Slashdot Mirror
Grassroots Response to .doc E-mail Attachments?
LurkingAbout asks: "Maybe it's just me, but it feels like people are sending Word .doc files as attachments more then ever. Typically it's a friendly acquaintance who doesn't realize that .doc is one of Microsoft's ploys to force the few remaining holdouts, like me, to shell out for a copy of Word (or better yet Office). This morning it was the director of my daughter's preschool with the monthly parent newsletter. I've taken to responding with a polite-but-educational message requesting that the sender save the file as RTF or HTML and resend. If I'm feeling long winded I sometimes go into a diatribe about the Evil Empire. Today I started thinking that maybe there's an opportunity for some grassroots organization here. Maybe a concise well-written boilerplate paragraph for just this situation? Or a link to a web page to help educate the masses who think .doc is like air. What do other Slashdot readers do in this situation?"
See this or this. RMS and many others are all over it.
the problem is people don't care. joe average seriously does not give a rat's ass if software is proprietary or not. i've given up trying to tell people why (pick one: comet cursor/word/kazaa regular/etc) is bad because they just don't care. it works for them and that's all they care about.
...and that's all there is to it.
"If I'm feeling long winded I sometimes go into a diatribe about the Evil Empire. Today I started thinking that maybe there's an opportunity for some grassroots organization here. Maybe a concise well-written boilerplate paragraph for just this situation?"
.DOC file to transmit data was being used to promote a monopoly by an 'evil empire', I'd tell you to take it and stick it up your butt. Sorry to be blunt, but you're going to get a lot of other responses like that. Don't make global issues out of the private use a file format. Microsoft has a .DOC monopoly whether you or anybody else you know uses that file or not. That's how everybody's going to see it. So why make them sound like the bad guy?
.DOC file. Can you resend it as .RTF?" Easy. Believable. And it won't make you look like you're making a mountain of a mole-hill.
If I got an email telling me how using a
Instead, appeal to a more urgent need. "Doh, I can't read this
"Derp de derp."
Doesn't this sound a bit rude?
.doc. Wordpad opens .doc. Microsoft provides a free viewer for word documents - I think it runs in WINE. OS X's TextEdit opens .doc as well. If that's not universally accepted, I don't know what is.
Sure, I wish everyone used RTF. Fact is, they don't. Deal with it. If they sent it in HTML, you'd be complaining about how word mauls the HTML code.
OpenOffice opens
I'd REALLY like to see PDF universally supported, but it just hasn't happened - until windows ships with native pdf support built-in - both viewing and creating, it will remain a format unusable to AOL users and computer-wielding grandmothers
Now, if you want to complain about people sending out 25mb powerpoint attachments, I definitely understand. But this is just silly and doesn't help push forward the OSS movement. If just makes you look like a jerk.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Just tell offenders "If you don't send me in .doc format, I won't be forced to buy MSWord to read it."
It's simple, and effective. People are not educated about freedom as speech yet, don't even mention open file formats, but they can understand what a couple of hundred bucks mean.
Why not "upgrade" these virii-venerable files at the [mail] server level? When a .DOC file is received at the mail server, it should be converted into a better "more harmless" format - like .TIFF or .SXC or something.
.TIFF image in thier email message instead of the .DOC file. If they need to make changes to the document, you can virus-scan it on a case-by-case basis or whatever.
Inform your users about the change. Send them a
Now obviously, this probably wouldn't work at a Law Firm or some other HIGH-VOLUME document facility, but it's a start and I think it would work fine in many small business scenarios.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
Oh for God's sake, put your tin foil hat away and give it up. DOC is a ubiquitos standard just as much as Windows is a standard, and its well past the point where other options might replace it.
.doc format is today's standard.
.doc file in Windows, on a Mac, on a Linux system, on BSD, on a cell phone, on a PDA, on pretty much anything you want. You can't say that for anything except for maybe RTF, plaintext, and HTML-- and who on earth uses RTF? As for HTML, HTML is not exactly user friendly as a format for editable stylized documents.
And why you might ask? Well say what you will about the bloat of Word 2003 or how much you hate Microsoft, but back in the early 90's when there were DOZENS of different word processors to choose from and Windows was far from the standard, MS Word took the cake. Microsoft did a better job on Word than the other companies did with the other options at the time, and thats why Microsoft's
I don't know what you are even complaining about. You can open a
"Evil Empire" indeed. This passes for news these days?
This is tricky, because they need to learn more before they try OpenOffice, or they'll be turned off right away.
/. reader.... Boom! Disaster strikes:
Before the education process, the trouble with OpenOffice is simple -- as long as they're using Word, they can save a document and most people will be able to read it.
But when they start using OpenOffice, they'll find that when they save a document now almost NO ONE can use it.
