Deet wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:25:25 -0600, VanguardLH <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>Deet wrote:
>>
>>> Brian Tillman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Josh White wrote ...
>>>>>
>>>>> It forces users to use Word? Where do you get that?
>>>>
>>>> Outlook 2007 uses only Word as its editor (albeit a less-than-full
>>>> version).
>>>
>>> Even when Word is NOT AVAILABLE - as in NOT INSTALLED? Please
>>> explain.
>>
>>Yep. A stub of Word is included in the install of Outlook (unless, of
>>course, you're also installing Word as part of MS Office). Consider
>>Outlook 2007 as including a light version of Word and also forcing you
>>to use that light version of Word.
>
> Interesting. But since it works without Word being installed, I'll
> continue to think that Outlook does it without Word in that situation.
>
>>Amazing what can be found by searching Microsoft's own huge support
>>knowledgebase at http://support.microsoft.com. For example:
>>
>>"Outlook 2007 uses only Word as the e-mail editor"
>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/933793
>
> If I decide to be an MVP for Outlook when I grow up, I'll make sure to
> keep that link in mind.
You were the one that said "Even when Word is NOT AVAILABLE - as in NOT
INSTALLED? Please explain." Nothing to do with the spell checking
feature that started this thread. YOU wanted the explanation on why
Word would get used with OL2007 although not installed as a separate
component. You asked for an explanation, and then you pretend that it
doesn't matter. Do you often ask for explanations in which you have to
interest in obtaining?
Also, YOU never get to decide to be an MVP. You get nominated by an
existing MVP and then voted in as an MVP. You don't get a choice other
than accepting the nomination. Or are you pcbutts1 under yet another
nym that wants to pretend they are an MVP but never was and never will
be? If you weren't nominated and elected, you're just delusional. Go
read
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/gp/mvpawardintro.
> Since I'm happy that my spell checker works as I want it to, I don't
> need to run such a search.
Then why did *YOU* ask for an explanation? Duh!