Joerg wrote:

>Discard previous states? That would be great to know because it'll get 
>rid of meta-data. AFAIK only a brand new version of Word can do that via 
>some helper routine. OpenOffice can't do it either as far as I know.

What happens when you select all, copy to clipbard, shut down Word,
restart Word, create a new blank Word document, and paste the saced
information into it?  

-- 
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>;

Ignacio G.T. wrote:
> Joerg escribió:
>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>> Joerg wrote:
>  >>>
>>>> How can I reverse anything on the *.doc file to make it smaller?
>>>
>>> I believe you can do the reversal, but it won't make it smaller! 
>>> However, IF IRC there is an option somewhere that allows you to
>>> discard the retained previous states when saving.  Using it makes
>>> saving a longer process - whee.  I virtually never use word (I
>>> stick to text files to all purposes) so I don't really know.
>>
>> Discard previous states? That would be great to know because it'll get 
>> rid of meta-data. AFAIK only a brand new version of Word can do that 
>> via some helper routine. OpenOffice can't do it either as far as I know.
> 
> Try Tools -> Options -> Save. Uncheck "Allow to save quickly" (or 
> something like that, I am translating from the Spanish 2002 version)
> 


It only has the auto-recovery option. But the meta-data is inside the 
file and that's what makes the Word format not suitable for exchange in 
a biz enfironment. MS has issued some kind of helper routine that scrubs 
this stuff but it won't work on older versions.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Guy Macon wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
> 
>> Discard previous states? That would be great to know because it'll get 
>> rid of meta-data. AFAIK only a brand new version of Word can do that via 
>> some helper routine. OpenOffice can't do it either as far as I know.
> 
> What happens when you select all, copy to clipbard, shut down Word,
> restart Word, create a new blank Word document, and paste the saced
> information into it?  
> 

Well, yeah, that's how it's done. But now you have to repeat a lot of 
formatting such as margins, footers, page count, page numbers etc. Quite 
cumbersome.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

Andrew Smallshaw wrote:
> On 2008-06-23, Joerg <n...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>> Joerg wrote:
>>>
>>> At that size I daresay it included some editing, and you could
>>> reverse that at will.  If so, I can think of ways to discourage
>>> them from such practices.
>> Don't know. I stored my copy back as PDF which got it down to around 
>> 10MB. Still a lot, but less. Now I can't edit it anymore but I am not 
>> supposed to anyhow.
>>
>> How can I reverse anything on the *.doc file to make it smaller?
> 
> There's an NSA paper on how to do this in various software packages.
> Different aim entirely (secrecy) but the results are the same.  Do
> a web search for "Redacting with Confidence".  Don't have a link
> handy right now.
> 

That paper mostly states the obvious, that MS has issued a scrubber 
routine that works only on 2003 and younger versions and that else you'd 
have to redact, then copy and paste into a new document.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

larwe wrote:
> On Jun 23, 11:59 am, Chuck Cox <chuckP...@synchro.com> wrote:
> 
>>One of our clients uses VMWare to encapsulate and archive their
>>embedded development environments and we have just started exploring
>>using it ourselves for future projects.  Have you found any gotchas?
>>I'm particularly concerned about problems with license managers and
>>hardware debuggers.
> 
> Which is precisely where you'll hit the problems. Unfortunately the
> bottom line is that even with "perfect" emulation software you'll be
> subject to the whims and vagaries of the underlying OS and the real
> hardware on which you're running it.
> 
> I have found several h/w debuggers that don't run at all inside
> emulation (USB-based, mostly).


I have both a eZdsp F2812 with integrated parallel port JTAG emulator 
and a XDS510PP+ parallel port JTAG emulator from Spectrum Digital which 
work well with VMware contained Win2k.

SD has a new inexpensive USB emulator, for $249.  I will probably get it 
for a spare that I can use with an XP laptop for in the field 
reprogramming (which for me means down the hall in one of the labs).  I 
suspect it will not function with VMware.

However, I do have an old VMware.  I'm not sure if newer ones implement 
more of the USB functionality.

Some instruments work under VMware, like I think my Agilent scope works. 
  Some don't.  It depends.


-- 
Good day!

____________________________________
CRC
c...@BOGUSsbcglobal.net
NOTE, delete texts: "REMOVETHIS" and
"BOGUS" from email address to reply.

Joerg wrote:
> Ignacio G.T. wrote:
>> Joerg escribió:
>>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>>> Joerg wrote:
>>  >>>
>>>>> How can I reverse anything on the *.doc file to make it smaller?
>>>>
>>>> I believe you can do the reversal, but it won't make it smaller! 
>>>> However, IF IRC there is an option somewhere that allows you to
>>>> discard the retained previous states when saving.  Using it makes
>>>> saving a longer process - whee.  I virtually never use word (I
>>>> stick to text files to all purposes) so I don't really know.
>>>
>>> Discard previous states? That would be great to know because it'll 
>>> get rid of meta-data. AFAIK only a brand new version of Word can do 
>>> that via some helper routine. OpenOffice can't do it either as far as 
>>> I know.
>>
>> Try Tools -> Options -> Save. Uncheck "Allow to save quickly" (or 
>> something like that, I am translating from the Spanish 2002 version)
>>
> 
> 
> It only has the auto-recovery option. But the meta-data is inside the 
> file and that's what makes the Word format not suitable for exchange in 
> a biz enfironment. MS has issued some kind of helper routine that scrubs 
> this stuff but it won't work on older versions.
> 

It's not the only thing that makes .doc format unsuitable for exchanging 
data.  The file formats vary according to the version of Word used to 
create it, and the support for importing different formats varies by 
version.  It's a read-write format, and therefore totally unsuitable for 
sending documents to others if you don't expect them to modify them. 
Printouts are inconsistent - things like page breaks and fonts will vary 
dramatically depending on the installed fonts and settings on each 
individual PC.  And of course, .doc is not a standard and is not 
properly documented, and therefore is unsuitable for long-term archiving.

