Re: I am not an expert on raw milk

[Guest guest]

Chi-

>If you would like to have me send you a copy for you to judge and use

>or discard as you wish, please send me a direct personal e-mail and I

>will reply with the article attached. It's a MS Word file.

I'd be quite interested in seeing this, but would you consider

posting it to the list?

-

[Guest guest]

--- In , Idol <paul_idol@y...>

wrote:

> >If you would like to have me send you a copy for you to

> >judge and use or discard as you wish, please send me

> >a direct personal e-mail and I will reply with the

> >article attached. It's a MS Word file.

> I'd be quite interested in seeing this, but would you consider

> posting it to the list?

Hi :

With respect for you, I would rather just send it directly to those

who are interested enough to send me a direct e-mail requesting it

since, once they have read it, they are free to e-mail me directly

with their comments, favourable or unfavourable. So far I think about

a dozen people have requested a copy and I have sent it to all. If

PPNF decides to publish it then anyone can read it if they wish. So

far I have had no response from PPNF.

Chi

P.S. If you want to see it please just send me a direct e-mail.

[Guest guest]

>

> Hello Chi,

> I'll email you directly for a copy, but just for everyone's benefit

> besides yours, here's a link explaining why it's a very bad idea to

> distribute MS Word files to people you don't know to be in

possession

> of the proprietary and undesirable MS Word software necessary to

read

> these files. It's not " bad " as in harmful, but simply ignorant or

> rude. The former condition can be rectified with the following

handy

> webpage among the many that address the topic:

> http://www.goldmark.org/netrants/no-word/attach.html#tth_sEc2

> Personally I think RTF is usually a great alternative, but in case

> it's not adequate in a particular case, you can ALWAYS use PDF.

HTML

> is fine too. And plain text is usually perfectly adequate. I

> personally do not have or ever wish to have MS Word software. I'm

also

> not fond of using a clunky program like Open Office to read simple

> text documents.

>

> I like this line from the page above: " using MS-Word is like

smoking;

> using it for document exchange is like blowing your smoke in

everyone

> else's face. "

>

> Mike

> SE Pennsylvania

Hi Mike:

Would wordpad be better? If not, I also have an Amiga computer.

None of the dozen or so people I have sent it to expressed a problem

with MS Word. When I sent an article to Sally, she wanted it in MS

Word. Doesn't MS stand for microsloth?

Chi

[Guest guest]

[Chi] Hi Mike:

Would wordpad be better? If not, I also have an Amiga computer.

None of the dozen or so people I have sent it to expressed a problem

with MS Word. When I sent an article to Sally, she wanted it in MS

Word. Doesn't MS stand for microsloth?

[Mike] WordPad is a program, not a document format. It's a very nice

program (I use a freeware upgrade of it called Jarte) and you can use

it to save your file as plain text or rich text, but you can do the

same thing using Word already so there's no reason to bother with

WordPad if you're not using it already. In the " save as " dialogue

window there are those choices. HTML is in there too I think. Most

people have MS Word and aren't aware of this issue (just like most

people buy their milk from a supermarket and aren't aware of the

problems or alternatives), so it's not suprising to not receive a

complaint.

By the way, if someone asks for something in MS Word you can send it

to them in plain text or rich text and they can open it just fine in

MS Word and change it into an MS Word document if they want to.

(Wow, that supermarket milk::MS Word analogy is great!)

Mike

SE Pennsylvania

[Guest guest]

> By the way, if someone asks for something in MS Word you can

> send it to them in plain text or rich text and they can open

> it just fine in MS Word and change it into an MS Word

> document if they want to.

>

> (Wow, that supermarket milk::MS Word analogy is great!)

Hi Mike:

Thanks for the obviously good advice.

NOTICE TO ALL: I will be sending copies in plain text format to

anyone who, from now on, requests a copy of the article unless I am

asked to send it in MS Word. If you follow Mike's advice there is no

need to ask me to send it in MS Word.

Great analogy, btw. I usually seek understanding by seeing

similarities rather than differences.

Chi

[Guest guest]

Chi-

>Would wordpad be better? If not, I also have an Amiga computer.

You've got an Amiga? Wow, you're a rare breed nowadays! Even I

don't have one anymore. What model?

>None of the dozen or so people I have sent it to expressed a problem

>with MS Word. When I sent an article to Sally, she wanted it in MS

>Word. Doesn't MS stand for microsloth?

Unfortunately, Word can propagate certain kinds of viruses, so it's

not a sound format for distributing documents. Also, not everyone

has Word or can read .doc files.

-

[Guest guest]

--- In , Idol <paul_idol@y...>

wrote:

>

> Chi-

> You've got an Amiga? Wow, you're a rare breed nowadays! Even I

> don't have one anymore. What model?

