Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Elliott Roper <nospam@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 00:12:11 +0100
In article <1hhesfd.1ccawknxltj31N%usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Woody
<usenet@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Elliott Roper <nospam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <jaqhp-7E692F.21321623062006@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jake
<jaqhp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <4g2s8pF1ld69uU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Chris Ridd <chrisridd@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2006-06-23 19:33:21 +0100, Jake <jaqhp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
Suppose I have Office 2001. I upgrade to Office v.X. lt installs OK
because it can see that an older version is already there.
Why not go straight to Office 2004? I suspect upgrading in two steps
would cost more than buying 2004 outright
But I don't want 2004. At least, I don't think I do. Should I?
Activation hassles and all?
2004 is worth it for long filenames and unicode.
But..
There are reports of a 2004 bug when running on Intel processors with
certain fonts in a large document. It is a crasher. It also seems to
cause other programs to die as well.
Which fonts in long documents? I haven't had problems, but I have some
long documents.
It is not clear exactly what sets it off. Google groups:-
microsoft.public.mac.office.word
awful ATSUI opentype macbook
will get most of the recent discussion
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Woody
- Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- References:
- Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Jake
- Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Chris Ridd
- Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Jake
- Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Elliott Roper
- Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- From: Woody
- Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- Prev by Date: Re: Herman Miller Mirra chair
- Next by Date: Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- Previous by thread: Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- Next by thread: Re: Office upgrades and Intel Macs
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|