Office Archive

If Excel rules the world, Word rules the legal profession. Jordan Bryan published a great article explaining why this is the case, and why this is unlikely to change any time soon, no matter how many people from the technology world think they can change this reality. Microsoft Word can never be replaced. OpenAI could build superintelligence surpassing human cognition in every conceivable dimension, rendering all human labor obsolete, and Microsoft Word will survive. Future contracts defining the land rights to distant galaxies will undoubtedly be drafted in Microsoft Word. Microsoft Word is immortal. ↫ Jordan Bryan at The Redline by Version Story Bryan cites two main reasons underpinning Microsoft Word’s immortality in the legal profession. First, lawyers need the various formatting options Word provides, and alternatives often suggested by outsiders, like Markdown, don’t come close to offering even 5% of the various formatting features lawyers and other writers of legal documents require. By the time you add all those features back to Markdown, you’ve recreated Word, but infinitely worse and more obtuse. Also, and this is entirely my personal opinion, Markdown sucks. Second, and this one you’ve surely heard before: Word’s .docx format is effectively a network protocol. Everyone in the legal profession uses it, can read it, work with it, mark it up, apply corrections, and so on – from judges to lawyers to clients. If you try to work with, say, Google Docs, instead, you create a ton of friction in every interaction you have with other people in the legal profession. I vividly remember this from my 15 years as a translator – every single document you ever worked with was a Microsoft Office document. Sure, the translation agency standing between the end client and the translator might have abstracted the document into a computer-aided translation tool like Trados, but you’re still working with .docx, and the translated document sent to the client is still .docx, and needs to look identical to the source, just in a different language. In the technology world, there’s a lot of people who come barging into some other profession or field, claiming to know everything, and suggest to “just do x”, without any deference to how said profession or field actually operates. “Just use Markdown and git” even if the people involved have no clue what a markup language even is let alone what git is; “just use LibreOffice” even if the people involved will skewer you for altering the formatting of a document even ever so slightly; we all know examples of this. An industry tends to work a certain way not because they’re stupid or haven’t seen the light – it tends to work that way because there’s a thousand little reasons you’re not aware of that make that way the best way.

In 1979, VisiCalc was released for the Apple II, and to this day, many consider it the very first spreadsheet program. Considering just how important spreadsheets have become since then – Excel rules the world – the first spreadsheet program is definitely an interesting topic to dive into. It turns out that while VisiCalc was the first spreadsheet program for home computers, it’s not actually the first spreadsheet program, period. That honour goes to LANPAR, created ten years before VisiCalc. Ten years before VisiCalc, two engineers at Bell Canada came up with a pretty neat idea. At the time, organizational budgets were created using a program that ran on a mainframe system. If a manager wanted to make a change to the budget model, that might take programmers months to create an updated version. Rene Pardo and Remy Landau discussed the problem and asked “what if the managers could make their own budget forms as they would normally write them?” And with that, a new idea was created: the spreadsheet program. The new spreadsheet was called LANPAR, for “LANguage for Programming Arrays at Random” (but really it was a mash-up of their last names: LANdau and PARdo). ↫ Jim Hall at Technically We Write While there wasn’t a graphical user interface on the screen with a grid and icons and everything else we associate with a spreadsheet today, it was still very much a spreadsheet. Individual cells were delinianated with semicolons, you could write down formulas to manipulate these cells, and the program could do forward referencing. The idea was to make it so easy to use, managers at Dell Canada could make budgeting changes overnight, instead of having programmers take weeks or months to do so. I’m not particularly well-versed in Excel and spreadsheets in general, but I can definitely imagine advanced users no longer really seeing the grids and numbers as individual entities, instead visualising everything much more closely to what LANPAR did. Like Neo when he finally peers through the Matrix.

