In Word 2010:

When I click on the Font Color gallery in the Font group, I would like
to see the same selection of colors that I saw in Word 2003 (and
earlier) in Format > Font > Color.

Instead, what I am offered in Word 2010 are shades of the Theme Colors
and a small set of Standard Colors; it's either those or I have to make
my own colors from the color wheel or the RGB tool. I'm stuck with the
same thing even when I open the Font dialog box.

Can I go back to the same selection of colors as in Word 2003?

Daddy

What I would like (and I'm not likely to get it, either), is that when you
click on the Font Color button, it would apply the color it is displaying
(being the color you last used), as in previous versions. That took me by
surprise.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Daddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:iv2ias$hdg$(E-Mail Removed)...
> In Word 2010:
>
> When I click on the Font Color gallery in the Font group, I would like to
> see the same selection of colors that I saw in Word 2003 (and earlier) in
> Format > Font > Color.
>
> Instead, what I am offered in Word 2010 are shades of the Theme Colors and
> a small set of Standard Colors; it's either those or I have to make my own
> colors from the color wheel or the RGB tool. I'm stuck with the same thing
> even when I open the Font dialog box.
>
> Can I go back to the same selection of colors as in Word 2003?
>
> Daddy

You and me both.

Daddy

Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
> What I would like (and I'm not likely to get it, either), is that when
> you click on the Font Color button, it would apply the color it is
> displaying (being the color you last used), as in previous versions.
> That took me by surprise.
>

FWIW, you can define a new color scheme that includes at least some of the
2003 standard colors, and you can define character styles that apply
specific colors to fonts, but I don't think there's any way to alter the way
the color palette works (and it's the same for fills and outlines as well as
fonts). There have been a number of complaints about the fact that, say,
"Blue" is not the same RGB color as "Blue" in previous versions, which I
would definitely consider an unwise decision if not a bug.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Daddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:iv2s8a$gne$(E-Mail Removed)...
> You and me both.
>
> Daddy
>
> Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
>> What I would like (and I'm not likely to get it, either), is that when
>> you click on the Font Color button, it would apply the color it is
>> displaying (being the color you last used), as in previous versions. That
>> took me by surprise.
>>

I would tend toward "unwise decision." It takes more work to edit
documents created before Word 2007 because you have to work harder to
match colors. (I use the color wheel.)

Thanks for your help here and on many other occasions.

Daddy

Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
> FWIW, you can define a new color scheme that includes at least some of
> the 2003 standard colors, and you can define character styles that apply
> specific colors to fonts, but I don't think there's any way to alter the
> way the color palette works (and it's the same for fills and outlines as
> well as fonts). There have been a number of complaints about the fact
> that, say, "Blue" is not the same RGB color as "Blue" in previous
> versions, which I would definitely consider an unwise decision if not a
> bug.
>

You're welcome. I feel less and less helpful these days, though, as Word
2007/2010 pass me by (I'm still using Word 2003 for production work).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Daddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:iv4bhj$53d$(E-Mail Removed)...
>I would tend toward "unwise decision." It takes more work to edit documents
>created before Word 2007 because you have to work harder to match colors.
>(I use the color wheel.)
>
> Thanks for your help here and on many other occasions.
>
> Daddy
>
> Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
>> FWIW, you can define a new color scheme that includes at least some of
>> the 2003 standard colors, and you can define character styles that apply
>> specific colors to fonts, but I don't think there's any way to alter the
>> way the color palette works (and it's the same for fills and outlines as
>> well as fonts). There have been a number of complaints about the fact
>> that, say, "Blue" is not the same RGB color as "Blue" in previous
>> versions, which I would definitely consider an unwise decision if not a
>> bug.
>>
>

On 7/7/11 12:13 PM, Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
> You're welcome. I feel less and less helpful these days, though, as Word
> 2007/2010 pass me by (I'm still using Word 2003 for production work).
>
You and many others. I have 2007 installed (not sure why) but still use
2002 all the time because I have no time to waste with the dumb ribbon.

I keep finding more and more features in 2007 and 2010 that I really like,
but as long as my #1 client is still using Word 2003, I won't be moving, I
suppose.

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message news:j07lch$5be$(E-Mail Removed)...
> On 7/7/11 12:13 PM, Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
>> You're welcome. I feel less and less helpful these days, though, as Word
>> 2007/2010 pass me by (I'm still using Word 2003 for production work).
>>
> You and many others. I have 2007 installed (not sure why) but still use
> 2002 all the time because I have no time to waste with the dumb ribbon.

Count me as an exception in that case. I think the ribbon is great, and
I much prefer it to the old menu system. Might be a good idea to at
least make peace with the ribbon, as it's showing up in more software
(and not only from Microsoft).

The way I look at it, the ribbon is simply a menu that opens
horizontally instead of vertically. No great innovation, but it provides
more space for menu selections before you need to dropdown a list.

Another way to look at it: It's just like the toolbars from older
versions of Word, only in two dimensions (and with labels).

If you want to criticize Microsoft's choices about which items belong in
which tab, that's fair game. I've got some opinions about that myself.

My big complaint with the 'new' versions of Word (2007, 2010) is that
they are needlessly complicated for the vast majority (>90%) of Word
users, and they take Microsoft's penchant for confusing terminology to a
new level.

Daddy

(E-Mail Removed)d wrote:
> On 7/7/11 12:13 PM, Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
>> You're welcome. I feel less and less helpful these days, though, as Word
>> 2007/2010 pass me by (I'm still using Word 2003 for production work).
>>
> You and many others. I have 2007 installed (not sure why) but still use
> 2002 all the time because I have no time to waste with the dumb ribbon.

There are things I like about the Ribbon, and if you customize the QAT to
hold your most-used buttons, it's not bad. But there are undeniably
frequently used features that now require more clicks, and I will not be
happy with "Ribbon customization" until they bring back the button editor so
that I can make and use my own custom icons on QAT buttons (I so still have
some custom ones, but only on a separate add-in toolbar that has to be
opened before I can access them).

--
Suzanne S. Barnhill
Microsoft MVP (Word)
Words into Type
Fairhope, Alabama USA
http://word.mvps.org

"Daddy" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:j099ft$t3g$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Count me as an exception in that case. I think the ribbon is great, and I
> much prefer it to the old menu system. Might be a good idea to at least
> make peace with the ribbon, as it's showing up in more software (and not
> only from Microsoft).
>
> The way I look at it, the ribbon is simply a menu that opens horizontally
> instead of vertically. No great innovation, but it provides more space for
> menu selections before you need to dropdown a list.
>
> Another way to look at it: It's just like the toolbars from older versions
> of Word, only in two dimensions (and with labels).
>
> If you want to criticize Microsoft's choices about which items belong in
> which tab, that's fair game. I've got some opinions about that myself.
>
> My big complaint with the 'new' versions of Word (2007, 2010) is that they
> are needlessly complicated for the vast majority (>90%) of Word users, and
> they take Microsoft's penchant for confusing terminology to a new level.
>
> Daddy
>
> (E-Mail Removed)d wrote:
>> On 7/7/11 12:13 PM, Suzanne S. Barnhill wrote:
>>> You're welcome. I feel less and less helpful these days, though, as Word
>>> 2007/2010 pass me by (I'm still using Word 2003 for production work).
>>>
>> You and many others. I have 2007 installed (not sure why) but still use
>> 2002 all the time because I have no time to waste with the dumb ribbon.
>