You'll likely find the reason they arent supporting the migration forward
has to do with the whole RT reset matrix. In that if your target market for
the near future is both RT & Pro experiences having the old dragging along
for the ride is still in the same problem space as it is with deskstop.
T
n that showed the most
recently (top 3) followed by most frequently used commands as suggestions to
add to the ribbon.
|-Original Message-
|From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-
|boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ken Schaefer
|Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 5:17 PM
|To:
ost frequently used commands as suggestions to
add to the ribbon.
|-Original Message-
|From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-
|boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Ken Schaefer
|Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 5:17 PM
|To: ozDotNet
|Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tange
e
Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 4:20 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
If you use Powerpoint and Access extensively your mileage may vary but other
than for a few minor niceties in Outlook I can’t think of a single ‘killer
feature’ added to the core Office progra
Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
If you use Powerpoint and Access extensively your mileage may vary but other
than for a few minor niceties in Outlook I can’t think of a single ‘killer
feature’ added to the core Office programs (ie Word, Excel and Outlook) between
Office 2003 and Office
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 4:38 PM, mike smith wrote:
> Sarchasm? :)
I like it. I just walked into a colleague's office, wrote that on the
whiteboard and walked out.
David Connors
da...@connors.com | M +61 417 189 363
Download my v-card: https://www.codify.com/cards/davidconnors
Follow me on Twit
On 13/05/2013 4:38 PM, "mike smith" wrote:
>
> Sarchasm? :)
Sarchasm - The abyss created when people are sarcastic?
* **
>
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:
> ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *mike smith
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 10:05 PM
> *To:* ozDotNet
> *Subject:* Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
>
> ** **
>
> THis is just for
com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On
Behalf Of Katherine Moss
Sent: Monday, 13 May 2013 3:52 PM
To: ozDotNet
Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
Say that again? There are still people using Office ’03? We have to get them
out of the dark ages and get them up to supported Office lev
Subject: Re: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
THis is just for Office-in-the-cloud, right? There's a lot of customers out
there that use and love Office 2003.
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Katherine Moss
mailto:katherine.m...@gordon.edu>> wrote:
I mean the new office model u
..@ozdotnet.com] *On Behalf Of *Ian Thomas
> *Sent:* Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM
> *To:* 'ozDotNet'
> *Subject:* RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
>
> ** **
>
> This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here
> goes:
>
.
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On
Behalf Of Ian Thomas
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 3:20 AM
To: 'ozDotNet'
Subject: RE: Is Surface really failing? (tangent # 99)
This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes:
This must be the most divergent tangent from the original topic, but here goes:
It is not related to HTML support (would that have changed, I wonder?) but my
guess is that it is because the legacy 3rd-party add-ins for Office would be
largely VBA add-ins or perhaps C++ COM add ins (not ever wri
13 matches
Mail list logo
