4 ms·

I cannot tell you how unproductive I am in Microsoft Word. I use LaTeX, often in overleaf, often natively in linux, often on MacOS. Naturally, the latter has a

I cannot tell you how unproductive I am in Microsoft Word. I use LaTeX, often in overleaf, often natively in linux, often on MacOS. Naturally, the latter has a Word version available in it and as a scientist at the interface of physics and biology/medicine I (un)fortunately have plenty of experience in both. Some of my colleagues carte-blanch refuse to try TeX (interestingly, I've never had a doctor refuse to write in Overleaf with me -- only biochemists). Writing a paper in Word is like pulling nasal hair out through the back of my throat. It's eminently possible to do it. Millions of people around the world do. Yet it is death by a thousand tiny, frustrating cuts. From the fact that the keyboard shortcuts are not those of the rest of the operating system (on MacOS or Linux on the online app -- e.g. ctrl+shift+arrow keys to highlight text works differently in Word to every other OS) to the fact that opening the paper, writing something, closing it, and re-opening it doesn't necessarily get you the same bloody document. I was editing something last night (from a biologist -- who had done MRI on Burmese pythons – alas the reconstruction was done in matlab and not python!) and each time I saved, my "tracked changes" went from displaying my name to "Author". I forget the number of times I've seen "Unknown field code changed" on the right hand side. If you want to work with references from many people, forget about it. LaTeX has literally none of these problems. Sure, it has a lot of other problems, but none of these ones. I just can't stand using Word; it is inconsistent, slow, and incorrectly second-guesses you. I'm not saying that everyone and their grandparents should use LaTeX, but the disparity -- and the comparative rareness of alternatives, outside of inDesign and Quark in the professional publishing scene -- does deeply worry me. Office is one of those areas where the Microsoft strangehold is strongest. And it's objectively a bad experience! Seeing "Proficient with Microsoft Office" on a CV for me is a bit of a red flag; highlighting another job skill is probably a better use of space, at the very least.

