Hi,
I purchased NWE because it looks very promising and I like to support the Mac market.
I am working towards my PhD and find that there are many documents created on the PC using Word that Nisus cannot render properly.
I can always open them using NeoOfficeJ and they render properly every time..
Because an open source app can read these docs, is it possible to add the same functionality to Nisus??
Also, page formatting set in Nisus does not always "stick" when the same document is opened in Word for Mac. For example, page numbers placed in the upper right hand corner (APA formatting), displays in the left hand corner in Word 2004 for Mac.
Comments?
Better Word Compatibility?
Thanks for the reply.
The beta and release version exhibit the same behavior.
I've read that NWE gets it's word compatibility from AbiWord. Abi has the same difficulties opening certain Word docs as NWE.
NeoOfficeJ can open these with ease. Formatting, including the location of page numbers, tables etc remains intact. NeoofficeJ gets it's formatting of Word docs from OpenOffice.
I like NWE however I need an application that can read and create Word compatible docs to share with colleagues and professors.
Textedit even works better for some Word docs. I can also open/create these in Pages.
If the formatting is "off", the papers are unacceptable in a strict academic environment. Retention of APA formatting is a must.
I really don't want to go back to Word. I recall fighting with it (crashes, spellcheck abnormalities etc) for HOURS and HOURS when I was working on my Masters.
I understand that NWE is not made specifically for academics. I didn't think that the formatting/style features needed for academic writing differed greatly from that of other professional and consumer-level writing needs.
The long and short of it is, can we expect to see better compatibility with Word in terms of reading Word docs and also in the creation/formatting of docs?
cheers
The beta and release version exhibit the same behavior.
I've read that NWE gets it's word compatibility from AbiWord. Abi has the same difficulties opening certain Word docs as NWE.
NeoOfficeJ can open these with ease. Formatting, including the location of page numbers, tables etc remains intact. NeoofficeJ gets it's formatting of Word docs from OpenOffice.
I like NWE however I need an application that can read and create Word compatible docs to share with colleagues and professors.
Textedit even works better for some Word docs. I can also open/create these in Pages.
If the formatting is "off", the papers are unacceptable in a strict academic environment. Retention of APA formatting is a must.
I really don't want to go back to Word. I recall fighting with it (crashes, spellcheck abnormalities etc) for HOURS and HOURS when I was working on my Masters.
I understand that NWE is not made specifically for academics. I didn't think that the formatting/style features needed for academic writing differed greatly from that of other professional and consumer-level writing needs.
The long and short of it is, can we expect to see better compatibility with Word in terms of reading Word docs and also in the creation/formatting of docs?
cheers
The fault here lies with Microsoft, not Nisus. The Word document format is a kooky, undocumented, intentionally-obfuscated binary mess that changes with every release of Word, so that other apps can't keep up perfect compatibility. This makes especially layout things tricky to keep right. OpenOffice.org has a more full implementation of the binary Word format, but they have lots of volunteer programmers reverse-engineering the crap-tastic layout format (though even they don't do a perfect job).
I know this doesn't help you open your colleagues' files, but perfect compatibility is almost literally impossible (thanks to Microsoft's intentional ridiculousness).
One thing you could do, and this is kind of a wonky work-around, is open your colleagues' files that are causing problems in NeoOfficeJ and then save them as RTF. They should then import perfectly into NWE.
Going from NWE to Word should work well. It's worked almost perfectly for me, saving the files as either .doc or .rtf (it doesn't make a big difference, since Word opens both; I'd recommend just sticking with rtf, since other programs can use that). The mis-formatting of the page header may be NWE doing something not-quite-right, or it could be Word improperly reading RTF. I looked at the raw RTF of a file with a right-formatted header (that showed up left-justified in Word), and I wasn't able to tell if it was right or not. Sorry.
Although it's not their fault, we can hope that Nisus will continue to improve Word-compatibility.
So, after that unreasonably long post, I guess you may not be closer to what you need. But at least now you have an explanation why?
Ryan
www.r-blog.com
I know this doesn't help you open your colleagues' files, but perfect compatibility is almost literally impossible (thanks to Microsoft's intentional ridiculousness).
One thing you could do, and this is kind of a wonky work-around, is open your colleagues' files that are causing problems in NeoOfficeJ and then save them as RTF. They should then import perfectly into NWE.
Going from NWE to Word should work well. It's worked almost perfectly for me, saving the files as either .doc or .rtf (it doesn't make a big difference, since Word opens both; I'd recommend just sticking with rtf, since other programs can use that). The mis-formatting of the page header may be NWE doing something not-quite-right, or it could be Word improperly reading RTF. I looked at the raw RTF of a file with a right-formatted header (that showed up left-justified in Word), and I wasn't able to tell if it was right or not. Sorry.
Although it's not their fault, we can hope that Nisus will continue to improve Word-compatibility.
So, after that unreasonably long post, I guess you may not be closer to what you need. But at least now you have an explanation why?
Ryan
www.r-blog.com
From the user perspective though, it is a bit of a quandary, if you want to get rid of Word,
It seems to me that Pages renders Word docs more reliably than NWX, whereas it's custom file format is a negative; as the Nisoid's say, RTF is a pretty universal format, it's the antithesis of format-lockin and I really appreciate that about the app.
Now, if only NWX's Word compatibility could be improved, to at least be on par with what the operating system offers (TextEdit/Pages), there would be less of an issue trying to move to NWX as a (fairly) low-end permanent replacement for Word
I have to admit being tempted by Pages, in some ways (it's text rendering is sharper IMHO, as well as its Word compatibility), but the file format is the final turn off, along with the sluggish performance.
As for the AbiWord origin of the MS Word compatibility, I guess I wonder if there's greater momentum in the OpenOffice camp? Would there be an advantage to working with that codebase, or are there just too many obstacles (complexity, the license, etc.)?
