Re: Multiple undo (was Re: Microsoft Documentation)

["Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>]

If that's the case, it's an indication of a lack of competence in
both programs' designers.  There are many, many applications
that manage to accomplish this with much larger memory loads
than either Frame or Word.  One that I work with is AutoCAD,
which not only allows you to undo right back to the startup state
(with an "undo/back" command", but allows you to insert place
holders at any point while you're working so that you can undo
back to any saved point in your session.  This with models in the
30+Mb size range using external references up the wazoo.  This
is one reason why I'm currently investigatiing native XML editors 
for my new writing team; it's become painfully clear to me in recent 
years that working in either Frame *or* Word is more or less like 
driving around in a 1985 car that someone has repainted and 
reupholstered multiple times without ever opening the hood.
There's no way I'm going to use either as the foundation of the 
single-source/content-managed documentation system I've been
tasked to create.

Gene Kim-Eng 


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "k k" <turnleftatnowhere -at- yahoo -dot- com>
> The single-level undo is, I believe, almost all of the
> reason FM is demonstrably more stable than MS Word. My
> experience with Word 2002 on an XP system has
> convinced me that Word's multiple undo levels are
> largely responsible for all the problems with
> autonumbering, style, and other stability problems,
> because of the memory management requirements. There's
> no way to shut off undo tracking or even reduce the
> number of levels. Word insists on tracking every last
> operation no matter what its scope or nature - that
> fills up the available memory pretty fast and must be
> terribly difficult to manage.