Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items
From: Daiya Mitchell (daiyaNOSPAM_at_mvps.org.INVALID)
Date: 11/01/04
- Next message: fizzicist: "Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items"
- Previous message: Daiya Mitchell: "Re: Word document keeps opening in Notebook layout"
- In reply to: fizzicist: "Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items"
- Next in thread: John McGhie: "Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 13:50:15 -0800
Thanks very much for the info--I've passed it along as well. Let's just
hope the partial improvement in the service pack means they ran out of time,
not that they can't do any better.
Many thanks to both you and John for the more efficient workarounds, which I
also saved, and which hopefully will make their way into the hands of those
also suffering from this problem.
Daiya
On 11/1/04 1:10 PM, "fizzicist" wrote:
> Hi Daiya:
>
> As promised, here are the results of my findings on the Office 2004
> SP1 installation, and my tryout of Clive's Word 2001 workaround.
>
> Office 2004 SP 1:
> I installed it and tested it on a volume that was identical to my
> normal working volume. In testing the cross-reference insertion
> process, I determined that SP1 does not affect the stability or
> persistence of the "reloads-the-list-every-time" bug, which functions
> just as reliably as ever. However, it runs more quickly since I
> installed SP1. The list loading time was approximately 30 seconds
> before SP1; after SP1 it's down to approximately 12 seconds. That's
> still an unacceptably long wait, but at least it suggests that
> whatever is the cause of the bug is affected by something that was
> fixed in SP1.
>
> Clive's Word 2001 Workaround:
> I tried it, and it works. In a separate post to John McGhie in which I
> described my own workaround, I explained why I believe using Word 2001
> is not practical in my application -- the tiny size of the referents
> list pane and the primitive scrolling function are the principal
> culprits -- so I won't repeat those details here. I mentioned it in
> today's production meeting, whereupon it was met with a response I
> would characterize as "not exactly receptive".
>
> Predictably, there is a certain amount of indignation over the fact
> that a great deal of effort is being expended by a number of users in
> the development of a workaround, yet a similar level of concern and
> remedial effort apparently is not forthcoming from Microsoft. I
> pointed out that there is something suggestive in a remark that I
> recalled in one of John McGhie's earlier posts:
>
>> Microsoft is planning the next version of Mac Word. One of the changes
>> being debated may fix this as a side-effect.
>
> I've thought about that comment some more, especially in context with
> the evidence that SP1 did not eliminate the "reload bug", but it DID
> have an effect on it. I'm in hypothesizing mode here, so take it with
> a grain of salt, but I'm inferring that there is a much bigger problem
> with MacWord than the reload bug itself. I'm inferring that the reload
> bug is a consequence of something else that is broken in the porting
> from WinWord to MacWord, and it's such a formidable task to repair it
> or redesign it that MBU is balking at the commitment of resources that
> effort would require.
>
> At least, that's the only kind of explanation that makes any sense to
> me. It certainly doesn't make any sense that a bug this serious could
> be allowed to persist for so long if it were a relatively simple or
> easy matter to fix it. Methinks there are deep waters here.
>
> This has been a pretty interesting thread. It has certainly stretched
> me quite a bit as a Word user. Thanks again for your inputs as a part
> of that process, Daiya.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Vito
>
>
> fizzicist@mac.com (fizzicist) wrote in message
> news:<136542ef.0410292223.bf4281b@posting.google.com>...
>> Hi Daiya:
>>
>> I haven't installed SP1 yet. There's a whole security procedure I have
>> to go through before I can clear an update for installation on the
>> project workstations, running them on a test bed volume that's a
>> precise clone of the working volume to check for incompatibilities
>> with other software. I'm not griping about it...the procedure makes
>> sense from a process workflow standpoint. Nothing gets installed until
>> it's been cleared by the Resources CM System Manager. That'd be yours
>> truly. I'll probably make time to do it on Saturday, after which I'll
>> post back here and let you know whether it makes any difference. I
>> doubt it will, though; I don't recall seeing it listed as one of the
>> things SP1 fixed, and it has evidently been such a big nuisance for so
>> long that I would think MS would be pleased to crow about having fixed
>> it.
>>
>> As for Clive Huggan's workaround, that presents problems of its own.
>> I've already found incompatibilities running Word 2004 docs back
>> through Word X; so, the opportunity for even greater
>> backward-incompatibility mischief probably skyrockets going back yet
>> another version to Word 2001...not to mention whatever gremlins might
>> materialize in bridging the gap from OS X back to Classic. The mind
>> reels...
>>
>> ...ah, well...as long as I'll be running the test bed volume for SP1,
>> I might as well launch Classic and fire up Word 2001 while I'm at it.
>> It can't hurt to check it out. Then all I have to do is sell it at the
>> next Project Change Board meeting. "Well, folks...I realize that we've
>> spec'd all this state of the art hardware & software, but we have to
>> port the documents back to Word 2001 in Classic to insert the
>> cross-references. The good news is that...(ahem)...there are
>> surprisingly few incompatibilities. I've prepared a list of the things
>> that won't survive the journey -- things we'll need to accommodate in
>> our workflow procedures..."
>>
>> I can hear the groans already. It certainly will make for an
>> interesting proposal...in approximately the same sense that the word
>> "interesting" is used in that venerable old Chinese curse, "May you
>> live in interesting times." ;-)
>>
>> Thanks much for your response, Daiya. I hope my
>> skepticism-cum-borderline-grumbly response above doesn't appear as
>> though I'm ungrateful. Believe it or not, there is some solace in
>> having a sympathetic ear, and I really do sincerely appreciate your
>> taking the time to post a reply to my original posts. I'll let you
>> know what happens in the test bed trials.
>>
>> Vito DiLuminoso
>
> (previous content snipped by Vito)
-- Daiya Mitchell, MVP Mac/Word Word FAQ: http://www.word.mvps.org/ MacWord Tips: <http://www.word.mvps.org/MacWordNew/> What's an MVP? A volunteer! Read the FAQ: http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
- Next message: fizzicist: "Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items"
- Previous message: Daiya Mitchell: "Re: Word document keeps opening in Notebook layout"
- In reply to: fizzicist: "Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items"
- Next in thread: John McGhie: "Re: Impossibly Slow Load-Time for Cross-Reference Window Items"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