Hi :

Still in use I have an Amiga 3000 and I still have my original Amiga

1000 with a 2 megabite expansion! Yes you IBM users, priority

multitasking back in about 1985. Microsloth didn't invent it.

Chi

[Guest guest]

> [mailto: ] On Behalf Of

> Anton

>

> Personally I think RTF is usually a great alternative, but in

> case it's not adequate in a particular case, you can ALWAYS

> use PDF.

You CAN use PDF, but if the idea is to make life easier for the person

reading it, you probably shouldn't. I'd rather read a Word document in a hex

editor than deal with Acrobat Reader.

By the way, for those who don't know, you can open most Word documents in

Wordpad. If the document uses any of the newer, fancier features of Word,

some parts might not show up, but you should usually be able to get most of

it.

[Guest guest]

,

> By the way, for those who don't know, you can open most Word documents in

> Wordpad. If the document uses any of the newer, fancier features of Word,

> some parts might not show up, but you should usually be able to get most of

> it.

With my new computer, all of the text files I make in word pad save as

a Word .doc by default. I didn't realize this at first, and didn't

have Word at first, so I had to choose " open with " --> " Wordpad. " So

like you say they are basically interchangeable.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html

[Guest guest]

-

>You CAN use PDF, but if the idea is to make life easier for the person

>reading it, you probably shouldn't. I'd rather read a Word document in a hex

>editor than deal with Acrobat Reader.

Acrobat doesn't allow easy copying of text, but why prefer Word otherwise?

-

[Guest guest]

> [mailto: ] On Behalf Of Idol

>

> -

> >You CAN use PDF, but if the idea is to make life easier for

> the person

> >reading it, you probably shouldn't. I'd rather read a Word

> document in

> >a hex editor than deal with Acrobat Reader.

>

> Acrobat doesn't allow easy copying of text, but why prefer

> Word otherwise?

Because Acrobat Reader takes longer to load, is (often much) slower once you

load it, has a clunky interface, and prompts me to upgrade to the new

version every time I launch it, despite the fact that I've already

downloaded and run the upgrade half a dozen times (though my distaste for

Acrobat precedes that last issue). PDF is a good format if you intend a

document to be printed, but IMO it's a very bad one if you think people are

going to want to read it on their computer screens. As Mike said, HTML and

RTF are probably the best formats for that purpose.

The thing about reading Word documents in a hex editor was a (slight)

exaggeration. But I'd definitely rather read a Word document in Wordpad than

a PDF document in Acrobat Reader. Microsoft also has a free Word Viewer

program which can read (but not edit) Word documents using most of the newer

features. I haven't tried it myself, though. Still, it's probably not the

best format for distributing a document over the Internet.

[Guest guest]

-

>Because Acrobat Reader takes longer to load, is (often much) slower once you

>load it, has a clunky interface, and prompts me to upgrade to the new

>version every time I launch it, despite the fact that I've already

>downloaded and run the upgrade half a dozen times (though my distaste for

>Acrobat precedes that last issue).

I'm not much of a fan of the PDF format except for distributing

material meant to be printed (for which it's great, as you point out)

but I can't help but wonder why you have those problems. Is the

interface great? No. But on my desktop and laptop it's quite snappy

and it never pesters me with upgrade notifications except when

there's an actual new version.

>As Mike said, HTML and

>RTF are probably the best formats for that purpose.

Well, that's certainly true. But Word isn't a good option because of

its propensity to spread viruses.

>Microsoft also has a free Word Viewer

>program which can read (but not edit) Word documents using most of the newer

>features. I haven't tried it myself, though. Still, it's probably not the

>best format for distributing a document over the Internet.

Yeah, because many people have neither. RTF is more widely openable,

though often formatting suffers grievously, and HTML of course is

fairly universal. At least there's a free reader on most or all

consumer platforms for PDFs.

-

[Guest guest]

On 1/22/06, Idol <paul_idol@...> wrote:

> -

>

> >Because Acrobat Reader takes longer to load, is (often much) slower once you

> >load it, has a clunky interface, and prompts me to upgrade to the new

> >version every time I launch it, despite the fact that I've already

> >downloaded and run the upgrade half a dozen times (though my distaste for

> >Acrobat precedes that last issue).

>

> I'm not much of a fan of the PDF format except for distributing

> material meant to be printed (for which it's great, as you point out)

> but I can't help but wonder why you have those problems.

That only happens to me sometimes. I deal with .pdf's constantly, and

it seems like it opens in a different interface depending on what

version the file was written in. My computer's new and I haven't

downloaded anything from Acrobat and only have what came with the

computer. I get prompted for a new version sometimes, and other times

not.

Chris

--

Dioxins in Animal Foods:

A Case For Vegetarianism?

Find Out the Truth:

http://www.westonaprice.org/envtoxins/dioxins.html