Re: Four KBs to address problems epidemic, ubiquitous and replete on 5 above groups!

From: Howard Kaikow (kaikow_at_standards.com)
Date: 08/19/04 

Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2004 08:29:16 -0400

I agree that your cross posting was appropriate. 

-- 
http://www.standards.com/; See Howard Kaikow's web site.
"Chad Harris" <ddram32_nospam@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:OwKyE8UhEHA.1652@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Milly-- (MillyS@donteventhinkaboutmailingmemvps.org) (are there a lot of
> people  thinking  seriously about this?)  The problem of getting Office
> apps' SP1 updates in are showing up on all these groups, and most are
> shoowing up on mpo.update statistically but they are prominent and
> ubiquitous on the rest.
>
> The intent is to see the posts go down, that means that people aren't
having
> the problems that anyone reasonable at any level knows they should not be
> having.  They should be spending their time on enjoying Office, One Note,
> and Outlook and moving their learning curve from the dictum that 95% of
> Office users can only use 3% of its features.  MSFT is a great company,
but
> it's products have to be more intuitive and that is hardly to be equated
> with dumb downed.  When SP launched I saw a lot of MSFT meetings where the
> presenter started saying to groups something like "We don't want you to
have
> to worry your little heads about What's Behind the Gui"--not at Technet,
TS2
> or MSDN, but to IT Pros at professional firms who just laughed.
>
> Sadly, because of pressure borne by ignorance, Smart Tags were whacked out
> of XP RTM during its last Beta because people believed Redmond was using
> them to spy--faster than Tony Soprano would take out a troublesome
> storekeeper on his trash route.
> http://news.com.com/2100-1001-269167.html?legacy=cnet
>
>
> *There was no intent to spam, nor was there a spam result.*  KBs ain't no
> spam when this many  peoples be having moocho trouble getting a hotfix in.
>
> I *know a bell shaped curve of Enterprise decision makers would not be
happy
> that their Sys Ads or IT staff has to resort to interpreting verbose logs
or
> parsing  product code GUIDs or download subkeys or hacking the registry in
> serial fashion* so that Suzy the Administrative Assistance or the back
> office personnel can use Office to get out documents or put something on
an
> Outlook calendar or meeting schedule.  Nor should they have to, but that's
> the way things are in Redmonville, North Carolina and Dallas Texasvill
rhatt
> now.
>
> Spam is when some bozo or bozoess posts something entirely off topic to
> helping with these particular software and hardware problems and those are
> ususally promptly removed.  If you think MSKBs on this topic on these
groups
> that were carefully selected are spam, petition the boys and girls at
> Redmond and Dallas campuses who monitor these groups to remove those KBs
you
> don't think are relevant there.
>
> So if it's spam, Milly why am I seeing so many posts on the other 3 groups
> that I hit that are headed "Can't install Office 2003 update."  Sometimes
> it's can't install Outlook SP1 or One Note SP1 and although there are a
few
> reasons for each, many have the same common demonimator as the Office 2003
> SP1 problem and sometimes Office 2K or Office XP install problems outlined
> above.
>
> There's another point.  Time.  Some people who read the Outlook group for
> info, don't take or have time to read Office.misc, Offic.setup,
> office.update but experience the problem.
>
> Another is that you know what a KB is, and since you have so many ways to
> keep up with them at your fingertips, just don't click a topic as
irrelevant
> and spammy as "Four New KBs issued on Updating Office 2003 SP1--although I
> think the volume of people I run into and see on the web having the
problems
> is truly epidemic and pandemic and MSFT ought to address it with the MSI
> beyond Windows  Installer. V 3.00.3790.2180 in XP SP2 RTM and Office
> .net/Longhorn/Version 12 that's percolating right now at Redmond, Dallas,
> and North Carolina, maybe Bangalore.
>
> Just take a good look.  There are general Office SP1 questions on each
group
> that I hit.  They all should be directed to office.setup or office.update.
> *but they aren't.*    They are on all these Office related groups--just
look
> at the posts.   And Milly is right there in case Ms. Perpicia Tick doesn't
> hit it to tell them where to take their post.
>
> There was no intent to spam and it wasn't spam.  If you think it's spam,
> explain why there are about 500 posts with basically the same question
with
> a differential diagnosis of a very few causes that Sloan tried to hit in
the
> KBs just out.
