geek world uses Word for almos every single task that has more than 20% text in it."

It's true. I know someone who keeps one word document per person per phone number. I.E. John Doe.doc contains 555-5555. I know another who will keep one or two links in a word document instead of bookmarking them.

Reply Score: 1

Word 12
by poohgee on Sat 13th May 2006 21:02 UTC
poohgee
Member since:
2005-08-13

As much as I can dislike Windows OS - Word is IMO a very good product - I have great respect for it - just because its from the same company doesnt mean that it has to not be that good & face it - Win-XP can be absolutly fine & working if you dont push your luck - if you dont install crap & always look out for anything dangerous - it will run just fine - Linux will run fine - even when you put things in its way - a lot more of a predictable experience I guess on Linux - .

When I read that OpenOffice was according to MS opinion like 10 years behind Word - I find it hard to disagree .

The thing is that e.g. Word 2000 loads opens up within 10 seconds or less on a 32MB laptop - yes preloading etc - as far as Ive tried - OO is hard to get loaded quickly no matter what system - & above comment is of course absolutly true - everybody xcept those that really want to save money - use Word - its just very good .

Okay its a bit far fetched - but some people out there think that Gimp is seriously on the same level as Photoshop ((with all its enumerous features etc (& being industry standard as well)) - a comment from someone else : its the last 10% of functionality & ease of use & speed etc that make Photoshop not just good but great - & this applies I guess also to the huge slow thing that is OO compared to Word .

If WinOS was the same quality as Word - we'd be not bashing MS for a shitty OS so much .

Looking forward to Word a lot more than Vista - blogging features is a very good idea - & ties in with the world going more & more online .

I must note that my knowledge of PS & Word are limited - Im not a ninja level user of them - but there are reasons beyond maybe a monopoly which are the reasons for MS-Word's (& PS's) wide usage .

Reply Score: 4

RE: Word 12
by leech on Sat 13th May 2006 21:30 UTC in reply to "Word 12"
leech Member since:
2006-01-10

What are you smoking? Nothing post Windows 98 will load in 10 seconds on a 32mb computer, especially a laptop. I think I timed OO.o on my system without pre-loading it takes about 12 or 13 seconds. Granted this is when I had a gig of ram and 7200 rpm sata drives. I tend to think some of it's perceived slowness could be attributed to it's use of Java, but I could be wrong.

As far as adding blogging to it, why not just have something like Gnome-Blog? In case you haven't used it, you simply set up the log in information for your blog, then anytime you want to put in an entry, just click on the little icon, a text editing box comes up (or down depending on where your applet is) then you just type, hit submit and you're good to go.

You don't need a full fledged Word Processor. Notepad works just as well for blogging.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Word 12
by poohgee on Sat 13th May 2006 22:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Word 12"
poohgee Member since:
2005-08-13

:) - Im not smokin a thing at all .

Yeah ... Win-98-A is the OS - actually quite stable ;) .

Yeah but that again is a seperate program & integration I think works for end users - use the same program for "everything" .

In Open Open just like Word you can easily switch between word processor - spreadsheet - database etc because they are integrated into the menus .

BTW that applet is integrated into gnome-panel ;) ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Word 12
by smashIt on Sun 14th May 2006 22:06 UTC in reply to "RE: Word 12"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

I think I timed OO.o on my system without pre-loading it takes about 12 or 13 seconds. Granted this is when I had a gig of ram and 7200 rpm sata drives.

word 2003 takes 4 seconds without preloading an my laptop (500mhz, 192mb ram, 4200rpm P-ATA)

Reply Score: 1

RE: Word 12
by John Nilsson on Sat 13th May 2006 23:57 UTC in reply to "Word 12"
John Nilsson Member since:
2005-07-06

As much as I can dislike Windows OS - Word is IMO a very good product

I will give you that Word can be a great tool. If you know what you are doing.

But seriously, the whole concept it builds upon is flawed. The ways an unfamiliar user can missuse that sofware are so numerus, common, and grave that it just isn't funny. Blending content creation and page layout in that manner just is the wrong way to go about it.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Word 12
by Nathan O. on Sat 13th May 2006 23:44 UTC
Nathan O.
Member since:
2005-08-11

I try not to complain about these type of things - but please - remember that there's more punctuation available on your keyboard - than just the hyphen - use periods - commas - and possibly elipses and colons - and people will have an easier time reading what you write. I didn't manage to finish the first paragraph before my attention span wore out.

Reply Score: 2

Why not jsut use
by th3rmite on Sun 14th May 2006 00:50 UTC
th3rmite
Member since:
2006-01-08

http://performancing.com/ It's an awesome piece of blog software for Firefox, and the best thing is it's free.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why not jsut use
by sappyvcv on Sun 14th May 2006 20:57 UTC in reply to "Why not jsut use"
sappyvcv Member since:
2005-07-06

Because not everyone uses Firefox?

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why not jsut use
by eMagius on Sun 14th May 2006 23:18 UTC in reply to "Why not jsut use"
eMagius Member since:
2005-07-06

Let's be serious here: Performancing is a toy compared to Word (or even to Wordpad/TextEdit/Write/etc.).

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Word 12
by superstoned on Sun 14th May 2006 12:22 UTC
superstoned
Member since:
2005-07-07

Come on, this guy is right, and you know it.

Compare MS Office wit OO.o - the basic design in both of these might suck, you're right there, but MS Office is far ahead OO.o - period. Its MUCH faster, and can do more. Generally better, and easier, too. Sure, OO.o is better in some areas, but not many.

If we want free software to compete with MS Office, Koffice might be able to do that, given some time and effort. OO.o is simply broken by design - to clean that thing up, you'd end up rewriting it anyway.

Also, from what i've seen from Office 12 - its really good. REALLY good. Sure, Vista isn't anything new or improved - kind'a boring, actually. But in Office 12, you can see the $$$ Microsoft put into it.

Reply Score: 3