Then they see all those choices in the "save as type" dialog and say "whoa, don't want to touch that". Even saving in Word format has 3 choices. They won't know instinctively that HTML or RTF is "better" than, say, "StarWriter 3.0 Template". Both sound equally foreign (though html maybe rings a bell... but no, wait -- that probably won't work unless I start up the internet first). Let's say they crossed their fingers and went with RTF after an email from a
"Saving in external formats may have caused information loss." Boy, that message frustrates me, because I know how most people read it (I remember switching my wife over to OO - she panicked at that dialog). They imagine whole paragraphs excised, pages gone poof. And worse -- why should they know how programs handle "files"? As far as they know, the original document (before the Save As) is also trashed now. "Information loss" is why they aren't supposed to open attachments anymore at work. Of course that looks bad.
This may all be easier a few generations from now, when the basic protocol of a computer program is taught in school and understood from an early age. For now, though, the education process is slow for most people... partly our fault, because we don't understand that new computer users are missing the basic assumptions that seem obvious to us. And also because there *are* huge pitfalls that aren't obvious. Driving a car is complicated and dangerous, but the big dangers are obvious at a basic level. Stay on the road, and don't hit other cars (or get in their way). On a computer, the catastrophes are subtle and don't feel any different from doing things right. You open an attachment from someone you know. You accidentally delete half your paper while placing the cursor and typing... then hit Save and close the word processor (recycle bin won't help you now!). Your finger presses the mouse button by accident while you're moving the mouse and drag some important system folders into another folder. Where did they go? Was that bad? Not until you reboot. You don't understand the choices on a dialog, and click the wrong button. Your DSL provider only mentioned "firewall software" somewhere in the install booklet, and you didn't know what that meant so you skipped it (my parents just got cable broadband, and I asked my Mom about this -- she'd never heard the term before).
The frustrating thing is that using a computer *could* be so much easier and safer... ah, well. What was my point here again? Oh, yeah -- education required. More than most people think.
There are only 10 types of people: those who understand decimal, those who don't, and, uh, 8 other types I forget.
Yes, he is overreacting. You will not get the world to bend to your idiologies. Simply use OpenOffice. I really don't understand the point of crying over .doc(s). As an IT director, I have learned not to try to press my views on customers/business associates. You learn to adapt. There are perfectly suitable software suites available to handle .doc(s) without using a MS app. Get over it, the sheep will come home in good time. Just be prepared to offer a hand during their transition. Make a point of illustrating the advantages of the alternatives whenever the subject of the shortcomings of Microsoft Office comes up, and don't preach - noone likes that.
All those that use computers are not geeks. Consider the fact that they are just trying to distribute their content in the medium most convienent. Seriously. Otherwise you come across like a mormon knocking on their door to tell them about Jesus. Who answers that door?
ymmv
Just say "Although the file arrived undamaged, I'm afraid I couldn't read your attachment. You could perhaps send it again in PDF or plain text format."
If you want to be more specific, you can say "I can't get Microsoft Word for my machine and therefore can't your attachment. Could you please send it in PDF or plain text format?"
Long-winded talk of "monopolies" and "politics" are unlikely to be any more effective and will only make you look unprofessional to many people.
A polite reply saying "I don't have Word, please send in X format" is enough.
Nobody is under any obligation to buy MS products to communicate with other people.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
What a lot of people don't seem to get is that there are really two use cases for sending documents by e-mail:
In case 1, PDF should be the be-all and end-all. It displays and prints perfectly on virtually any platform.
In case 2, there should be an agreed format for sending. Something like DOC may be acceptable, but if this is the kind of thing the recipient(s) can negotiate, then it may be perfectly appropriate to suggest SXW, text, etcetera.
Problems usually occur when people mistake case 1 for case 2. If exporting to PDF is popularised, this may happen less often.
Geek: "I can't read .doc files. Please use a non-proprietary format."
Luser: "What's a .doc file? I dragged an icon labeled '2004 annual report' and you tell me you can't read it?"
No, it really doesn't get the message across, which is the entire problem. It gets you a message back that says "your attachment doesn't work with windows". Like it or not, SXW is a very unpopular format, whereas DOC is very popular. Sending stuff in SXW doesn't send your message, only miscommunication. It simply isn't practical to do so.
Tired of legitimate data sources? Try UNCYCLOPEDIA
Signed PDF files can still be had, but they're much more secure and they're also just about as ubiquitous when it comes to people being able to make use of the information within. Provide a link to ghostscript and show'em how easy it is to install a pdf "printer" with (most of) the bells and whistles.
The message I had in mind was that people shouldn't take it for granted that "everybody" uses MSWord.
It's not, after all, that hard a concept, and unless you're very young, you will have already seen evidence of this. Between 10 and 15 years ago, for example, it was perfectly acceptable for there to be opposing camps for document formats (WordPerfect, Word, Works and all those others). People accepted these incompatibilities and just got on with their jobs. Hence if something needed to be accessible by everyone, you sent it in text. No problem.
Now there are cross-platform options for sophisticated formatting of documents, there is no excuse for insisting on the use of a package widely regarded as the product of a bullying monopoly.