It seems to me that Pages renders Word docs more reliably than NWX, whereas it's custom file format is a negative; as the Nisoid's say, RTF is a pretty universal format, it's the antithesis of format-lockin and I really appreciate that about the app.
Now, if only NWX's Word compatibility could be improved, to at least be on par with what the operating system offers (TextEdit/Pages), there would be less of an issue trying to move to NWX as a (fairly) low-end permanent replacement for Word
I have to admit being tempted by Pages, in some ways (it's text rendering is sharper IMHO, as well as its Word compatibility), but the file format is the final turn off, along with the sluggish performance.
As for the AbiWord origin of the MS Word compatibility, I guess I wonder if there's greater momentum in the OpenOffice camp? Would there be an advantage to working with that codebase, or are there just too many obstacles (complexity, the license, etc.)?
You're absolutely right that the Nisus approach with RTF is a superior way to go. Pages' file format provides a certain amount of flexibility that RTF doesn't (advanced layout, for instance), but will never be compatible with anything else, particularly not for Windows users.
I'm interested that you find Pages' text rendering is sharper. I guess I never noticed much difference. It could be, though.
Pages has its other downsides besides its file format, one of which, on my humble iBook G3, is speed. And I find it has awkward controls dealing with adding/removing pages (ironically). Of course it has its benefits, which is why both apps can happily coexist.
Regarding the AbiWord thing, my guess is that the license played a fairly large role in that. I haven't looked carefully at the OpenOffice.org license, but I'll bet it requires "derivative work" and apps that use it to be open source.
I'm interested that you find Pages' text rendering is sharper. I guess I never noticed much difference. It could be, though.
Pages has its other downsides besides its file format, one of which, on my humble iBook G3, is speed. And I find it has awkward controls dealing with adding/removing pages (ironically). Of course it has its benefits, which is why both apps can happily coexist.
Regarding the AbiWord thing, my guess is that the license played a fairly large role in that. I haven't looked carefully at the OpenOffice.org license, but I'll bet it requires "derivative work" and apps that use it to be open source.
Ryan
www.r-blog.com
www.r-blog.com
Great posts guys. 
The central issue for me remains (inter platform) compatibility with Word because most folks use or require it.
RTF is good, as long as headers/footers etc. remain properly formatted (Many scholarly formats, such as APA, require specific styles for page numbering and other attributes).
A pdf formatted document is portable but many are hesitant to accept them because they like to annotate/comment in the document.
If a document created in Nisus can't maintain those when exported, I have to own a licensed copy of Word to be safe.
It's far from an ideal situation but may be the best we'll have.
For the time being, I own Nisus, Mellel and Word. We'll see what the future holds.
cheers
The central issue for me remains (inter platform) compatibility with Word because most folks use or require it.
RTF is good, as long as headers/footers etc. remain properly formatted (Many scholarly formats, such as APA, require specific styles for page numbering and other attributes).
A pdf formatted document is portable but many are hesitant to accept them because they like to annotate/comment in the document.
If a document created in Nisus can't maintain those when exported, I have to own a licensed copy of Word to be safe.
It's far from an ideal situation but may be the best we'll have.
For the time being, I own Nisus, Mellel and Word. We'll see what the future holds.
cheers
I've often wondered why noone comes up with a shareware app for Windows and Mac that will enable annotations and comments to be made on a .pdf file. Needn't be anything elaborate just to allow annotations and possibly combining pdfs.bluloo wrote:Great posts guys.
................A pdf formatted document is portable but many are hesitant to accept them because they like to annotate/comment in the document...............
cheers,
Tacitus
History is a nightmare from which I am trying to escape.
I recently was given to edit and work on a Word file (PC, but not sure what version of Word) that was formatted, or set up somehow, in something called Reading Layout. In NWE 2.5, this document was a total mess, with a whole set of embedded comments repeating over and over throughout the document. In sum, completely unuseable. I could only see what was going on by viewing the document on a PC with Word.
The document is viewable, sans all those unnecessary (to me) comments, in TextEdit, but that program's editing functions are limited, to say the least.
I am glad, in a way, to read that it is Msft, messing around with their interfaces, that makes so much trouble for the rest of the world - a trick they learned from IBM of yore. This confirms my original decision to buy as little of their software as possible.
The document is viewable, sans all those unnecessary (to me) comments, in TextEdit, but that program's editing functions are limited, to say the least.
I am glad, in a way, to read that it is Msft, messing around with their interfaces, that makes so much trouble for the rest of the world - a trick they learned from IBM of yore. This confirms my original decision to buy as little of their software as possible.
-
martin
- Official Nisus Person
- Posts: 5228
- Joined: 2002-07-11 17:14:10
- Location: San Diego, CA
- Contact:
If you have a file that doesn't open properly, please send it to us at <A HRef="mailto:expressfeedback@nisus.com">expressfeedback@nisus.com</A>, and we'll see if there's anything we can do.
You may be sorry you said thatmartin wrote:If you have a file that doesn't open properly, please send it to us at <A HRef="mailto:expressfeedback@nisus.com">expressfeedback@nisus.com</A>, and we'll see if there's anything we can do.
but will do!
Thanks again and keep up the good work. It's support like this that makes it easy to recommend Nisus to others.
Preview in Tiger has a simple annotation feature for pdfs. It is nothing fancy, but it gets the job done.Tacitus wrote:
I've often wondered why noone comes up with a shareware app for Windows and Mac that will enable annotations and comments to be made on a .pdf file. Needn't be anything elaborate just to allow annotations and possibly combining pdfs.
cheers,
Tacitus
cheers
-
wolfcreekads
- Posts: 23
- Joined: 2004-12-15 10:16:29