?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous | Next

More later. Rant now.

Word produces the most hideously b0rken, user-gets-raped-in-the-arse-with-a-cheese-grater-dildo grade HTML output. That is without a doubt. A fact, something that will probably never change.

But by the entire contents of @DEITY, Visio comes bloody close. No need for ten HTML pages, two stylesheets, three pages of XML, three graphics, frames, and far too much fucking javascript. For a single. Sodding. Image. Map.

Fuck you, Mickey$haft. Rather I code in your wanky VBA than have to fix that abortion of HTML again.

Tagcloud:

Comments

( 8 informants — We want information! )
dgg
Jun. 14th, 2005 07:14 pm (UTC)
Neither Word nor Visio are professional tools.

Even to make simple dinky office memos, they are "passable" at best.
digitalraven
Jun. 14th, 2005 07:16 pm (UTC)
OpenOffice for those doing layout or writing things that need WYSIWYG. Emacs for the rest. Including me.
triplee
Jun. 14th, 2005 07:28 pm (UTC)
I've spent the better part of the last 5 years fixing people's hacked up pages based on Word documents, older versions of Front Page[0], etc., and I feel your pain. I want the entire crew, from Microsuck down to the idiots who used those tools to make HTML to burn in the hottest pits of the deepest Hell.

Fuckers.

~EEE~


[0] Newer versions are far from standards compliant, but nothing like their predecessors.
nickys
Jun. 14th, 2005 08:10 pm (UTC)
We had to argue with one of our lecturers last year to change the course spec from requiring us to use Word to generate html pages.
digitalraven
Jun. 14th, 2005 10:16 pm (UTC)
"You require a proprietary piece of software costing a metric fuckton of money to create an HTML page. Said page can be created faster and much, much better in any number of perfectly free programs. Vi, for example. Emacs. Nvu is rather good, as is OpenOffice. Up yours, I'm not wasting my money on that bletcherous heap of malware."

As the mood says... ranty.
joexnz
Jun. 14th, 2005 10:00 pm (UTC)
you forgot the vicks vapa rub!!!!!
digitalraven
Jun. 14th, 2005 10:16 pm (UTC)
Users of Word's HTML don't get that, it'd count as lubrication. The cheese-grater is coated in curare, though.
spudtater
Jun. 15th, 2005 01:24 am (UTC)
I opened an HTML document in Word the other day to see what it would make of it. Rather surprisingly, it showed a page of neatly-indented HTML source. Changing the text and saving it again, I noticed it had somehow refrained from adding any junk to the headers, etc.. To say I was surprised would be an understatement.

So is it just creating HTML that it sucks at?
( 8 informants — We want information! )

Links

Tagcloud

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Lilia Ahner