> On Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:21:07 -0700
> Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com> wrote:
>
> > That line of reasoning, by the way, only works if they are a monopoly,
> > i.e., it doesn't work real well for BK, there are lots of other source
> > management systems. But it works very well for things like Word,
> > that's a de facto standard, contrary to what some people here believe
> > it is bloody difficult to negotiate a contract in anything but Word.
> > Try sending a lawyer anything else and you'll see what I mean.
>
> A lot of people love reading deleted-and-not-visible parts of w.rd-docs, you
> can learn a lot out of such a doc, including some information about the network
> it was created on.
> But of course it may be of no importance what the other side thinks when
> negotiating a contract ...
>
Older versions of word used to embed random bits of memory into the doc
file that word couldn't see. I'm not sure of the versions that did it but
I once found an essay on the mark of the beast embedded in the
unreadable portions of woman's resume that didn't show until I used
catdoc. She was most upset when I showed her. That sort of error could
be catastrophic during contract negotiations if it happened to embed some
data that you didn't want to see such as opposing bids or something.
Gerhard
-- Gerhard Mack<>< As a computer I find your faith in technology amusing.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/