Re: OT? Ode to Word

Subject: Re: OT? Ode to Word
From: Chris Kowalchuk <chris -at- BDK -dot- NET>
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 1999 18:36:45 -0400

I have to agree with Scott Browne on this one.

It is not "professional" to knowingly use the wrong tools because "the
client requires it." Trust me, I've tried a few times too often, and
have vowed not to do it again. If a client insists on a particular tool,
then you, if you are confident that you know what you are talking about,
must insist that you will work within the limitations of the tool, but
if the requirements go beyond those limitations, the choices must be
made clear: either change the requirements, change the tool, or, having
given your opinion and best advice, respectfully back out and let
someone else take on the headache.

What makes Word doubly annoying (although apparently SR2 fixes some of
this), is that you are not sure what the limitations are from time to
time. Will the page numbering work this time? Dare I use the automated
ToC generation, or God forbid, master and sub-documents, or will the
program crash six ways to Sunday at about the moment I hit the Print
button? What's the point? If I have to work around most of the program's
"features", I might as well scrawl the document out on the back of a
napkin. At least I won't lose any work, unless I drop it in some

Chris Kowalchuk

From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=

Previous by Author: Re: US style in Europe (was Punctuation tips (not that you need t hem!))
Next by Author: Re: Performant - is it a word
Previous by Thread: Re: OT? Ode to Word
Next by Thread: JOB OP:

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads