Slashdot Mirror


Word 2007 to Feature Built-in Blogging

Vitaly Friedman writes "Microsoft has revealed a surprising new feature for Word 2007: built-in blog publishing. The big surprise is this: the HTML that is generated is actually not that bad. 'Joe Friend, a lead program manager (Microsoft's term for a person who creates the specifications for software that programmers implement) has posted an entry on his blog regarding an interesting new feature being implemented for Word 2007: direct publishing of blogs to the web from within the program.'"

15 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. Spelling the cause? by Rosyna · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You know... if Microsoft integrated a spell checker that shows squiggly lines in Internet Explorer, the main reason I've seen for wanting to use word to blog goes away.

    Gotta love Safari for that, I guess...?

    1. Re:Spelling the cause? by grammar+fascist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know... if Microsoft integrated a spell checker that shows squiggly lines in Internet Explorer, the main reason I've seen for wanting to use word to blog goes away.

      Less Internet-literate people (people who don't know HTML, people who are uncomfortable typing in a text editor, etc.) have plenty of reasons to want to use a familiar word processor to blog.

      Heck, if OpenOffice did this, I'd use it in a heartbeat. Blogger has a decent AJAX WYSIWYG post editor, but it's got a couple of inconsistencies and doesn't nearly support the wide range of formatting options in OpenOffice's writer. OpenOffice has always produced very sane HTML as well.

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
    2. Re:Spelling the cause? by Oscar_Wilde · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And Firefox 2 will have spell checking

      I'm sick of saying this: spell checking is the responsibility of the GUI toolkit not the application. Why does every damn application need to implement its own spell checker? Why does no-one other than Apple and the KDE team seem to realise that this kind of basic functionality should be available in every text box, anywhere in the GUI (but with the option for developers to disable it for fields at design time).

      If Firefox 2 has a built in spell checker then it damn well better have an option to disable it and use the standard MacOS spell-checker (the one I already use for every single other application on my system) instead.

      Don't even get me started on web-sites that implement a spell checker...

    3. Re:Spelling the cause? by Trelane · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Custom GUI toolkit.
      Using native widgets for cross-platform code has been tried. It was called AWT (Abstract Widget Toolkit) and was eventually replaced by Swing, but not before giving Java a reputation for "Compile Once, Debug Everywhere".
      --

      --
      Given enough personal experience, all stereotypes are shallow.
  2. It's Microsoft. by ComradeSnarky · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Obviously they would claim the HTML produced is "not bad". What do you expect them to say? "Our program is terrible, don't bother using it."

  3. Not bad by JanneM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know, when people are saying that the quality of the generated data is "actually not that bad", with a surprised and delighted tilt in their voices, you know your customers aren't exactly expecting greatness anymore.

    --
    Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
  4. Not just a tool, also a bit of promotion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wonder how many people that start out blogging using MS Word 07 will register for the first publisher on the list: MSN spaces. Seems Blogger is also listed, so it's not all doom & gloom..

  5. Your right it IS Microsoft. by CSMastermind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You know what, since nobody else seems to want to do it, I'll go out on a limb here and defend M$ this time. I'm impressed they claimed that the HTML isn't bad. I think it's good of them to man up. Because in saying that the new stuff isn't bad, they're admitting the old HTML code in word was.....and they're taking steps to fix the problem. If you actually looked at the source from the article (which was generated using word), it looked clean and readable. Nothing like the HTML we used to see from Word. On /. everytime Word is mentioned you get the same old responces, "I haven't touched a new verison of word since 97", "they haven't added any new features that are worthwhile", and "I don't even use the program, it's M$ they suck". Fair enough. But can you really complain about them not adding new features, then bitch when they obviously start thinking and try to? Do you think the people who post here are Word's targeted consumers? The majority of people don't really understand that much about computers, nor do they want to. They like to check email, surf the web, chat online, write in their blog, and upload their pictures for everyone to see. So the fact that the new Word might have a blog publishing feature is a big deal for most people who use the lastest versions of Word.

  6. May struggle to take off by DarthChris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Regardless of how good it is, there's a fair bit of competition in online blogging systems - many webhosts such as 50megs.com have had built-in html-helpers for years. Besides, when I think of Word, I think of letters & CVs & other formal stuff - certainly not blogging!
    As a side note, when the submitter says the HMTL is "not bad", could they clarify that a bit? Is it W3C compliant? (in which case IE6 may have trouble rendering it!)

    --
    Don't you just hate it when people reply to your signature?
    1. Re:May struggle to take off by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You beat me to it. Great the new MS autocode strongs a space...wow count me underwhelmed. Last I allowed Word generated HTML it produced a 600K file of a 4 page all text .doc. All of the office products are astonishingly bad at producing html.

      Sera

      --
      Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
  7. Re:Needless by Steinfiend · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How do you know its not wanted? There are a large number of less technical people out there who don't know HTML from a hole in the ground. For them creating their blog from within Word would be perfect. They already know how to create a document in Word so their time to create something would be shorter and as such more rewarding. The key thing to remember is most blogs aren't created for the reader, they are created for the blogger.

  8. Two Words by rueger · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Microsoft Frontpage

    Need I say more?

    The beauty of e-mails generated by Word, the strict adherence to HTML standards demonstrated by Frontpage and IE....

    And of course the literary values beloved by blogger everywhere...

  9. Re:What's the big fucking deal with blogging? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Actually, it can go either way. It depends on which style you're following...

    Fucking retards... : p

    --
    This guy's the limit!
  10. What's the big fucking deal with anti-blogging? by Infonaut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't like blogs, don't read 'em.

    I understand why you wouldn't want to read the "Why I like the color pink" blog, or the "I just took a dump" blog.

    But you're bashing on an entire medium. Hell, even television has a lot of good content hidden among the chaff. When you discount blogging out of hand, you're lumping sites like Daring Fireball, The Technology Liberation Front and IP Democracy in with the navel-gazers.

    Sure, there are a lot of useless blogs. There are also a lot of useless magazines and books. Personally I prefer a world where there are more mediums of expression, not fewer. Slashdot is an excellent example of this. It could easily be considered a group blog, filled with useless opinions, but it is obviously more than that. Get all your information and all of your opininions from Big Media if you want. I like having more options.

    --
    Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
  11. Re:Spell checker in every text box??? No thanks. by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I see you've never used Mac OS X. It's not bloatware. It's the lack of bloatware. I get spellcheck in an AIM client, an IRC client, an e-mail client, a text editor, a browser... but it's not five different spell checkers, each one adding bloat. It's just one spell checker, that works where I want it... except in Firefox, my default browser du jour.

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;