Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralPortable MacsHardwareNetworking
Applications
Mac ApplicationsEudoraFirefox / MozillaInternet ExplorerOutlook ExpressMS OfficeEntourageExcelPowerPointWordVirtual PCMedia PlayerOther MS Products
Programming
Mac ProgrammingCodeWarriorPerl
Country Specific
Australian Mac GroupUK Mac Group

Mac Forum / Applications / Word / November 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Bad idea to have both Word X and Word 2004 on same drive?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Zack - 28 Nov 2005 16:29 GMT
I've recently purchased and installed Word 2004 on my hard drive.
Previous to doing this, I'd briefly installed Word X as a temporary
work-around to solve some printing problems I was having  with Word 5.

I now realize that Word 2004 lacks the ability to save a file in Word 5
format, and am considering whether I should keep Word X on my computer
on the chance that I once again revert back to Word 5 (I assume I can
same a file created in Word 2004, then open it in Word X and 'save as'
a Word 5 document).  Are there any possible problems with having these
two versions of Word mounted on the same drive? (Partitioning the drive
is not an option at this point).

And is there really any point in doing this, or can I just rely on Word
2004's ability to 'save as' an RTF file which would be readable by Word
5?  I don't do any writing that relies on arcane scientific or language
fonts.

Thanks!
Zack
Elliott Roper - 28 Nov 2005 16:46 GMT
> I've recently purchased and installed Word 2004 on my hard drive.
> Previous to doing this, I'd briefly installed Word X as a temporary
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> two versions of Word mounted on the same drive? (Partitioning the drive
> is not an option at this point).

It works OK for me. You might get some font conflicts, but a bit of
cunning in the use of the Font Book utility that comes with OS X should
resolve that on sunny days.

> And is there really any point in doing this, or can I just rely on Word
> 2004's ability to 'save as' an RTF file which would be readable by Word
> 5?  I don't do any writing that relies on arcane scientific or language
> fonts.
I don't have any experience with going back to Word 5 via that route,
but it sounds OK. Anyhow, leaving Word 5 lying about does not seem to
break anything, so you have the choice.

Signature

To de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$
PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810  E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.