>
> The average Office user isn't going to read the KBs at all nor is their
help
> disk, and unfortunately they don't know the existence of these groups, but
> that's another issue.  The average Windows user wouldn't know a KB from an
> SUV unfortunately.  Ask the next time your in a super market check out
line
> or buying a dress.   Ask how many of them are fluent in Hex or Hungarian
> notation.
> Sometimes just a little too much is assumed at Redmond.
>
> I see this phenom a lot.  People will duplicate post instead of cross
post,
> and they will continue their threads erratically and sporadically on
diffent
> groups at the same time for the same question.  So one will have 5 posters
> and one will have 10 posters trying to help with the exact same question
> posted on different groups by the same poster at staggered intervals.
>
> You're not speaking for everyone.  It's not  spam for some people.  It
will
> cut down on posts and frustration for more people if they read Sloan's
KBs.
> I see a lot of posts on each group that I hit that should properly be
> directed to One--OfficeUpdates, but they aren't.  That's precisely why the
> crosspost was done.  To get the KBs to people on the groups who all have
> multiple "I can't get my One Note, Outlook and Office SP1 in.  And there
is
> more diifficulty in getting this particular SP in for Office 2003 than
there
> has been for years of Windows and Office service packs.  Considerably
more.
>
> Most people are not going to be able parse KBs, GUIDs, and verbose logs
just
> to update Office nor should they have to.  But that's apparently the way
it
> is for reasons that are still not quite clear with all due respect to the
> major etiologies as posted by MSFT.  The average Office user on the planet
> is not going to metabolize these  Resource Kit tools well although a lot
of
> us enjoy learning about them from people kind enough and skillful enough
to
> teach us (like you, like Sloan, like the Outlook and Office experts and
> others).  Again just yell Office Resource Kit in your supermarket checkout
> line and see if it gets the same response as "J-Lo's marrying again."
>
> My point--all the people in your checkout line need and use Office and Mr.
> Ballmer and Mr. Gates and Mr. Sinofsky darn well hope that continues.  See
> NY Times Article on Office at the bottom.
>
> 1) registry keys that are way too easily corrupted
> 2) Local install cache corruptions that MSFT can't fix after 11 versions
and
> Office 12, Office Longhorn, Office Blackcomb, and Office .net or whatever
in
> the oven.
> 3) There is a tool available from the Office Resource Kit web site that
will
> fix that for you.  The Local Installation Source Tool that provides the
> ability to repair the Local Installation Source is available for download
> from
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/office/ork/2003/journ/LISTool.htm.
>  In addition of repairing the LIS, it will also provide the ability to
move
> it to another
> disk drive.
>
> 2. You are seeing the following message""This patch package could not be
> opened.  Verify that the patch package
> exists and that you can access it, or contact the application vendor to
> verify that this is a valid Windows Installer patch package."
> or some other patch specific issue.
>
> Try using the Windows Installer Cleanup Utility detailed here to uninstall
> Office:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;290301
>
> When you reinstall don't forget to not delete the local cache files at the
> end of the installation so you will have your Local Install Source intact
> and will be able to patch your Office installation without the possible
need
> of the CD.
>
> This article is speaking to concerns MSFT has about their cash cow Office
> and most of these people aren't reading newsgroups, KBs, Technet Flash, or
> any Office newsletters.
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/16/technology/16office.html
>
> Ambitious Package to Raise Productivity (and Microsoft's Profit)
> By STEVE LOHR
>
> Published: August 16, 2004
>
>
> EDMOND, Wash. - To most of the computer-using world, Microsoft Office is
the
> familiar workhorse of the desktop, a collection of software for creating
> documents, spreadsheets and presentations.
>
> But for Microsoft, which is starting to see its growth slow as it ages,
> reinventing that suite of old reliables - including Word, Excel and
> PowerPoint - has become nothing less than a key to its future.
>
> "Office defines business productivity," Bill Gates, Microsoft's chairman,
> told financial analysts in July. He added that "the productivity area is
> probably the most important franchise that we have."
>
>      Advertisement
>
>
> With that focus, Microsoft is now pursuing a strategy to transform Office
> from a bundle of programs on personal computers into a family of software
> that can put Microsoft's technology deeper into the operations of
corporate
> data centers. As Steven A. Ballmer, Microsoft's chief executive, wrote in
an
> e-mail message to employees last month, "Our biggest growth opportunity is
> with our existing base of Office users."
