In article <civ%g.80681$073.56099@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Bob Levine
<robjlevin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> > In article <ipo%g.80656$073.43248@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Bob Levine
> > <robjlevin@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> >
> >>Helpful Harry wrote:
> >>
> >>>If one fool's answer to everything was not basically "don't use
> >>>'RageMaker', but InDesign", then maybe I might have wanted to stay
for
> >>>more than half-a-dozen messages and therefore try to find some
> >>>workaround for ONE newsgroup out of the 100+ I subscribe to not
wanting
> >>>quotes of previous messages.
> >>
> >>You're obviously one of the minions of PM users that are still upset
> >>that Adobe abandoned the program. Why you don't understand that it was
> >>Aldus that realized that new program was the only way to move ahead is
> >>mind bongling to me.
> >>
> >>If Adobe had called InDesign PM 8, 9, CS, or CS2 would you calling
those
> >>who recommend an upgrade fools?
> >>
> >>If you took the time to look around the PM forums, you'd see that
almost
> >>every post is answered by a FORMER PM user. I try to help, but the
> >>bottom line is that the answer is almost always that silly workarounds
> >>can be avoided by upgrading to InDesign.
> >
> > All completely irrelevant.
>
> No, it's not. When someone posts that they're trying to run PM 6.5 on
> WinXP that's all I need to hear. It's simply unsup****ted and a complete
> waste of time to troubleshoot.
>
> When someone asks why their transparent graphic has a white background
> in PM, I'm going to tell them PM doesn't sup****t transparency but ID
> does. Either upgrade or learn to draw clipping paths. What's that? You
> want the nice feathered edge. Sorry, no dice.
>
> When they post about the annual re****t with 125 tables that need to be
> im****ted from Excel, I'm going to suggest InDesign. Or do you actually
> think that Adobe Table is a satisfactory tool when you have deadline
> approaching?
>
> Sometimes upgrading isn't just the best answer, it's about the only
> answer. One of these days you're going to need a new computer. What are
> you going to do then? The new Macs won't sup****t classic at all and
> running PM under it on the older Macs is a crapshoot, too.
>
> I'm sure Vista will be the end of PM on the Windows side.
>
> > If someone asks a question in a PageMaker forum then they want a
> > PageMaker answer, not simply some idiot that tells them just to buy
> > InDesign ... that's NOT helping.
>
> There you go again. Anyone suggesting an upgrade is an idiot. Why is
that?
Anyone answering a question about PageMaker with the ONLY answer of
"just upgrade" while also calling the product silly names within it's
own forum / newsgroup *IS* an idiot.
The original person wants help, not a sales pitch. If something can't
be done in PageMaker, then by all means suggest InDesign as ONE
alternative alongside other possible workarounds.
> > It's not completely different. When you're in forum you don't go
around
> > calling the main topic of that forum by silly names ... if you don't
> > like the product, you stay out of the forum for it, otherwise you ARE
a
> > troll (at best!).
>
> Again, I wasn't referring to the PM forum, but the ID forum. Please pay
> attention.
Yes, and *I* was referring to the PAGEMAKER forum all along, but you
keep swapping to the InDesign one ... and I'm the one not paying
attention?? Geez. :o\
> > Yes, I call it "Quack Xpress", but only in here. If I went into a
Quark
> > forum I wouldn't use that them ... common decency, common sense,
common
> > courtesy.
>
>
> >>>There's also no real reason that there can't be a InDesign and other
> >>>Adobe newsgroup in the Usenet listings, even Microsoft has lots of
> >>>them.
>
> No reason? You sound like the people that complain that Word has a
> feature and so should InDesign. What makes you the authority on this?
> Who cares what MS uses for sup****t? Adobe has chosen a web interface
> that has a mirrored NNTP access. So what's the problem?
NNTP access is not the same as a *Usenet* Newsgroup, which is what I've
been talking about all along. Adobe run their own forum probably so
that they can keep control of it, whereas many other big companies
provide proper Usenet Newsgroups, or at least push their newsgroups out
into Usenet as well.
There's exactly ONE Adobe newsgroup in Usenet: alt.com.apps.adobe.
There's 1370 newsgroups for Microsoft products (I don't know how many
are actually run by Microsoft themselves), 185 newsgroups for
Macromedia products, etc.
Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hard****ps ;o)
|
