I cannot open powerpoint 95 in powerpoint 2007

In article <6383BFA2-EAA0-4A86-8591-85B626E5328B RemoveThis @microsoft.com>, Dwarkin wrote:
> Pia, this does not help: using this merely takes away the
> security-restrictions; we´ve tryed that. The problem is that Microsoft has
> not implemented any converter for those elder file-types in 2007. But as
> Microsoft wrote: we users may learn that our content is limited by decisions
> from MS. This mean, merely as long accessible as Microsoft is willing to
> allow us to do so.
> I´m very curious how long it will take until EU-Commission or US-authorities
> will watch this as using market-power against customers.

I wouldn't hold my breath. It's rare that programs read files from more than a
few versions back; I've never heard of the government stepping in and demanding
that they do so. If it's in the company's competitive and financial interests
to make it happen, they'll do so. Otherwise no.

Realistically, how many people do you imagine are still using files from
PowerPoint 95 and earlier (from 12 or more years ago)? I doubt very much that
it'd be worth MS' time and money to build the converter, particularly when
anyone with a copy of an earlier version of PPT can convert the files to
something that 2007 can read.

There's a macro here that'll automate it in fact:

Batch re-save presentations; update older presentations to newer PowerPoint
version
http://www.pptfaq.com/FAQ00740.htm


-----------------------------------------
Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
PPTools: www.pptools.com
================================================
Live and in personable in the Help Center at PowerPoint Live
Sept 21-24, San Diego CA, USA
www.pptlive.com

This question "realistically how many people do you imagine are using files
from Powerpoint 95 and earlier...?" displays a truly out-of-touch
understanding of the use of Powerpoint by academicians. Loss of backward
compatibility is a huge issue, for so many reasons that I cannot count.
Powerpoint is used in academia to create figures, etc. for lectures,
manuscripts, grants, etc. Backward compatibility, no matter how far back, is
essential to the utility of the program. Few people have probably discovered
yet that they cannot go back to files that they created 10 years ago to take
another look at the figure or to modify it. As they discover this, more and
more people will become disgusted. The effect on MS will only be felt if
another company produces a better product. But what happened to companies
that really care about the quality of their product, rather than simply, gee,
I don/t see how we can make any additional money if we make the product
better?



"Steve Rindsberg" wrote:

> In article <6383BFA2-EAA0-4A86-8591-85B626E5328B DeleteThis @microsoft.com>, Dwarkin wrote:
> > Pia, this does not help: using this merely takes away the
> > security-restrictions; we´ve tryed that. The problem is that Microsoft has
> > not implemented any converter for those elder file-types in 2007. But as
> > Microsoft wrote: we users may learn that our content is limited by decisions
> > from MS. This mean, merely as long accessible as Microsoft is willing to
> > allow us to do so.
> > I´m very curious how long it will take until EU-Commission or US-authorities
> > will watch this as using market-power against customers.
>
> I wouldn't hold my breath. It's rare that programs read files from more than a
> few versions back; I've never heard of the government stepping in and demanding
> that they do so. If it's in the company's competitive and financial interests
> to make it happen, they'll do so. Otherwise no.
>
> Realistically, how many people do you imagine are still using files from
> PowerPoint 95 and earlier (from 12 or more years ago)? I doubt very much that
> it'd be worth MS' time and money to build the converter, particularly when
> anyone with a copy of an earlier version of PPT can convert the files to
> something that 2007 can read.
>
> There's a macro here that'll automate it in fact:
>
> Batch re-save presentations; update older presentations to newer PowerPoint
> version
> http://www.pptfaq.com/FAQ00740.htm
>
>
> -----------------------------------------
> Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
> PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
> PPTools: www.pptools.com
> ================================================
> Live and in personable in the Help Center at PowerPoint Live
> Sept 21-24, San Diego CA, USA
> www.pptlive.com
>
>

Thank you for the great feedback Greg,

Unfortunately, there is no one here but use chickens. Everyone here in the
newsgroup is a user, like yourself. No one here works for Microsoft.

In my experience, it is often worthwhile to keep a version of older software
running on virtual machines, so that when (yes, when) support is dropped for
an older version (by whatever company), you still have access to it.