Many Outlook users encounter the error message – “PST file is not an Outlook data file”, while trying to open or import a PST file into the application on another system. It is obvious from error message that Outlook cannot correctly read the file. This happens if there is corruption in the PST file or due to some other internal or external factors. In this guide, you’ll find the possible reasons for this error and know the solutions to resolve it without any hassle.       Reasons behind the ‘PST File is not an Outlook Data File’ Error There are several reasons that may cause this error, such as: Corrupted or Damaged PST File There are high chances that your PST file is corrupted due to which Outlook is unable to read the file and throwing this error message. PST File is Read-Only If your PST file attribute is set as read-only, then Outlook fails to make any changes or do modifications to the file, resulting in the error. Compatibility Issues Compatibility issues can also prevent you from opening or importing a PST file. For example, when trying to open a PST file created in higher Outlook version in a lower version.    Oversized PST File Too large or oversized PST files are difficult to open or import. You may face issues or errors when importing such large files into Outlook. Solutions to Resolve the ‘PST File is not an Outlook Data File’ Error Depending on the cause of the error, you can follow the below solutions to fix this error.   1. Check the Attributes of the PST File It might happen that the PST file attributes are set to Read-Only. This might be the reason you’re getting the error when accessing the file. The solution is simple – verify the file’s attributes and change them if required. Follow the given steps: In the Properties window, ensure that the Read-Only attribute and Hidden are not selected. If selected, then uncheck them and click OK. Now, try to access the PST file and check if the issue is resolved. 2. Update your Outlook Application Outdated Outlook application may develop bugs or issues which can prevent you from performing certain operations. If this is the case, it is obvious that updating the application can help fix the issue. Here’s how you can check and update your Outlook: Sometimes, updates are managed by your IT administrator, due to which the option ‘Update Now’ is unavailable or disabled in your account. Still, you can update your account manually by following the given steps. Once Outlook is installed, configure your profile. If the error is not resolved, follow the next method.  3. Create a New Outlook Profile Issues or errors may arise if your Outlook profile gets corrupted or damaged. Creating a new profile can help resolve such issues. You can follow the given steps to create a new profile in Outlook: After that, complete the email setup by following the sign-in wizard and instructions. 4. Reduce the PST File Size Accessing or importing excessively large PST file may cause this error. So, reduce the PST file size if it is large. Here are some approaches you can follow: 5. Repair Corrupted PST File Corruption or inconsistencies in the PST file can result in the said error. You can conveniently repair the PST file with the Microsoft Outlook’s Inbox Repair Tool, also known as ScanPST.exe. Follow these instructions to repair PST using this tool: While ScanPST can fix damaged PST files, it has certain limitations, such as: As an alternative solution and avoid such limitations, you can opt for a more powerful PST repair tool, like Stellar Repair for Outlook. This tool can repair PST file with any level of file corruption and without any file size limitations. After successfully repairing the file, it saves all the mailbox items in a new fresh PST file by maintaining the same folder hierarchy and keeping the data intact. It can also auto-split large PST file to reduce the file size. The tool can seamlessly repair PST files of any Outlook application version – 2021, 2019, 2016, 2013, and earlier. Conclusion As you have seen above, the PST file is not an Outlook data file error is the result of corruption in the file, large file size, incompatibility problems, and other reasons. It is easy to resolve this error. You can follow the stepwise solutions explained above to fix this error, depending on the cause. If this error is the result of corruption in PST file, you can rely on Stellar Repair for Outlook as it is one of the advanced tools to repair corrupted PST files. This tool recovers all the items from corrupted PST file and save them in a new PST file with complete data integrity.

You already need custom scripts and third-party applications that make custom Windows ISOs to make installing Windows somewhat bearable – unless you enjoy spending hours manually disabling all the anti-user settings in Windows – and now there’s another setting to add to the massive, growing list of stuff you have to fix after setting up a new Windows installation. Microsoft has announced that Word will start saving every new file to OneDrive (or another provider if you’ve installed one) by default. We are modernizing the way files are created and stored in Word for Windows! Now you don’t have to worry about saving your documents: Anything new you create will be saved automatically to OneDrive or your preferred cloud destination. ↫ Raul Munoz on the Microsoft 365 Insider Blog There’s the usual spiel of how this is safer and supposedly more convenient, but I suspect the real reason Microsoft is doing this is listed right there at the end of the list of supposed benefits: this enables the use of Copilot’s “AI” features right from the beginning. In other words, by automatically saving your new Word documents to OneDrive by default, you’re giving Microsoft access to whatever you write for “AI” training purposes. The setting can be changed, but defaults matter and few people change them. It’s also possible to set another provider than OneDrive as your online storage, but again – defaults matter. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if few people will even realise their Word documents will be stored not on their local PC, but on Microsoft’s servers.