benhurmarcel 5y ago
I agree that LaTeX is much more pleasant to work with, and I’d rather use it than Word. However I still have “Proficient with Microsoft Office" on my CV (along with LaTeX) because companies expect it, and I’ll be forced to use it. I often write reports in Word, not because I prefer it over LaTeX, but because it’s mandated by the company.
jabroni_salad 5y ago
>mucho texto OK, but what if your applicant had this in his CV? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlX_pThh7z8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlX_pThh7z8
tpoacher 5y ago
> Seeing "Proficient with Microsoft Office" on a CV for me is a bit of a red flag; highlighting another job skill is probably a better use of space, at the very least. Well, it shouldn't. The candidate does not know what kind of checkbox exercise their CV ends up on, so they should not be penalized for trying to cover weird edge-cases. True story: I once applied for a 'ranked' job which needed me to "prove" IT skills. By that point I had a masters in advanced computer science (with specialization in machine learning). The scoring for the job went as follows: - Demonstrates IT skills proficiency via European Computer Driving Licence (ECDL): 2 points - Demonstrates IT skills proficiency via other means: 1 point. - No IT skills demonstrated: 0 points. I scored 1 point. Given the competitive nature of this process, apparently that single point cost me about 1000 places down in the rankings, so I got none of the positions that interested me the most. According to the infinite wisdom of the recruitment checklist, being able to program your own word suite was pittance compared to being able to type in one. I literally had to drag my ass to the nearest public library, subscribe to, and actually ATTEND (due to mandatory attendance) an ECDL course for the next 6 months, just so I could score more highly in the next round of job applications.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
zdw 5y ago
The fundamental problem is that all of Office was designed for a different time, and irredeemably sucks at two things: * True version control and useful change tracking of content * Intercompatability of formats with other tools If we could get away from v2,v3,v4 suffixes on files, and your data basically going into those Roach Motels of file formats, maybe it could become worthwhile someday. For now, it's just a vomitous throwback to the bad old 90's software design mechanics.
- azalemeth 5y ago
  There is a lot of truth in this. The common argument for word is "track changes is good", but it actually sucks in many ways: try doing a three-way merge, for example (from co-authors A, B and C) or a diff. TeX can use all of the power of modern editors and this sort of thing just happens really nicely; with git it happens seamlessly. I think another big problem is that Word is one monolithic thing that aims to do everything, and in reality does nothing well.
spdionis 5y ago
I do not have in-depth experience using Microsoft Word or LaTeX for writing papers. Nevertheless I found this funny: > LaTeX has literally none of these problems. Sure, it has a lot of other problems, but none of these ones > Office is one of those areas where the Microsoft strangehold is strongest. And it's objectively a bad experience! The rest of your comment does not logically conclude to "it's objectively a bad experience", although that might seem obvious to someone who has used both in-depth.
user_7832 5y ago
Counterpoint: Working in anything not a WYSISYG editor (or close, like markdown) is painful for me. Changing styles and formatting is direct - there is no code that you need to worry about, and no "27 errors" because you (or the others in your team) messed up a few semicolons somewhere. Mind you, I'm not saying that latex is bad (especially for citations). But if I'm driving a car at highway speeds I'd rather have the car have handle autobraking and power steering and ABS rather than not.
- eyeundersand 5y ago
  This might be the first time that I've seen someone who's used both WYSISYG and TeX pick the former. If you don't mind, how proficient are you in TeX? As someone mentioned in another thread, the formatting in Word and other such software is terribly inconsistent. No guarantee that the document will look the same in two machines, let alone across platforms. The formatting is "direct" for a while but change a single period or colon anywhere in the document and that messes everything up. Not sure I understand the driving analogy. Care to explain?
  - user_7832 5y ago
    I'm admittedly not very good at TeX - I can make a document and work, but will likely hit a few errors. It's not that I can't use it properly - I consider myself decently tech-savvy (this is hackernews after all) and I am used to coding (C++/python, even a bit of html and css), and I frequently Google whenever I get stuck. However I find most tasks in tex (I mainly use overleaf) much longer than the corresponding task in word. I don't think I have ever gotten "stuck" in word the way you can in overleaf (eg numbered lists). I don't have to worry about an entire file system with different files for different chapter and images in word, for example - the software handles that itself - you add a '1.' and word starts a numbered list. Fewer buttons to press. Mind you, it's not that I don't understand the reasoning behind TeX - yes, it is quite logical - but to use another terrible analogy (sorry!) it's like comparing assembly code for a particular computer with python - one is way more specific and doesn't have half a dozen dependencies, but the other is much more "human" in its use and readability. I fully agree that word compatibility is terrible and I hate MS's monopolistic practices as much (I use OpenOffice too and prefer odt files). But within our university everyone has the latest version of word and things work reasonably decently. (The driving analogy was that Office assumes and does things for you automatically, just like a car activating the ABS system, while with TeX you manually need to do it. More control, but also more effort.) (Also, Google docs >>> Word imo. Amongst other reasons, because word doesn't support fonts like Inter properly.)
eyeundersand 5y ago
Thank you! I submitted a paper to a conference this week but my advisor does not use LaTeX. You can imagine the suffering I had to go through during the draft process. It's such a PAIN! to have to work on Word for any kind of scientific writing. The formatting issues make me want to cry. I'm also on Linux so no desktop Word client and using Word or google docs on the web is extremely slow and frustrating. LibreOffice Writer comes with some compatibility issues. Anyone who is doing technical work and needs to have stuff in writing often definitely needs to learn Markdown at the very least, imo. You are needlessly limiting yourself and causing a lot of pain to collaborators by sticking to Word.
vba616 5y ago
Word has the same built in scripting language as other Office applications, and you can use its object model if you like, as well as access anything else that a Windows system can do. I don't know what the explanation is for people not liking Word, but it can't be "because I like writing code to produce documents and LaTeX is the only option for that".

benhurmarcel 5y ago

I agree that LaTeX is much more pleasant to work with, and I’d rather use it than Word. However I still have “Proficient with Microsoft Office" on my CV (along with LaTeX) because companies expect it, and I’ll be forced to use it. I often write reports in Word, not because I prefer it over LaTeX, but because it’s mandated by the company.

jabroni_salad 5y ago

>mucho texto OK, but what if your applicant had this in his CV? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlX_pThh7z8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlX_pThh7z8

tpoacher 5y ago

> Seeing "Proficient with Microsoft Office" on a CV for me is a bit of a red flag; highlighting another job skill is probably a better use of space, at the very least. Well, it shouldn't. The candidate does not know what kind of checkbox exercise their CV ends up on, so they should not be penalized for trying to cover weird edge-cases. True story: I once applied for a 'ranked' job which needed me to "prove" IT skills. By that point I had a masters in advanced computer science (with specialization in machine learning). The scoring for the job went as follows: - Demonstrates IT skills proficiency via European Computer Driving Licence (ECDL): 2 points - Demonstrates IT skills proficiency via other means: 1 point. - No IT skills demonstrated: 0 points. I scored 1 point. Given the competitive nature of this process, apparently that single point cost me about 1000 places down in the rankings, so I got none of the positions that interested me the most. According to the infinite wisdom of the recruitment checklist, being able to program your own word suite was pittance compared to being able to type in one. I literally had to drag my ass to the nearest public library, subscribe to, and actually ATTEND (due to mandatory attendance) an ECDL course for the next 6 months, just so I could score more highly in the next round of job applications.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

zdw 5y ago

The fundamental problem is that all of Office was designed for a different time, and irredeemably sucks at two things: * True version control and useful change tracking of content * Intercompatability of formats with other tools If we could get away from v2,v3,v4 suffixes on files, and your data basically going into those Roach Motels of file formats, maybe it could become worthwhile someday. For now, it's just a vomitous throwback to the bad old 90's software design mechanics.

