Compatibility mode?

[Peggy Grall]

I have Office 2008 and for some reason just recently I notice that when I
open a new Word doc and save it for the fist time it saves in ŒCompatibility
Mode¹

What does this mean, and should I/how can I get it to save correctly.

Thanks,

Peggy G.

 

[JE McGimpsey]

I have Office 2008 and for some reason just recently I notice that when I
open a new Word doc and save it for the fist time it saves in ŒCompatibility
Mode¹

What does this mean, and should I/how can I get it to save correctly.

Compatibility mode means that you've saved it in the older
Word97-Word2004 format (.doc) rather than the Word2007/2008 format
(.docx)

To change the default behavior, choose Word Document (.docx) from the
Preferences/Save/Save Word files as: dropdown.

 

[Peggy Grall]

Compatibility mode means that you've saved it in the older
Word97-Word2004 format (.doc) rather than the Word2007/2008 format
(.docx)

To change the default behavior, choose Word Document (.docx) from the
Preferences/Save/Save Word files as: dropdown.

Thanks, that makes sense...I have encountered problems when I save in the
..docx format...some pc people can't open them. Is there another way to save
them that's better?

Peggy

 

[CyberTaz]

Thanks, that makes sense...I have encountered problems when I save in the
.docx format...some pc people can't open them. Is there another way to save

them that's better?

Peggy

Hi Peggy -

If you're already saving in the .doc [older] format & people are having
difficulty opening the files there must be another factor at play. Anyone
with Office 2000 or later - Mac or PC - should be able to open .doc files
with no problem at all - and most should be able to open .docx files as
well. But this is a different issue that stated in your original message

Are you emailing the documents? If so, that's probably the source of the
problem. Make sure you do the following:

1- Regardless of the format, make sure you check the box in Save As for
Append File Extension,

2- Zip the file & send the Zipped version as an attachment, and

3- Make sure your email preferences are set for the right encoding for
Windows compatibility - exact settings vary depending on email program.

It's also a good idea to remind the Windows users that they should Save the
file to their local drive & open that rather than just dbl-clicking the
attachment to open it. The above suggestions help insure that they do.

HTH |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[MC]

Compatibility mode means that you've saved it in the older
Word97-Word2004 format (.doc) rather than the Word2007/2008 format
(.docx)

To change the default behavior, choose Word Document (.docx) from the
Preferences/Save/Save Word files as: dropdown.

I always Save As compatibility mode. My major client isn't up to speed
on .docx and it's just easier all round.

Yes, the client should and could apply the patch to the Windows version,
but it's not as easy as it sounds. There are 2000+ computers there, and
that kind of update has to be done by their IT department, and they have
more pressing things to do than accommodate one Mac user from outside
the company.

 

[CyberTaz]

Hi MC;

and they have
more pressing things to do than accommodate one Mac user from outside
the company.

....Except that the OXML format is hardly exclusive to the Mac - .docx is far
more prevalent in the Windows environment. I also find it hard to understand
how any IT department can be too busy to keep their software investment
updated - perhaps that's why they're so busy

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[MC]

and they have
more pressing things to do than accommodate one Mac user from outside
the company.

...Except that the OXML format is hardly exclusive to the Mac - .docx is far
more prevalent in the Windows environment. I also find it hard to understand
how any IT department can be too busy to keep their software investment
updated - perhaps that's why they're so busy [/QUOTE]

My job is to provide them with documents they can open without any
intermediate steps, not to address the shortcomings of their IT
department.

We've had this discussion -- or variations of it -- more than once.

..docx may well be superior in every conceivable way, but that's not
relevant in this situation. I'm dealing with people who commission my
services and put food on my table. They are under all kinds of pressure.
My job is to solve their problems, not to add to them by getting into
this with them.

 

[CyberTaz]

Hi MC -

...Except that the OXML format is hardly exclusive to the Mac - .docx is far
more prevalent in the Windows environment. I also find it hard to understand
how any IT department can be too busy to keep their software investment
updated - perhaps that's why they're so busy

My job is to provide them with documents they can open without any
intermediate steps, not to address the shortcomings of their IT
department.

We've had this discussion -- or variations of it -- more than once.

.docx may well be superior in every conceivable way, but that's not

relevant in this situation. I'm dealing with people who commission my
services and put food on my table. They are under all kinds of pressure.
My job is to solve their problems, not to add to them by getting into
this with them.[/QUOTE]

All understood - just engaging in some "light-hearted banter"

The one serious note is not that they haven't upgraded to WinOffice 2007,
but that the converters on the Windows side have been out there virtually
since release of 2007, which is now over two years old. My understanding is
that - although they "can" be implemented separately - the converters are
automatically installed as a part of one of the Service Packs provided more
than a year ago. I can understand how a smaller installed user base might
drag their feet on updates, but for one the size you refer to not to have
even phased them in over time is simply hard to comprehend - especially in
view of the other fixes & security issues addressed but the same updates.

I can certainly appreciate where you're coming from though - and how
frustrating it can be to have to deal with such a situation.

