 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Mac Forum / Applications / Word / September 2007Word not updating
I recently downloaded the 11.3.7 update. Today when I was having problems with page numbers I looked in the "About Word" section and see that I am only running 11.3.5. I checked for updates but my computer told me there were updates. Where did my files for 11.3.6 and 11.3.7 disappear? How do I find them and what do I do so that my Office is running the latest updates. TIA! Julie > I recently downloaded the 11.3.7 update. Today when I was having > problems with page numbers I looked in the "About Word" section and > see that I am only running 11.3.5. I checked for updates but my > computer told me there were updates. Where did my files for 11.3.6 > and 11.3.7 disappear? How do I find them and what do I do so that my > Office is running the latest updates. Hello again. Don't sweat it. The update droids at Microsoft do not understand how much anxiety that causes. The 11.3.7. Office update left Word at 11.3.5. Word itself did not change, but one or more of the components shared between it and the other bits of Office did. I hope that makes sense to you. It barely does to me. Sometimes I sit here with my mouth hanging open wondering if they should be watered rather than fed.  SignatureTo de-mung my e-mail address:- fsnospam$elliott$$ PGP Fingerprint: 1A96 3CF7 637F 896B C810 E199 7E5C A9E4 8E59 E248 Elliott, Thanks again for the info. I won't sleep over this. Odd that there has been 2 updates but the version number hasn't changed. Maybe it isn't so odd. I also have a PC but prefer my Mac because it normally doesn't do odd things like this. Julie Hi Julie: The actual explanation is sillier than Elliott is letting on... The "Version" of the application is welded into the main executable by the compiler at build time. The main executable has not updated for a while: only the peripheral things such as filters and dialogs. So they haven't had occasion to open the source for the main executable. So they haven't updated the version number. If they opened it just to update the version number, that would be a "change" and they would have to re-test it. They would then have to include it in the download, making the updater twice the size... They have promised to improve this mechanism. Sometime... He's right, they should be watered... Cheers On 30/09/07 6:22 AM, in article 1191099128.601604.49240@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com, "Julie27" <frau@ligtel.com> wrote: > Elliott, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Julie SignatureDon't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/ Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to. John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/ Nhulunbuy, Northern Territory, Australia +61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name Just chalk it up MicroSoft. They are a odd lot to begin with. One Look at Bill gates Picture, well set you to saying "Ohhhhh... That's why...." > Elliott, > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Julie Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112 |pjones@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjones@kimbanet.com <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm> <http://www.vpea.org> > Hello again. Don't sweat it. The update droids at Microsoft do not > understand how much anxiety that causes. The 11.3.7. Office update left [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > here with my mouth hanging open wondering if they should be watered > rather than fed. I used to feel that way when the "update droids at Microsoft" used to change application version numbers when *nothing else* in the application changed. To me, changing version numbers implies a change in code. Which implies that I then have to waste a day or so to go and do a check on the applications I've supplied my clients to make sure nothing changed that would cause a problem. Imagine if an auto manufacturer had to change all the part numbers on a car when a warranty update was done on a headlight. I understand the user anxiety, and I think that MacBU does, too, since I remember this issue being rather hotly debated several years ago. But I'm glad they came down on the side of truth-in-advertising... I used to think that it could be fixed with more information. But most people blindly install updates without reading the readme's, which tell them *exactly* which applications or components are being updated and to which version number. Since one can't *force* people to look after their own machines, I no longer profess to know how to save users from themselves... Amazingly, I've never had clients call me asking what happened to their Finder updates (10.4.7 vs. OSX 10.4.10). I never thought of the consultants who need to keep their customers informed on how updates will affect their computer usage. That has to be a nightmare considering how rare it is for any 2 customers to have the same computer set-up, software, needs, etc. I will confess that I don't always read the "Read me" file but I normally wait a week before doing any updates until I know if it has caused problems with other people's computers. Occasionally I glance at the Apple discussion forums to see if there are issues. I know I should be more pro-active in how I treat my computer but usually I just want to get my work done. I only notice something when a problem occurs. I had a page numbering problem and that led to me discovering that the version number wasn't current. Now I know not to worry about the version number. Julie > I will confess that I don't always read the "Read me" file but I > normally wait a week before doing any