![mellel bibliography mellel bibliography](https://www.mellel.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/d-e-wickstroem-300x300.jpg)
![mellel bibliography mellel bibliography](https://www.mellel.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Page_4-1.png)
I agree, track changes is a great feature. That simply would not have been possible without Track Changes. Went through about 50 revisions of what wound up being about 40 pages (started out closer to 100). I worked on a grant proposal that involved about 20 people, all experts in their fields, each with their own idea of how (and what) to write. Framemaker's Change Bars might substitute in a pinch, but Track Changes is the king for collaboration - at least right now. But you can't sell products that don't have new functions, so MS has to keep shoving them in there. Most people LOVE Word because the 12 functions that they learned in 1986 still work exactly like they did, and they're not going to learn function #13 for love or money. People like me have a really hard time with Word because I'm very open to relearning if it makes things easier. It's not that a word processor is hard (though the document model that Word users is really retarded in this day and age) but preserving the integrity of billions of documents is mind-blowingly hard.
MELLEL BIBLIOGRAPHY CODE
If it does this really quirky thing in a certain situation, that code stays, and any new code needs to route around that without disturbing the status-quo. One reason why Office is SO bloated is that old code never leaves the product, it just gets conditionalized.
![mellel bibliography mellel bibliography](https://www.mellel.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/techspot.png)
My understanding is that it really is a problem for MS, and of course nobody else can navigate through their maze either. It basically means that they can't touch anything without breaking something in the process. It also means for MS that the number of variables involved in displaying a Word file is virtually unlimited. It's retarded as all get-out, but it also means that you have to support a billion different things just to get 100% Word compatibility. MS is also horribly trapped in their file formats by their decision to allow any file format to contain any other - so you can put a spreadsheet in a powerpoint in a word doc and display it.
MELLEL BIBLIOGRAPHY WINDOWS
Migrating from DOS Wordperfect to Windows Wordperfect was as difficult as migrating to Word. Wordperfect tried to move their users off of the old tried-and-true commands that so many users were accustomed to, that provided predictable results every time, to a much more GUI type interface to keep pace with Word. So, MS introduced an option for Excel to use Lotus functions, etc.
![mellel bibliography mellel bibliography](https://www.mellel.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/29792747_m-765x509.jpg)
They learned this lesson from the previous two productivity leaders: Lotus 1-2-3 and Wordperfect.Įxcel could not make headway against Lotus for the longest time because people that did Lotus 8 hours a day would not learn the Excel functions and commands. MS absolutely will not fix behavior that currently exists in the product - good or bad, expected or not - they will not introduce a change that either changes how an old document will display, or how a user interacts with the doc. Now, that *sounds* simple, but it's a bit like the IRS taking the philosophy of simplifying the tax code without changing how much everybody pays. MS has a very simply philosophy with Word: Don't break what it does. Has any of the longstanding bugs been fixed in the last five years? This is meant as an honest question without any irony: what is so goddam difficult about writing a word processor? How old is Word? Ten years? Older? How many hundred developers are working on it, how much does it cost, how many billions had MS made with it? And why does everyone use it, although it's completely broken? I really wonder what the developers working on Word actually do.