[Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (..

We have no idea!!!

This is an issue between Apple, Xerox, and Microsoft. Something got broke
in OS 10.5.1.

All of those companies have headquarters in the USA. No USA company will
ever tell you what it is "going to do" because of the legal system in the
USA. If they say anything, there's a risk they will get sued for millions.

So you will know before we do, because the fix will appear in Software
Update (if you have that turned on). We DO know that each company has
someone "paying attention to this".

Just to set an expectation: It takes a software developer between one and
three months to research, find, code a fix for, test, package, and issue a
fix for a bug like this. With at least two companies involved, you get the
situation where one has to wait for the other to fix their bit before they
can test the fix to their own.

So I would imagine this fix will appear about three months from the date the
issue was first reported. That's about as good as you can do with software
built to a price as low as this. Yes, I agree, it doesn't feel "low" when I
am paying it, but the kind of software they fix three days after your phone
call costs about $15,000.00 per year per copy

Hope this helps


On 3/02/08 11:02 AM, in article
ce2dcae3-0c43-4fc7-a713-9b5eb965db14 DeleteThis @f10g2000hsf.googlegroups.com,
"wsmknicks@netscape.net" wrote:

> When will this be fixed!!! I have been submitting this bug to this
> group, as well as Apple, as well as Xerox (on the Phaser 6110) since
> 10.5 was released!!! Why is no one paying attention to this???
>
>
> On Feb 2, 9:06 am, Beth Rosengard wrote:
>> When running on Leopard, Word 2008 and Word/PowerPoint/Excel 2004 may
>> produce blank output for some printers.
>>
>> Microsoft, Apple, and various printer manufacturers are working on this
>> issue but in the meantime, there are a couple of workarounds:
>>
>> 1.  Set the current default printer to one that doesn't have this problem.
>> Try an inkjet or low dpi laser printer, if you have one.
>>
>> 2.  Change your printer resolution to something lower if possible, like 600
>> dpi, from the print dialog.
>>
>> 3.  If all else fails or is otherwise not possible, uninstall the printer
>> and save to PDF as follows.
>>
>>   a.  Open System Preferences>Print & Fax and remove/uninstall your printer.
>>
>>   b.  Quit and relaunch Word.
>>
>>   c.  File/Save as.../PDF  (in Word 2004: Save/print to PDF)
>>                 -OR- File/Print/PDF/Save as PDF.
>>
>>   d.  Reinstall the printer.
>>
>>   e.  Open the PDF and print to any printer.
>>
>> The third workaround, while undeniably a pain, is probably best.  You may be
>> able to save up all your print jobs and only have to do this once a day.
>>
>> --
>> ***Please always reply to the newsgroup!***
>>
>> Beth Rosengard
>> Mac MVP
>>
>> Mac Word FAQ:  <http://word.mvps.org/Mac/WordMacHome.html>
>> My Site:  <http://www.bethrosengard.com>
>

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Nhulunbuy, Northern Territory, Australia
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (.. 

Hi Stuart:

It's a confirmed bug, yes. We are waiting for a patch to fix the issue.

If it was Word's fault, it wouldn't print on ANY printer, because it does
the same thing on every printer. And that's not the case: there are only a
handful of printers affected, most of them made by Xerox.

In fact, Word is not much involved in the printing process on Mac OS X. It
simply hands the file off to the OS X Printing Subsystem, with a tag on it
to say which printer it wants to send it to.

Everything else that happens is in the hands of OS X and the Printer Driver.

Did you try the work-around? That does enable most users to print on the
affected printers.

Cheers

On 8/02/08 9:19 AM, in article ee8bc9d.3 DeleteThis @webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Stuart
Wiber " <> wrote:

> I would like to add that this is a problem for me as well, and that it is only
> in Microsoft Word 2008 and not in any other program. I am inclined to place
> significant responsibility on Microsoft Word 2008. I hope that these messages
> are being relayed to the production group and that they will solve this
> problem or provide monetary compensation for all of us who have new printers
> that are incompatible with this system. These printers are between $300 to
> $500 dollars or more. For a university student, this is an important piece of
> hardware and not easily replaced.