Regards |:>)
Bob Jones
[MVP] Office:Mac

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Matt:

Well, Rio Tinto (where I work) has around 200,000 computers, and they're in
the middle of a take over. So I did not have "high hopes" of speedy action
when I raised a support ticket to get the XML converters loaded.

I got a ticket response back from the Help Desk to say that my request was
"Being considered for inclusion in the next COE Build."

I settled back to wait a lifetime for that. Three weeks later, the new
desktop appeared, with the XML converters. That was nearly two years ago!

The point is that the converters have nothing to do with "keeping a Mac user
happy." They are part of the core Office functionality, required to use ANY
version of Office from 2000 on, on both the PC and Mac platforms.

The only people who do not need the converter are those with Office 2007 or
Office 2008, which has it built-in.

The new standard Office file format is XML. It is one quarter the size on
disk, and very much more reliable against corruptions and crashes. So there
are solid business benefits in using it. Corporate IT should know this, or
they are not doing their job.

Cheers

I always Save As compatibility mode. My major client isn't up to speed
on .docx and it's just easier all round.

Yes, the client should and could apply the patch to the Windows version,
but it's not as easy as it sounds. There are 2000+ computers there, and
that kind of update has to be done by their IT department, and they have
more pressing things to do than accommodate one Mac user from outside
the company.

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[MC]

Hi Matt:

Well, Rio Tinto (where I work) has around 200,000 computers, and they're in
the middle of a take over. So I did not have "high hopes" of speedy action
when I raised a support ticket to get the XML converters loaded.

I got a ticket response back from the Help Desk to say that my request was
"Being considered for inclusion in the next COE Build."

Key phrase: "where I work." I'm not on the payroll at Cirque du Soleil.
I'm an outside supplier. A freelance entity. I don't get to submit
support tickets.

As such I am expected to deliver what am contracted to deliver. If I do
it in a way that no one can read I won't get asked again.

If I raise the issue, I can assure you nothing will happen. And it will
be regarded as an irritant not an enhancement.

I settled back to wait a lifetime for that. Three weeks later, the new
desktop appeared, with the XML converters. That was nearly two years ago!

The point is that the converters have nothing to do with "keeping a Mac user
happy." They are part of the core Office functionality, required to use ANY
version of Office from 2000 on, on both the PC and Mac platforms.

The only people who do not need the converter are those with Office 2007 or
Office 2008, which has it built-in.

The new standard Office file format is XML. It is one quarter the size on
disk, and very much more reliable against corruptions and crashes. So there
are solid business benefits in using it. Corporate IT should know this, or
they are not doing their job.

So what? Not every IT department treats it as any kind of a priority,
and I have no -- zero -- influence over this. I assume they operate on
the principle that if it ain'tbroke they won't fix it, and no one is
asking for it to be fixed.

I simply set my preferences to save as .doc and forget about it. Nothing
has exploded. No one is bleeding or on fire.

I'll say it once more, and then shut up about it because this is *so*
tedious.

..docx is a superior file format.

There. I said it. I hope everyone gets it. I agree. It's better.In every
possible conceivable way.

But I will continue to use .doc until my clients get around to changing
things on their end.

And I will not be telling any of the people who put food on my table
what they "should" be doing.

Finis.

Talk amongst yourselves.

And a very Happy Christmas.

 

[Clive Huggan]

And a very happy Christmas to you too, Matthew!

I've enjoyed seeing you give curry to our learned colleague McGhie. One
needs energy to do it. No doubt consulting to Cirque du Soleil sees some
considerable energy rub off... ;-))

Consulting to the seafood industry as I do (in part) only sees slimy, smelly
stuff rub off...

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
============

 

[JE McGimpsey]

Well, Rio Tinto (where I work) has around 200,000 computers, and they're in
the middle of a take over. So I did not have "high hopes" of speedy action
when I raised a support ticket to get the XML converters loaded.

I got a ticket response back from the Help Desk to say that my request was
"Being considered for inclusion in the next COE Build."

Key phrase: "where I work." I'm not on the payroll at Cirque du Soleil.
I'm an outside supplier. A freelance entity. I don't get to submit
support tickets.

As such I am expected to deliver what am contracted to deliver. If I do
it in a way that no one can read I won't get asked again.[/QUOTE]

If you're contracted to deliver '.doc' format, then of course you
deliver that format. Not worth posting about.

If, on the other hand, you're contracted to deliver 'Word documents',
the situation is, contractually, more murky. Depends on the client.

Sounds like yours isn't very tractable. C'est la vie.

If I raise the issue, I can assure you nothing will happen. And it will
be regarded as an irritant not an enhancement.

Yup, mileage will vary with the contractor/contractee relationship...

FWIW, I have a client who provides scores of Word, Excel, and Powerpoint
docs to his client per day. Client's workflow balked at .docx, .xlsx,
and .pptx, even though that format met the contract specification. IT
Dept. said it wouldn't help.

With his client's knowledge, he simply added a $3.50 (per document) fee
for "Legacy file format conversion" to his next invoice.

The fee lasted exactly one billing cycle. Since his client's boss values
both the contract work and his own budget, the client's IT department
was somehow convinced to figure out how to install the converters.

It was apparently cheaper than finding and training a new contractor.