The Document Foundation, which developers LibreOffice, is mad at Microsoft for the levels of complexity in the Microsoft 365 document format. They claim Microsoft intentionally makes this format’s XML schema as complex and obtuse as possible to lock users into the Microsoft Office ecosystem. This artificial complexity is characterised by a deeply nested tag structure with excessive abstraction, dozens or even hundreds of optional or overloaded elements, non-intuitive naming conventions, the widespread use of extension points and wildcards, the multiple import of namespaces and type hierarchies, and sparse or cryptic documentation. In the case of the Microsoft 365 document format, the only characteristic not present is sparse or cryptic documentation, given that we are talking about a set of documents totalling over 8,000 pages. All the other characteristics are present to a greater or lesser extent, making life almost impossible for a developer trying to implement the schema. ↫ Italo Vignoli I feel like this was widely known already, since I distinctly remember the discussions around the standardisation process for the Office Open XML file formats. Then, too, it was claimed that Microsoft’s then-new XML file formats were far more complex and obtuse than the existing, already standardised OpenDocument file formats, and that there was no need to push Microsoft’s new file formats through the process. These days, you might wonder how relevant all of this still is, but considering vast swaths of the private, corporate, government, and academic world still run on Microsoft Office and its default file formats, it’s definitely still a hugely relevant matter. As an office suite, you are basically required to support Office Open XML, and if Microsoft is making that more complex and obtuse on purpose, that’s a form of monopoly abuse that should be addressed.

Are you still using Windows 7, 8, 8.1, or a 32 bit version of Windows, relying on LibreOffice for your sexy office tasks of writing TPS reports and calculating and tabulating juicy, plump numbers? Bad news: the next version of LibreOffice will remove support for these platforms. Buried deep in the release notes of the second beta for LibreOffice 25.8, it reads: Support for Windows 7 and 8/8.1 was removed. Support for x86 (32-bit) Windows builds is deprecated. ↫ LibreOffice 25.8 beta 2 release notes I honestly doubt many people actually still rely on LibreOffice on these platforms, and even if for some unfathomable reason you do, you are probably also okay with sticking with an older version of LibreOffice to keep your weird setup going a few years longer. You do you.

In October 2026, Microsoft Publisher will reach its end of life. After that time, it will no longer be included in Microsoft 365 and existing on-premises suites will no longer be supported. Microsoft 365 subscribers will no longer be able to open or edit Publisher files in Publisher. Until then, support for Publisher will continue and users can expect the same experience as today. ↫ Microsoft’s Support website Microsoft Publisher is an application with a long history, and it’s been part of Microsoft Office for almost 35 years. The initial 1.0 version was released all the way back in 1991, and it’s tried to compete with tools like InDesign and QuarkXPress in the desktop publishing market, but it never gained much of a share. Microsoft advises users of Publisher to use a combination of Word, PowerPoint, or Designer instead, which, of course, are all Microsoft products too. Due to Microsoft’s stupidly complex naming schemes and branding changes over the years, you might assume that the quoted paragraph means Publisher will just stop working for everyone, but that’s not the case. People who have the regular, non-subscription version of Publisher, probably as part of Microsoft Office, will of course be able to keep using it perpetually, just without support. If you use Office through Microsoft 365, however, the application will just… Stop working. Welcome to the future, I guess. I’m curious, though – do any of you use Microsoft Publisher, at home or at your work? I assumed the entire desktop publishing market was locked up by things like InDesign and QuarkXPress, and I had almost forgotten Publisher was still a thing in the first place.

Graphic design is my passion so naturally I love the vintage, 1990s WordArt. This was a feature in Microsoft Word that allowed you to create timeless “3D” renderings of any text you wanted. It was perfection, but for some reason Microsoft overhauled the feature in the late 2000s, basically ruining it. These are a soulless simulacrum of the WordArt of yore. The true WordArt remains, however, embedded deep in the code of Microsoft Word itself. But some things that should not have been forgotten were lost. History became legend. Legend became myth. And for twenty years WordArt passed out of all knowledge.  But it can be found again. ↫ Justin Pot at Popular Science I had no idea this stuff was still in there, but I guess it makes sense – people absolutely adored this stuff, and it was all over the place for a very long time. You would see it in restaurants, hotels, schools, stores, everywhere – from high-end, luxury places to bargain basements. Now that I think about it, I’m not at all surprised it’s still accessible.