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Nhulunbuy, Northern Territory, Australia
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (.. 

Thank you for your reply. I am using the work around. Also, I appreciate your help extending me the understanding of the workings of this bug. But I am still confused on one point. This printer came out before both leopard and word. How could it then be the result of Xerox? I would reevaluate what I said earlier to state that the responsibility would seem to be then both Microsoft and Mac OSX. Would you say that Mac has been made aware of this bug? Should I contact them as well?<br>
Thanks John for your help,<br>
Stuart
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (.. 

Hi Stuart -

Let's put it into a different context:

Is it the responsibility of General Motors to make their vehicles
"compatible" with every variety of tire ever manufactured by every tire
manufacturer? What could you then consider an advancement?

Mfrs of peripherals bear the onus of responsibility to keep their products
functional with the systems & software with which they claim compatibility.
As the systems & software advance the secondary market needs to catch up.


On 2/10/08 9:48 AM, in article ee8bc9d.5.RemoveThis@webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Stuart
Wiber " <> wrote:

> Thank you for your reply. I am using the work around. Also, I appreciate your
> help extending me the understanding of the workings of this bug. But I am
> still confused on one point. This printer came out before both leopard and
> word. How could it then be the result of Xerox? I would reevaluate what I said
> earlier to state that the responsibility would seem to be then both Microsoft
> and Mac OSX. Would you say that Mac has been made aware of this bug? Should I
> contact them as well?
> Thanks John for your help,
> Stuart
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (.. 

Hi Stuart:

Welcome to a grand old computer industry tradition known as
"finger-pointing" Trust me, all THREE companies know damned well that
there is a problem, and they're all working to try to fix it while placing
the blame on the others.

Xerox says it's Microsoft's fault, Microsoft points to Apple

What really happened here is that Apple published a set of specifications by
which printing "was going to" work in OS 10.5.1.

Microsoft coded to that, and so did Xerox. For reasons of convenience and
laziness, Microsoft made some assumptions as to what the effect of
requesting certain printing features would be, and so did Xerox.

Then when Apple released OS 10.5.1, it didn't do EXACTLY what they said it
would. One example: They said it would "handle" OTF ligatures if the
printing application requested them. They did not say ligatures would be
turned on all the time, even for fonts that don't have any. That one
produces the weird spacing you would see with some fonts (if you could print
at all).

Now if the three of them were standing at the Pearly Gates, Saint Pete would
say "Apple, you were the last to make a change, and you screwed both
pooches: you go downstairs!"

But in the sad and sleazy world of shrink-wrap consumer software, Bob is
correct: Apple gets home free, Microsoft gets to put out a service release
because they shoulda been able to read Apple's mind, and the rule is you
must comply with the Operating System, and Xerox gets to put out a new
printer driver 'cause they're the smallest, and in reality the big kids
always win ...

Now, you and I can explore various attitudes within these scenarios. For
example, I suggest that the reason that Apple remains utterly insignificant
in the server market is because they STILL have not learned that "You never
break your legacy installed base with an update." The industry is very
patient: Microsoft was kept out of the glass-house for 20 years until they
too learned that being able to be trusted not to break the installed base is
more important than breathing.

I would also boot Microsoft where they sit and tell them to wake their ideas
up too: they had a month to play with this between when OS 10.5.1. Shipped
and when they did. They should have found this one and fixed it. They
didn't, because they didn't have enough warm bodies on the job!

And Xerox gets a black star for lazy and arrogant software design. Properly
designed printer drivers do not give you "nothing" when they don't like the
input. They give you an error page that tells you what is wrong and what to
do about it. And computer companies that are actually interested in wining
sales would have had a new driver out by now.

So I think we can disparage them all equally

Cheers

On 11/02/08 1:48 AM, in article ee8bc9d.5 DeleteThis @webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Stuart
Wiber " <> wrote:

> Thank you for your reply. I am using the work around. Also, I appreciate your
> help extending me the understanding of the workings of this bug. But I am
> still confused on one point. This printer came out before both leopard and
> word. How could it then be the result of Xerox? I would reevaluate what I said
> earlier to state that the responsibility would seem to be then both Microsoft
> and Mac OSX. Would you say that Mac has been made aware of this bug? Should I
> contact them as well?
> Thanks John for your help,
> Stuart

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (.. 