Bill Dilworth

"GregO" <GregO.RemoveThis@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B17B18E4-C6B0-4FEA-87EF-E0C36BB30EAB@microsoft.com...
> This question "realistically how many people do you imagine are using
> files
> from Powerpoint 95 and earlier...?" displays a truly out-of-touch
> understanding of the use of Powerpoint by academicians. Loss of backward
> compatibility is a huge issue, for so many reasons that I cannot count.
> Powerpoint is used in academia to create figures, etc. for lectures,
> manuscripts, grants, etc. Backward compatibility, no matter how far back,
> is
> essential to the utility of the program. Few people have probably
> discovered
> yet that they cannot go back to files that they created 10 years ago to
> take
> another look at the figure or to modify it. As they discover this, more
> and
> more people will become disgusted. The effect on MS will only be felt if
> another company produces a better product. But what happened to companies
> that really care about the quality of their product, rather than simply,
> gee,
> I don/t see how we can make any additional money if we make the product
> better?
>
>
>
> "Steve Rindsberg" wrote:
>
>> In article <6383BFA2-EAA0-4A86-8591-85B626E5328B.RemoveThis@microsoft.com>, Dwarkin
>> wrote:
>> > Pia, this does not help: using this merely takes away the
>> > security-restrictions; we´ve tryed that. The problem is that Microsoft
>> > has
>> > not implemented any converter for those elder file-types in 2007. But
>> > as
>> > Microsoft wrote: we users may learn that our content is limited by
>> > decisions
>> > from MS. This mean, merely as long accessible as Microsoft is willing
>> > to
>> > allow us to do so.
>> > I´m very curious how long it will take until EU-Commission or
>> > US-authorities
>> > will watch this as using market-power against customers.
>>
>> I wouldn't hold my breath. It's rare that programs read files from more
>> than a
>> few versions back; I've never heard of the government stepping in and
>> demanding
>> that they do so. If it's in the company's competitive and financial
>> interests
>> to make it happen, they'll do so. Otherwise no.
>>
>> Realistically, how many people do you imagine are still using files from
>> PowerPoint 95 and earlier (from 12 or more years ago)? I doubt very much
>> that
>> it'd be worth MS' time and money to build the converter, particularly
>> when
>> anyone with a copy of an earlier version of PPT can convert the files to
>> something that 2007 can read.
>>
>> There's a macro here that'll automate it in fact:
>>
>> Batch re-save presentations; update older presentations to newer
>> PowerPoint
>> version
>> http://www.pptfaq.com/FAQ00740.htm
>>
>>
>> -----------------------------------------
>> Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
>> PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
>> PPTools: www.pptools.com
>> ================================================
>> Live and in personable in the Help Center at PowerPoint Live
>> Sept 21-24, San Diego CA, USA
>> www.pptlive.com
>>
>>

In article <B17B18E4-C6B0-4FEA-87EF-E0C36BB30EAB.DeleteThis@microsoft.com>, GregO wrote:
> This question "realistically how many people do you imagine are using files
> from Powerpoint 95 and earlier...?" displays a truly out-of-touch
> understanding of the use of Powerpoint by academicians.

You're probably right there. I'm not an academician.

On the other hand, I live with several of them and find that they, or at least their
students, are at the leading edge when it comes to software upgrades, if only because
the latest/greatest is all that's on offer at student/teacher discount prices.

> Loss of backward
> compatibility is a huge issue, for so many reasons that I cannot count.
> Powerpoint is used in academia to create figures, etc. for lectures,
> manuscripts, grants, etc. Backward compatibility, no matter how far back, is
> essential to the utility of the program.

I can understand that, and I do think MS should do a better job of making users aware
of compatibility issues. but realisitically, infinite backward compatibility is just
not in the cards. Few programs read files created more than a few versions back.
That PowerPoint and the other Office apps can still go back four versions and read
and edit files from 12 years ago is, to me, quite remarkable.

We may disagree on this, but I think users really need to take responsibility for the
continued viability of files that are valuable to their work.

Just as they should back up their work and periodically verify that the backups still
work, they need to do some testing when updating to new software. And just as they'd
expect to do a conversion when changing backup media (from floppies to tape to CD to
DVD to whatever comes next) they'll sometimes need to convert older files to newer
formats.