As an undergraduate student in the early 1990s, I wrote all my class papers using WordPerfect for DOS. WordPerfect was a powerful desktop word processor that was used in offices all over the world. But WordPerfect was quite expensive; my student edition of WordPerfect cost around $300. When the new version of WordPerfect came out, I just couldn’t afford to buy it. Fortunately, the shareware market was starting to take off around this time. “Shareware” was a new model where software publishers released a program for free so you could try it out – usually for a limited time. If you liked it, you sent them a check and they mailed back a registered copy of the software. Shareware often had the same or similar features as the commercial software it aimed to displace, usually at a lower price. And that’s how I discovered the Galaxy word processor. Galaxy had all the features that I needed in a desktop word processor, but at about one-third the price. The registration fee for Galaxy was $99. There’s so many pieces of software that lost out in the market, and the further back in time we go, the more obscure these tend to get. I had never heard of Galaxy, but I’m glad someone took the time to write this article, ensuring – hopefully – it’ll be saved from obscurity for a long time to come.

Today we begin the final phase of this major change where Aptos will start appearing as the new default font across Word, Outlook, PowerPoint and Excel for hundreds of millions of users. And, over the next few months it will roll out to be the default for all our customers. We can’t wait for Aptos to be readily available since it was crafted to embody the many aspects of the human experience. A new default font for Microsoft Office is a huge deal. It doesn’t sound like it should be, but it really is – over the coming years, millions and documents changing hands within and between companies, organisations, individuals, and more will be typeset in this new font, and you’ll come to see it everywhere. And hate it. It’s the natural order of things.

If Microsoft had its way, Office 2021 probably wouldn’t be news at all—the Redmond giant would almost certainly prefer that everyone simply subscribe to Microsoft 365, pay a small monthly or annual fee, and get new features and fixes as they’re rolled out. For many if not most Office users, the subscription-based service is the most convenient way to get Office, even when they want to use it as locally installed software rather than doing their work in the browser and in the cloud. For the rest of us—and for those who don’t want to put up with the Byzantine procedures necessary to install Microsoft 365 apps on Remote Desktop Servers—there’s Office 2019 now, and there will be Office 2021 later this year. There will also be a new Office LTSC (Long Term Service Channel), which trades a 10 percent price hike for a guarantee of longer support periods… longer than the consumer version of Office 2021, that is. A new version of Microsoft Office used to be big news in the late ’90s and early 2000s. Now, with Office 365, LibreOffice, Google Docs, and several more than capable older standalone versions of Office, it feels like most people just don’t care anymore.

The LibreOffice Project announces the availability of LibreOffice 7.0, a new major release providing significant new features: support for OpenDocument Format (ODF) 1.3; Skia graphics engine and Vulkan GPU-based acceleration for better performance; and carefully improved compatibility with DOCX, XLSX and PPTX files. A pretty major release. You can download and install it for Linux, Windows, and macOS, or wait until your Linux distribution ships it.

Early adopters of LED lighting will remember 50,000 hour or even 100,000 hour lifetime ratings printed on the box. But during a recent trip to the hardware store the longest advertised lifetime I found was 25,000 hours. Others claimed only 7,500 or 15,000 hours. And yes, these are brand-name bulbs from Cree and GE. So, what happened to those 100,000 hour residential LED bulbs? Were the initial estimates just over-optimistic? Was it all marketing hype? Or, did we not know enough about LED aging to predict the true useful life of a bulb? I put these questions to the test. Join me after the break for some background on the light bulb cartel from the days of incandescent bulbs (not a joke, a cartel controlled the life of your bulbs), and for the destruction of some modern LED bulbs to see why the lifetimes are clocking in a lot lower than the original wave of LED replacements. Just a good, fun, but also depressing read.