updates until I know if it has [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > that the version number wasn't current. Now I know not to worry about > the version number. Well, please forgive my rant, 'cause it wasn't directed at you by any means. It's perfectly rational for most users to think of Office as a monolithic entity for which all the components have the same version. It just happens to be wrong. It's partly an artifact of providing "Office updaters" instead of "Word updaters" or "OLE Component updaters". Leads to incorrect expectations. What's needed is a way to inform users that they have the appropriate application version. The readme's obviously don't work, because most users are like you (and me, with a lot of non-critical software), that usually click OK and move on. An effective one might be to have each app's About dialog reference the Office Component Plugin (which *is* updated with every Office update), so that one could see Microsoft(R) Word Version 11.3.5 (Office Version 11.3.7) which works for most installations when the updates are properly applied. The problem with that occurs if, for example, Office Version 11.3.7 is applied, and for some reason Word doesn't get updated. There's no way for Word to know whether a later update has been unsuccessful. Which is why you *should* "worry about the version number", just not worry because it's not the same as the overall Office version. So I was being literal when I said that I don't know what the right answer is... >> Hello again. Don't sweat it. The update droids at Microsoft do not >> understand how much anxiety that causes. The 11.3.7. Office update left [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Amazingly, I've never had clients call me asking what happened to their > Finder updates (10.4.7 vs. OSX 10.4.10). Use but if you notice when you receive a Mac update (from software update; before you actually hit return or enter to start the update, in the box below usually is a detailed description of what's being updated and why it is. Its always been that way from system updates, to Java updates, to Quicktime Updates, etc. Its there naming convention at MS that's the problem. if they would just explain what actually is updated instead of saying 11.3.5 and implying everything is upgraded. Apple only updates desired components and leave the rest alone. but they do a good job of explaining what is being updated in an update. Another thing that apple does well that MS doesn't is if say you've been using OSX.3.2 and want to update to OSX.3.9 you can do incremental updates. or you can download a combo update which rolls all the changes in to one updater up to the point the combo updater came out. MS doesn't do this your required to do incremental until you get to the last update. Its just a different way of doing things. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112 |pjones@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjones@kimbanet.com <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm> <http://www.vpea.org> > Use but if you notice when you receive a Mac update (from software > update; before you actually hit return or enter to start the update, in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Apple only updates desired components and leave the rest alone. but they > do a good job of explaining what is being updated in an update. MacBU doesn an excellent job of explaining what is being updated in an update in the readme file. I may be remembering wrong, but I think that even with MS AutoUpdate you can read that first before the update is applied. I agree that Apple's format is better, but the info is there. A Frankly, I doubt many folks read Apple's explanation, either. > Another thing that apple does well that MS doesn't is if say you've been > using OSX.3.2 and want to update to OSX.3.9 you can do incremental > updates. or you can download a combo update which rolls all the changes > in to one updater up to the point the combo updater came out. MS doesn't > do this your required to do incremental until you get to the last > update. Its just a different way of doing things. MacBU has in fact done somewhat the same thing in both Office v.X and Office 2004. They'll issue two or three incremental updates, then the next will be a combo. For instance, the 11.3.5 updater for Office is a combo - you can apply it to 11.3.0 to 11.3.4. >> Use but if you notice when you receive a Mac update (from software >> update; before you actually hit return or enter to start the update, in [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Frankly, I doubt many folks read Apple's explanation, either. While this is true, it available for them to do so. I'm in the minority, I do read the info before updating. I usually update anyway. But I do read them. >> Another thing that apple does well that MS doesn't is if say you've been >> using OSX.3.2 and want to update to OSX.3.9 you can do incremental [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > next will be a combo. For instance, the 11.3.5 updater for Office is a > combo - you can apply it to 11.3.0 to 11.3.4. I have set up to do the auto update for office and I must say they do have a little blurb about Its recommend to do this update for secuity and performance .... But I've never seen it tell exactly what is updated. Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112 |pjones@kimbanet.com, ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjones@kimbanet.com <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm> <http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm> <http://www.vpea.org> |
Reply to this Message |
 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.