...still broken after 10.5.2

On Feb 10, 4:00 pm, John McGhie wrote:
> Hi Stuart:
>
> Welcome to a grand old computer industry tradition known as
> "finger-pointing"  Trust me, all THREE companies know damned well that
> there is a problem, and they're all working to try to fix it while placing
> the blame on the others.
>
> Xeroxsays it's Microsoft's fault, Microsoft points to Apple
>
> What really happened here is that Apple published a set of specifications by
> which printing "was going to" work in OS 10.5.1.
>
> Microsoft coded to that, and so didXerox.  For reasons of convenience and
> laziness, Microsoft made some assumptions as to what the effect of
> requesting certain printing features would be, and so didXerox.
>
> Then when Apple released OS 10.5.1, it didn't do EXACTLY what they said it
> would.  One example:  They said it would "handle" OTF ligatures if the
> printing application requested them.  They did not say ligatures would be
> turned on all the time, even for fonts that don't have any.  That one
> produces the weird spacing you would see with some fonts (if you could print
> at all).
>
> Now if the three of them were standing at the Pearly Gates, Saint Pete would
> say "Apple, you were the last to make a change, and you screwed both
> pooches: you go downstairs!"
>
> But in the sad and sleazy world of shrink-wrap consumer software, Bob is
> correct: Apple gets home free, Microsoft gets to put out a service release
> because they shoulda been able to read Apple's mind, and the rule is you
> must comply with the Operating System, andXeroxgets to put out a new
> printer driver 'cause they're the smallest, and in reality the big kids
> always win ...
>
> Now, you and I can explore various attitudes within these scenarios.  For
> example, I suggest that the reason that Apple remains utterly insignificant
> in the server market is because they STILL have not learned that "You never
> break your legacy installed base with an update."  The industry is very
> patient: Microsoft was kept out of the glass-house for 20 years until they
> too learned that being able to be trusted not to break the installed base is
> more important than breathing.
>
> I would also boot Microsoft where they sit and tell them to wake their ideas
> up too: they had a month to play with this between when OS 10.5.1. Shipped
> and when they did.  They should have found this one and fixed it.  They
> didn't, because they didn't have enough warm bodies on the job!
>
> AndXeroxgets a black star for lazy and arrogant software design.  Properly
> designed printer drivers do not give you "nothing" when they don't like the
> input.  They give you an error page that tells you what is wrong and what to
> do about it.  And computer companies that are actually interested in wining
> sales would have had a new driver out by now.
>
> So I think we can disparage them all equally
>
> Cheers
>
> On 11/02/08 1:48 AM, in article ee8bc9... DeleteThis @webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Stuart
>
> Wiber " <> wrote:
> > Thank you for your reply. I am using the work around. Also, I appreciate your
> > help extending me the understanding of the workings of this bug. But I am
> > still confused on one point. This printer came out before both leopard and
> > word. How could it then be the result ofXerox? I would reevaluate what I said
> > earlier to state that the responsibility would seem to be then both Microsoft
> > and Mac OSX. Would you say that Mac has been made aware of this bug? Should I
> > contact them as well?
> > Thanks John for your help,
> > Stuart
>
> --
> Don't wait for your answer, click here:http://www.word.mvps.org/
>
> Please reply in the group.  Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.
>
> John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
> McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltdhttp://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
> Sydney, Australia.  S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
> +61 4 1209 1410, mailto:j...@mcghie.name
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (.. 

Do the standard re-boot, delete the printer and re-add it, etc. Also check
your printer manufacturer's website to see if they are saying anything.

One user reported in here that his came right with 10.5.2.

But like I said: each company is blaming the other, so it could be "a
while".

Sadly, "we" have heard nothing more.