>
> Microsoft is banking on the Office initiative to help it fend off the
> challenge from open-source software and other competitors. But if the plan
> stumbles, Microsoft's hopes for sustained growth and greater profits could
> come under heavy pressure.
>
> The logic of building on the Office franchise is not hard to see, given
that
> it has more than 90 percent of the market for office software
applications.
>
> The information worker business at Microsoft, which is nearly all from
> Office, had revenues of $10.8 billion in the year ended in June, and
> operating profit of more than $7.15 billion. As a stand-alone business,
> Office - which on average sells for about $275 - would be slightly larger
> than the second-largest software company, Oracle, and far more profitable.
> Only the Windows operating system, the other pillar of Microsoft, is
> slightly larger.
>
> Traditional Office programs helped enhance productivity by allowing
workers
> to easily create and modify digital documents. The aim of the new
initiative
> is to increase the productivity with new tools for collaboration,
> communications, planning and document handling.
>
> New programs - like SharePoint, LiveMeeting, OneNote and InfoPath - have
> been introduced in the last year or so as part of the "Office system," a
> term Microsoft adopted last fall to replace "Office suite."
>
> The new design makes programs like Word, Excel and Outlook e-mail part of
> collaborative work spaces. In theory, a worker working in Word could tap
> into all the corporate information on a customer or project.
>
> "Making collaboration faster, easier and more efficient will be the next
> revolution in worker productivity, and we want to be in the forefront,"
said
> Peter Rinearson, vice president for new business development in
Microsoft's
> information worker group. "The goal is to make Office a tool that steadily
> delivers productivity improvements. It becomes a competitive advantage for
> the companies that use it well. If you don't have it, you can't keep up."
>
> Automating collaborative work, economists and analysts agree, is a
promising
> frontier for productivity gains. The low-cost, networked communications of
> the Internet make it a possibility. But there is a long way to go.
Analysts
> estimate that 95 percent of today's workers use the telephone and e-mail
for
> team projects. Microsoft has plenty of competition in the emerging market,
> and Office's past success could prove an obstacle.
>
> "Microsoft is trying to make Office less a product and more like an online
> service," said Nate Root, an analyst for Forrester Research. "Adoption is
> going to be slow because Microsoft is trying to change the paradigm. It's
a
> fundamental cultural change in how people think of and use Office."
>
> Yet across the Microsoft corporate campus, there is only optimism.
>
> Anoop Gupta, a former Stanford University professor and a vice president
of
> Microsoft's real-time collaboration group, points to Microsoft's own
> experience with Web conferencing as proof of the new efficiencies. The
> company's use of LiveMeeting, a Microsoft conferencing program, has
> increased to 40,000 hours a week from 2,000 hours a week a year ago. Mr.
> Gupta says that one of every five face-to-face meetings can be replaced
with
> Web conferencing tools, and Microsoft estimates that it will save $70
> million in reduced travel this year.
>
>
>
>      Continued
>       1 | 2 | Next>>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Chad Harris
> ____________________________________________
>
> "Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
<MillyS@donteventhinkaboutmailingmemvps.org>
> wrote in message news:u9hlNEUhEHA.3632@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> While we know that you mean well, please do not spam the news groups.  A
> simple posting to m.p.o.misc would have been sufficient.
>
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> --
> Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]
>
> Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.  Due to
> the (insert latest virus name here) virus, all mail sent to my personal
> account will be deleted without reading.
>
> After searching google.groups.com and finding no answer, Chad Harris
asked:
>
> | *Recent KBs that May Help with the Epidemic or Pandemic of Office 2003
> | Installation Problems*
> |
> |
> | You cannot update your Office 2003 program to Service Pack 1 (August
> | 17, 2004)
> | http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;EN-US;884298
> |
> | Description of numbering scheme for product code GUIDs in Office 2003
> | (August 17, 2004)
> | http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=832672
> |
> | Frequently asked questions about the local install source feature in
> | Office 2003(August 17, 2004)
> | http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=830168
> |
> | How to troubleshoot an update installation by using log files in
> | Office 2003 (August 13, 2004)
> | http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?kbid=884290
> |
> | hth,
> |
> | Chad Harris
>
>
>