Re: Hogs

[Hayward Johnson <ndx -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>]

*Sigh* Will we never learn?

>Robert Maxey wrote:
>>
>> >>Forget it!  I recently tried to use word to put together a catalog and
it
>> >>kept crashing.  With the version I was using, Word 97, I found I could
only
>> >>put in around 3 large photos before it started acting up.

The major problem with Word is that it doesn't know if it's a word processor
or an operating system. (A typically Microbloat software characteristic.)
The problem with us tech writers is that we keep confusing Word with desktop
publishing tools.

Word is not a DTP tool. If you need to accomplish moderate to complex layout
and design in a publication, you should use a DTP tool (Quark, Frame,
PageMaker, et cetera). If you need to write a novel, where layout complexity
is minimal, use Word.

>> How much memory do you have? Word, as well as Windows 95/NT are hogs.
>>
>> RM
>>
><SNIP>
>
>RAM is so cheap today that there's simply no reason for anyone to
>continue suffering memory problems. Add more inexpensive RAM and
>move on. If your company won't pay for the RAM upgrade, buy it
>yourself if doing so will save headaches. Doing so would constitute
>a small investment in safeguarding one's sanity.

For the reasons mentioned, memory is hardly an issue.


>
>Insofar as the photographs are concerned, try saving them as JPEG with
>a competent photo tool and reducing their quality to a lower but fully
>acceptable level. You can save much RAM doing this.
>


Actually, GIFs are more efficient, size-wise, and more compliant web-wise.
And: PaintShop Pro (way less pricey than a photo tool) handles photos pretty
darn well.

BTW: Anyone out there proficient in Word (Basic) macros and/or VBA? I need
some help making Word 6 for Mac and PC automatically format UNIX text files.
Reply to this query off list to hjohnson -at- best -dot- com -dot- 


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