If you are sending files to someone who is not expected to edit the 
files, you'd have to have a very good reason for using something other 
than pdf.  If you are storing or sending editable files, the only 
standard format is open document.  Soon MS Office will have decent 
support for open document, and there will no longer be any reason to use 
.doc files.

And if you are paranoid about what might be in your open document files 
(such as revisions), you can simple rename the file to ".zip", open it 
and view the xml text.

Everett M. Greene wrote:
> CBFalconer <c...@yahoo.com> writes:
> 
>> I virtually never use word (I stick to text files to all purposes)
>> so I don't really know.
> 
> I don't use Word except under duress.  I'm mostly interested in
> handling program source files and compiling them.  The results
> are sent back to a non-PC primary machine for most of the rest
> of the work.
> 
> A major thing I miss is a simple "print" command.  This has been
> removed/disabled in the recent M$ offerings.  I find it a major
> pain to have to fire up a word processor just to be able to
> print a simple ASCII file.
> 
> Curiosity item:  Does anyone know what the internal API is
> for the various flavors of Windows for printing?  Does the
> API expect the text to be simple ASCII, Postscript, or what?

Windows handles printing using "device contexts" - you draw your text 
onto a canvas.

But why don't you just use a text editor that supports printing? 
Off-hand, I can't think of any text editor  (except nano - but that 
hardly counts as native windows) I've used on Windows that does *not* 
support printing directly.

David Brown wrote:
> Joerg wrote:
>> Ignacio G.T. wrote:
>>> Joerg escribió:
>>>> CBFalconer wrote:
>>>>> Joerg wrote:
>>>  >>>
>>>>>> How can I reverse anything on the *.doc file to make it smaller?
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe you can do the reversal, but it won't make it smaller! 
>>>>> However, IF IRC there is an option somewhere that allows you to
>>>>> discard the retained previous states when saving.  Using it makes
>>>>> saving a longer process - whee.  I virtually never use word (I
>>>>> stick to text files to all purposes) so I don't really know.
>>>>
>>>> Discard previous states? That would be great to know because it'll 
>>>> get rid of meta-data. AFAIK only a brand new version of Word can do 
>>>> that via some helper routine. OpenOffice can't do it either as far 
>>>> as I know.
>>>
>>> Try Tools -> Options -> Save. Uncheck "Allow to save quickly" (or 
>>> something like that, I am translating from the Spanish 2002 version)
>>>
>>
>>
>> It only has the auto-recovery option. But the meta-data is inside the 
>> file and that's what makes the Word format not suitable for exchange 
>> in a biz enfironment. MS has issued some kind of helper routine that 
>> scrubs this stuff but it won't work on older versions.
>>
> 
> It's not the only thing that makes .doc format unsuitable for exchanging 
> data.  The file formats vary according to the version of Word used to 
> create it, and the support for importing different formats varies by 
> version.  It's a read-write format, and therefore totally unsuitable for 
> sending documents to others if you don't expect them to modify them. 
> Printouts are inconsistent - things like page breaks and fonts will vary 
> dramatically depending on the installed fonts and settings on each 
> individual PC.  And of course, .doc is not a standard and is not 
> properly documented, and therefore is unsuitable for long-term archiving.
> 
> If you are sending files to someone who is not expected to edit the 
> files, you'd have to have a very good reason for using something other 
> than pdf.  If you are storing or sending editable files, the only 
> standard format is open document.  Soon MS Office will have decent 
> support for open document, and there will no longer be any reason to use 
> .doc files.
> 
> And if you are paranoid about what might be in your open document files 
> (such as revisions), you can simple rename the file to ".zip", open it 
> and view the xml text.


I only use it in situations where collaboration is required and thus the 
other parties must be allowed to edit. An unspoken rules is to store in 
'97-compatible format so no version issues either.

Anything else goes out as PDF.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

David Brown wrote:

> I note your list of tested solutions is missing Virtual Box...

OK, I got home and did some testing... Not bad. Not bad at all. It
works [maybe a little slowly] with the TI hardware, which was instant
death to VMWare and Parallels. Works with the JTAG-ICE and AVRISP
mkII. Jury's still out on a couple of my other pieces of hardware, I'm
having administrative trouble moving some nodelocked licenses.

Thanks for the recommendation there, looks like a useful product.

larwe wrote:
> David Brown wrote:
> 
>> I note your list of tested solutions is missing Virtual Box...
> 
> OK, I got home and did some testing... Not bad. Not bad at all. It
> works [maybe a little slowly] with the TI hardware, which was instant
> death to VMWare and Parallels. Works with the JTAG-ICE and AVRISP
> mkII. Jury's still out on a couple of my other pieces of hardware, I'm
> having administrative trouble moving some nodelocked licenses.
> 
> Thanks for the recommendation there, looks like a useful product.
> 

Thanks for posting your results here (I haven't had time to try much 
hardware with Virtual Box, other than the dongle and debugger mentioned 
previously).

You can manually set the MAC address of the virtual NICs - perhaps 
setting them to the same address will let you run your nodelocked software?