Last week I installed the RTM version of Office 2007. I had little choice; I've been using Beta 2 for quite a while, with no problems. Then one of this month's Patch Tuesday updates killed Outlook 2007. Well, okay -- it didn't kill it completely; it just crippled it terribly.

Got up Wednesday morning after the updates and Outlook worked fine as long as I only wanted to read my mail. However, sending was out of the question. Whether I tried to reply, forward, or create a new message, the error message was the same: essentially, it "just said no."

So I installed the RTM. And I can send mail again. But I'm really annoyed that they've broken one of the nicest things about Outlook 2003 (and 2007 betas) -- the ability to "keep its place" within folders. Now if I go to a different folder and then come to the one I was in, it takes me to the top message in the list, rather than to the one I had highlighted when I left the folder. A little thing? Sure. But one that makes email management a lot less pleasant.

Oh, and the RTM seems to have messed up the Office 2003 programs that were installed on the machine. Except for Outlook, I had O2003 and 2007 applications peacefully coexisting until the RTM. Now if I try to open Word 2003, for instance, the Windows Installer runs. Grrrr. Word 2003 still opens - eventually. And I doubt I'll use it much anyway, since I'm one of those rare folks who actually likes Word 2007, ribbon and all (especially the ribbon). But it's the principle of the thing. If it's not broke, don't break it.

In case I haven't mentioned it before, PowerPoint 2007 is awesome. I love the ability to make the fanciest graphics ever with a few clicks. I also like the SmartArt, although I wish there were a way to animate individual elements within a SmartArt object separately. Apparently you can't do that because if you save the presentation to PPT 2003 format, it turns the SmartArt into an uneditable graphic. Oh, well. I can live with that. I do think they made the Chart function way more complicated than it needed to be. I admit I didn't spend too much time trying to figure it out -- I gave up and made my chart directly in Excel, then cut and pasted it. Much easier.

Bottom line: I like O2007 but Outlook is the crux of the matter, the heart of Office; for me, Outlook is the interface. You want to make me happy, don't mess with Texas and don't mess with Outlook (except to make it better).

DEBRA LITTLEJOHN SHINDER, MCSE, MVP
deb@shinder.net    www.debshinder.com

Link

I thought my tiny TX series notebook was light at 2.7 lbs., but now Sony is planning to offer one that's even lighter: 898 grams (that's less than 2 lbs) - and it has a 12 inch screen as compared to the 10 incher on my TX.

Although the headline touts the light weight, to me the most interesting part of the article had to do with battery life; it claims the computer can run for 12.5 hours on a charge. Now we all know that in real life we rarely ever get as many hours out of a battery as the manufacturer says (my TX claims 7 hours; I get about 5 and a half) but if the machine can go 10 hours on a charge, that's pretty impressive.

Price is about the same as I paid for the TX. There's no optical drive, which takes away one of the uses to which I like to put the Sony: playing a DVD movie on the plane. And unfortunately, word is that Sony has no plans "at this time" to market it in the U.S.  Still, the U series ultra portables were available in Japan for years before they made it to the U.S., so we may see it show up here eventually. And lighter weight combined with a longer battery life is definitely something to look forward to.

DEBRA LITTLEJOHN SHINDER, MCSE, MVP
deb@shinder.net    www.debshinder.com

This week we added one of the "baby" (slimline) HP Media Center PCs to the network. It packs a lot of power in a tiny package that's about the size of a typical toaster. Sporting a gig of RAM and a 250 GB hard disk, it was on sale for $349 at Circuit City, so I couldn't resist.

This is the third computer on the network running XP MCE 2005.  The other two, a more sophisticated "digital entertainment center" (http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/generic...) with dual tuner cards and over a terabyte of attached storage, and a "tank" sized notebook with 17" screen, are also both HPs.

Funny how we've gravitated toward different brands for different purposes. All of our productivity desktops and newer servers are Dells. All of our regular notebooks are Sonys. And all of our Media Center computers are HPs. Makes for a lot of diversity on the network.

Here are a couple of photos of the new baby:

In the close-up, you can see its size relative to the remote controls lying on top of it and the DVDs beside it. The wider angle shot shows the whole system. On the shelf below it, underneath the keyboard, is a media center extender that connects to the main Media Center in the media room. So on this TV, you can run the HP computer from one video input and the recorded programs, music, etc. from the main MCE on a different input, or play DVDs and CDs through the home theater system on the third shelf down on a third input.

I was pleasantly surprised at how easily and quickly the whole thing set up. Especially so since we had just spent an hour trying to get a Strobe XP100 scanner to work - and never did (more on that in another post). The little HP worked immediately. Since it doesn't have a tuner card with TV out, we ran it through a little VGA-to-TV scan converter box that lets you connect any computer to the TV via S-video or composite cables. It even worked flawlessly with an old Gyration wireless "air mouse" that we had left over from our first (Gateway) Media Center PC.

So if you're looking for an inexpensive but powerful little machine to serve as a secondary Media Center, I can highly recommend this model. Remember, it doesn't have a tuner card nor wireless keyboard/mouse, so you can't record TV with it (unless you want to add an external USB tuner) but you can watch the TV recorded by your primary Media Center and perform any tasks you'd do on any XP computer.

I give it a thumbs up.

I voted early this year. Electronic voting has come to my DFW suburb, and the interface was pretty straightforward. Anyone who complains of confusion with this system really doesn't have the mental capacity necessary to make an important decision such as who should be running our counties, states and country.

It was a very simple touch screen -- you touch the name of the candidate you want to select in each race and a check mark appears by his/her name. The fonts are large and easy to read, even for presbyopic eyes like mine. When you've gone through all the virtual "pages," a summary of your votes comes up for you to review. When you're done, a red lighted "vote" button at the top of the screen flashes, and when you push it, your vote is recorded.

At least, that's how it's supposed to work.

How many among us who work with computers on a regular basis haven't had the experience of clicking a button that was supposed to do something - save a file, delete a file, perform a calculation - only to find that the operation didn't happen, or was done incorrectly? Who hasn't had data disappear forever from a hard disk, never to be found again?

Computers are far less fallible than human beings - except when they aren't. Sure, user error is by far the most common cause of computer mishaps, and the simplicity of the voting machine interface should help to reduce that. However ... despite that simplicity, I still heard people all around me asking for help from the polling place workers. Never underestimate the ability of people to mess things up, especially when they're interacting with computers. I have a friend who seems to be able to make computers malfunction without even touching them; he walks into the room and systems start to display errors. We've wondered, only half-jokingly, if there is some sort of magnetic field around his body that interferes with electronic devices.

I find it interesting -- and a little scary -- that the people I know who are most concerned about the accuracy of electronic voting machines are those who work in the computer and electronics industries. We know exactly how many things can go wrong, and how difficult it can be to diagnose or even detect them when they do.

I'm not suggesting a return to pencil and paper ballots -- but I'd feel better if there were a printout of my vote, something tangible to serve as a backup in case of a computer crash. As it is, when I pushed the button to cast my ballot, I felt a little like I do when I play the video slot machines in Las Vegas. Maybe there'll be a payoff (my vote will count). Maybe not.

I love technology. I don't necessarily trust it at this point in time, in the hands of mostly inexperienced users, with something as important as the vote.

DEBRA LITTLEJOHN SHINDER, MCSE, MVP
deb@shinder.net   www.debshinder.com