Cheers

On 13/02/08 4:29 PM, in article
3460f74f-3531-4b25-8357-fe57dfeb81dc.RemoveThis@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com,
"wsmknicks@netscape.net" wrote:

> ...still broken after 10.5.2
>
> On Feb 10, 4:00 pm, John McGhie wrote:
>> Hi Stuart:
>>
>> Welcome to a grand old computer industry tradition known as
>> "finger-pointing"  Trust me, all THREE companies know damned well that
>> there is a problem, and they're all working to try to fix it while placing
>> the blame on the others.
>>
>> Xeroxsays it's Microsoft's fault, Microsoft points to Apple
>>
>> What really happened here is that Apple published a set of specifications by
>> which printing "was going to" work in OS 10.5.1.
>>
>> Microsoft coded to that, and so didXerox.  For reasons of convenience and
>> laziness, Microsoft made some assumptions as to what the effect of
>> requesting certain printing features would be, and so didXerox.
>>
>> Then when Apple released OS 10.5.1, it didn't do EXACTLY what they said it
>> would.  One example:  They said it would "handle" OTF ligatures if the
>> printing application requested them.  They did not say ligatures would be
>> turned on all the time, even for fonts that don't have any.  That one
>> produces the weird spacing you would see with some fonts (if you could print
>> at all).
>>
>> Now if the three of them were standing at the Pearly Gates, Saint Pete would
>> say "Apple, you were the last to make a change, and you screwed both
>> pooches: you go downstairs!"
>>
>> But in the sad and sleazy world of shrink-wrap consumer software, Bob is
>> correct: Apple gets home free, Microsoft gets to put out a service release
>> because they shoulda been able to read Apple's mind, and the rule is you
>> must comply with the Operating System, andXeroxgets to put out a new
>> printer driver 'cause they're the smallest, and in reality the big kids
>> always win ...
>>
>> Now, you and I can explore various attitudes within these scenarios.  For
>> example, I suggest that the reason that Apple remains utterly insignificant
>> in the server market is because they STILL have not learned that "You never
>> break your legacy installed base with an update."  The industry is very
>> patient: Microsoft was kept out of the glass-house for 20 years until they
>> too learned that being able to be trusted not to break the installed base is
>> more important than breathing.
>>
>> I would also boot Microsoft where they sit and tell them to wake their ideas
>> up too: they had a month to play with this between when OS 10.5.1. Shipped
>> and when they did.  They should have found this one and fixed it.  They
>> didn't, because they didn't have enough warm bodies on the job!
>>
>> AndXeroxgets a black star for lazy and arrogant software design.  Properly
>> designed printer drivers do not give you "nothing" when they don't like the
>> input.  They give you an error page that tells you what is wrong and what to
>> do about it.  And computer companies that are actually interested in wining
>> sales would have had a new driver out by now.
>>
>> So I think we can disparage them all equally
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> On 11/02/08 1:48 AM, in article ee8bc9....RemoveThis@webcrossing.caR9absDaxw, "Stuart
>>
>> Wiber " <> wrote:
>>> Thank you for your reply. I am using the work around. Also, I appreciate
>>> your
>>> help extending me the understanding of the workings of this bug. But I am
>>> still confused on one point. This printer came out before both leopard and
>>> word. How could it then be the result ofXerox? I would reevaluate what I
>>> said
>>> earlier to state that the responsibility would seem to be then both
>>> Microsoft
>>> and Mac OSX. Would you say that Mac has been made aware of this bug? Should
>>> I
>>> contact them as well?
>>> Thanks John for your help,
>>> Stuart
>>
>> --
>> Don't wait for your answer, click here:http://www.word.mvps.org/
>>
>> Please reply in the group.  Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.
>>
>> John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
>> McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltdhttp://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
>> Sydney, Australia.  S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
>> +61 4 1209 1410, mailto:j...@mcghie.name
>

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Consultant Technical Writer
+61 4 1209 1410, mailto:john@mcghie.name
McGhie Information Engineering Pty Ltd
http://jgmcghie.fastmail.com.au/
Sydney, Australia. S33°53'34.20 E151°14'54.50
 >> Stay informed about: [Announce] Blank Output for some printers with Word 2008 (..