azalemeth 5y ago
There is a lot of truth in this. The common argument for word is "track changes is good", but it actually sucks in many ways: try doing a three-way merge, for example (from co-authors A, B and C) or a diff. TeX can use all of the power of modern editors and this sort of thing just happens really nicely; with git it happens seamlessly. I think another big problem is that Word is one monolithic thing that aims to do everything, and in reality does nothing well.

spdionis 5y ago

I do not have in-depth experience using Microsoft Word or LaTeX for writing papers. Nevertheless I found this funny: > LaTeX has literally none of these problems. Sure, it has a lot of other problems, but none of these ones > Office is one of those areas where the Microsoft strangehold is strongest. And it's objectively a bad experience! The rest of your comment does not logically conclude to "it's objectively a bad experience", although that might seem obvious to someone who has used both in-depth.

user_7832 5y ago

Counterpoint: Working in anything not a WYSISYG editor (or close, like markdown) is painful for me. Changing styles and formatting is direct - there is no code that you need to worry about, and no "27 errors" because you (or the others in your team) messed up a few semicolons somewhere. Mind you, I'm not saying that latex is bad (especially for citations). But if I'm driving a car at highway speeds I'd rather have the car have handle autobraking and power steering and ABS rather than not.

eyeundersand 5y ago
This might be the first time that I've seen someone who's used both WYSISYG and TeX pick the former. If you don't mind, how proficient are you in TeX? As someone mentioned in another thread, the formatting in Word and other such software is terribly inconsistent. No guarantee that the document will look the same in two machines, let alone across platforms. The formatting is "direct" for a while but change a single period or colon anywhere in the document and that messes everything up. Not sure I understand the driving analogy. Care to explain?
- user_7832 5y ago
  I'm admittedly not very good at TeX - I can make a document and work, but will likely hit a few errors. It's not that I can't use it properly - I consider myself decently tech-savvy (this is hackernews after all) and I am used to coding (C++/python, even a bit of html and css), and I frequently Google whenever I get stuck. However I find most tasks in tex (I mainly use overleaf) much longer than the corresponding task in word. I don't think I have ever gotten "stuck" in word the way you can in overleaf (eg numbered lists). I don't have to worry about an entire file system with different files for different chapter and images in word, for example - the software handles that itself - you add a '1.' and word starts a numbered list. Fewer buttons to press. Mind you, it's not that I don't understand the reasoning behind TeX - yes, it is quite logical - but to use another terrible analogy (sorry!) it's like comparing assembly code for a particular computer with python - one is way more specific and doesn't have half a dozen dependencies, but the other is much more "human" in its use and readability. I fully agree that word compatibility is terrible and I hate MS's monopolistic practices as much (I use OpenOffice too and prefer odt files). But within our university everyone has the latest version of word and things work reasonably decently. (The driving analogy was that Office assumes and does things for you automatically, just like a car activating the ABS system, while with TeX you manually need to do it. More control, but also more effort.) (Also, Google docs >>> Word imo. Amongst other reasons, because word doesn't support fonts like Inter properly.)

eyeundersand 5y ago

Thank you! I submitted a paper to a conference this week but my advisor does not use LaTeX. You can imagine the suffering I had to go through during the draft process. It's such a PAIN! to have to work on Word for any kind of scientific writing. The formatting issues make me want to cry. I'm also on Linux so no desktop Word client and using Word or google docs on the web is extremely slow and frustrating. LibreOffice Writer comes with some compatibility issues. Anyone who is doing technical work and needs to have stuff in writing often definitely needs to learn Markdown at the very least, imo. You are needlessly limiting yourself and causing a lot of pain to collaborators by sticking to Word.

vba616 5y ago

Word has the same built in scripting language as other Office applications, and you can use its object model if you like, as well as access anything else that a Windows system can do. I don't know what the explanation is for people not liking Word, but it can't be "because I like writing code to produce documents and LaTeX is the only option for that".