Front Page Calendar Links Archive Guidelines Software Feedback

Click below on name of editor / contributor for info and access to articles.

Editors

Steve Beisner
Melinda Palacio

Contributors

Jim Alexander
Mary Rose Betten
Ned Bixby
Karl Bradford
Mary Brown
Ted Chiles
Chella Courington
Fran Davis
Julia Michelle Dawson
Karin delaPena
Sharon Dirlam
Dawn Downey
Karin Finell
Reyna Grande
JNelle Holland
Bill Honey
Beverlye Hyman Fead
Cheryl Joi
Catherine Ann Jones
Martha Lannan
Molly-Ann Leikin
Andre Levi
Anne Lowenkopf
Shelly Lowenkopf
Marcy Luikart
Josie Martin
Diana Raab
Joseph Riley-Portuges
Sojourner Rolle
Kathleen Roxby
Catherine Ryan Hyde
Alison Schaumburg
Rita Shaler-Nelson
Laura Slattery
Gia Sola
Erik Talkin
Karen Telleen-Lawton
Catherine Viel
Kathryn Wilkens
Dallas Woodburn

Search Ink Byte


Ink Byte Software
Free, professionally developed software for writers:
InkByte Tracker to help you organize and manage the submission of your work to journals, publishers, agents, or any market.
InkByte for Word to tame Microsoft Word.

Would you like to write for Ink Byte?
We're looking for good articles. Contact us with your ideas for an article, a column, an interview, or a "how-to". Send us events of interest to writers for the Calendar.


RSS Feed

The Silicon Amanuensis: Microsoft Word Revisited

Steve Beisner -- April 15, 2012

What piece of modern technology is most responsible for the not-fit-for-polite-company vocabulary in your everyday speech? If you answered "Microsoft Word," you're in good company. But is Microsoft Word really that bad? Yes, and in some ways it may be getting worse.

The mis-design of Word has been a theme in many of my articles about tools for writers. A few days ago Tom Scocca, writing in Slate Magazine, confirmed many of the complaints I've had with MS Word as used by writers: unhelpful "help"; bizarrely organized toolbars and menus; display bugs that seem to lose text; auto-formatting and auto-correction that screw up formatting and introduce errors; the senseless and trouble-inducing change from .doc format to .docx format, which sets sharing with colleagues back decades... the list is long.

Over the years Word has grown more and more complex, through a process that Microsoft touts as "simplification." But in the speech of the wizards of Redmond, we've all come to understand that "simple" means "complicated and obscure".

But these things are not the central complaint that Tom lays out in his criticism of Word. The point he makes, and it's a good one, is that Microsoft Word has not kept up: most publishing today takes place on the web. If you've ever tried to write something in word and then move it to the web you know the problem. Word does not like HTML, the format of the web. Word speaks HTML with the same degree of fluency as my uncle from rural North Louisiana speaks Mandarin Chinese.

The good news is that there are alternatives to Word. I've written about many of them: OpenOffice/LibreOffice/NeoOffice is a good example. It's highly compatible with Word, but has a cleaner design and great support for the web. There are also specialized programs like Scrivener designed explicitly for writers.

So if Word has been raising your blood pressure, read Tom's article, then try some of the alternatives.