> Few people have probably discovered
> yet that they cannot go back to files that they created 10 years ago to take
> another look at the figure or to modify it. As they discover this, more and
> more people will become disgusted.

They can always keep an older version of the software installed to handle conversions
from the really old formats to something that the newest versions will read. Or keep
an older PC around for this sort of work. Or use Virtual Machines. And I'd guess
that if there's enough demand for it, people will start businesses based on doing
these kinds of conversions.

> The effect on MS will only be felt if
> another company produces a better product. But what happened to companies
> that really care about the quality of their product, rather than simply, gee,
> I don/t see how we can make any additional money if we make the product
> better?

As with just about any other enterprise you can imagine, resources at MS are not
unlimited. Someone has to make the decision where to spend them: on fixing known
bugs, on adding new features, on maintaining backward compatibility, etc.

And before they can spend the resources on *anything*, they need to earn the money to
pay the bills. Unless they make add'l money, the product dies.


> "Steve Rindsberg" wrote:
>
> > In article <6383BFA2-EAA0-4A86-8591-85B626E5328B.DeleteThis@microsoft.com>, Dwarkin wrote:
> > > Pia, this does not help: using this merely takes away the
> > > security-restrictions; we´ve tryed that. The problem is that Microsoft has
> > > not implemented any converter for those elder file-types in 2007. But as
> > > Microsoft wrote: we users may learn that our content is limited by decisions
> > > from MS. This mean, merely as long accessible as Microsoft is willing to
> > > allow us to do so.
> > > I´m very curious how long it will take until EU-Commission or US-authorities
> > > will watch this as using market-power against customers.
> >
> > I wouldn't hold my breath. It's rare that programs read files from more than a
> > few versions back; I've never heard of the government stepping in and demanding
> > that they do so. If it's in the company's competitive and financial interests
> > to make it happen, they'll do so. Otherwise no.
> >
> > Realistically, how many people do you imagine are still using files from
> > PowerPoint 95 and earlier (from 12 or more years ago)? I doubt very much that
> > it'd be worth MS' time and money to build the converter, particularly when
> > anyone with a copy of an earlier version of PPT can convert the files to
> > something that 2007 can read.
> >
> > There's a macro here that'll automate it in fact:
> >
> > Batch re-save presentations; update older presentations to newer PowerPoint
> > version
> > http://www.pptfaq.com/FAQ00740.htm
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
> > PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
> > PPTools: www.pptools.com
> > ================================================
> > Live and in personable in the Help Center at PowerPoint Live
> > Sept 21-24, San Diego CA, USA
> > www.pptlive.com
> >
> >


==============================
PPT Frequently Asked Questions
http://www.pptfaq.com/

PPTools add-ins for PowerPoint
http://www.pptools.com/

Bill -

I have Vista ultimate and about 50 old powerpoints from pre-1998 to be
converted.

I downloaded Virtual Machine from the Microsoft website. Am I right that
the steps are:

1. download virtual machine
2. install virtual machine
3. load something like windows 2000 or 98 as the OS on the VM
4. Install the MS Batch converter (which was never updated to Vista)
5. Run it
6. Move the files to a place where I can access them from my Office 2007 ppt

Am I right? Is it that easy?

Bill

"Bill Dilworth" wrote:

> Thank you for the great feedback Greg,
>
> Unfortunately, there is no one here but use chickens. Everyone here in the
> newsgroup is a user, like yourself. No one here works for Microsoft.
>
> In my experience, it is often worthwhile to keep a version of older software
> running on virtual machines, so that when (yes, when) support is dropped for
> an older version (by whatever company), you still have access to it.
>
>
> Bill Dilworth
>
> "GregO" <GregO.TakeThisOut@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B17B18E4-C6B0-4FEA-87EF-E0C36BB30EAB@microsoft.com...
> > This question "realistically how many people do you imagine are using
> > files
> > from Powerpoint 95 and earlier...?" displays a truly out-of-touch
> > understanding of the use of Powerpoint by academicians. Loss of backward
> > compatibility is a huge issue, for so many reasons that I cannot count.
> > Powerpoint is used in academia to create figures, etc. for lectures,
> > manuscripts, grants, etc. Backward compatibility, no matter how far back,
> > is
> > essential to the utility of the program. Few people have probably
> > discovered
> > yet that they cannot go back to files that they created 10 years ago to
> > take
> > another look at the figure or to modify it. As they discover this, more
> > and
> > more people will become disgusted. The effect on MS will only be felt if
> > another company produces a better product. But what happened to companies
> > that really care about the quality of their product, rather than simply,
> > gee,
> > I don/t see how we can make any additional money if we make the product
> > better?
> >
> >
> >
> > "Steve Rindsberg" wrote:
> >
> >> In article <6383BFA2-EAA0-4A86-8591-85B626E5328B.TakeThisOut@microsoft.com>, Dwarkin
> >> wrote:
> >> > Pia, this does not help: using this merely takes away the
> >> > security-restrictions; we´ve tryed that. The problem is that Microsoft
> >> > has
> >> > not implemented any converter for those elder file-types in 2007. But
> >> > as
> >> > Microsoft wrote: we users may learn that our content is limited by
> >> > decisions
> >> > from MS. This mean, merely as long accessible as Microsoft is willing
> >> > to
> >> > allow us to do so.
> >> > I´m very curious how long it will take until EU-Commission or
> >> > US-authorities
> >> > will watch this as using market-power against customers.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't hold my breath. It's rare that programs read files from more
> >> than a
> >> few versions back; I've never heard of the government stepping in and
> >> demanding
> >> that they do so. If it's in the company's competitive and financial
> >> interests
> >> to make it happen, they'll do so. Otherwise no.
> >>
> >> Realistically, how many people do you imagine are still using files from
> >> PowerPoint 95 and earlier (from 12 or more years ago)? I doubt very much
> >> that
> >> it'd be worth MS' time and money to build the converter, particularly
> >> when
> >> anyone with a copy of an earlier version of PPT can convert the files to
> >> something that 2007 can read.
> >>
> >> There's a macro here that'll automate it in fact:
> >>
> >> Batch re-save presentations; update older presentations to newer
> >> PowerPoint
> >> version
> >> http://www.pptfaq.com/FAQ00740.htm
> >>
> >>
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >> Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
> >> PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
> >> PPTools: www.pptools.com
> >> ================================================
> >> Live and in personable in the Help Center at PowerPoint Live
> >> Sept 21-24, San Diego CA, USA
> >> www.pptlive.com
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

I GOT IT!!!

Microsoft is tricky, but there are work arounds to the planned obsolescence.
This isn't perfect but at least I can see my old work.

Trapped in Vista with Powerpoint 2007 needing to see powerpoint 1997 (4).
1. Download PowerPointViewer 1997
2. Install it in Vista (but in a folder with 97 on the end so you can find
it later)
3. Open it
4. Navigate to the file you want to get into.
5. Print it to a pdf (from Viewer)

Then You at least have the Adobe Acrobat version that can be displayed for
classes, printed, and viewed with user-friendly backward compatibility.

Bill

"Bill Dilworth" wrote:

> Thank you for the great feedback Greg,
>
> Unfortunately, there is no one here but use chickens. Everyone here in the
> newsgroup is a user, like yourself. No one here works for Microsoft.
>
> In my experience, it is often worthwhile to keep a version of older software
> running on virtual machines, so that when (yes, when) support is dropped for
> an older version (by whatever company), you still have access to it.
>
>
> Bill Dilworth
>
> "GregO" <GregO.TakeThisOut@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:B17B18E4-C6B0-4FEA-87EF-E0C36BB30EAB@microsoft.com...
> > This question "realistically how many people do you imagine are using
> > files
> > from Powerpoint 95 and earlier...?" displays a truly out-of-touch
> > understanding of the use of Powerpoint by academicians. Loss of backward
> > compatibility is a huge issue, for so many reasons that I cannot count.
> > Powerpoint is used in academia to create figures, etc. for lectures,
> > manuscripts, grants, etc. Backward compatibility, no matter how far back,
> > is
> > essential to the utility of the program. Few people have probably
> > discovered
> > yet that they cannot go back to files that they created 10 years ago to
> > take
> > another look at the figure or to modify it. As they discover this, more
> > and
> > more people will become disgusted. The effect on MS will only be felt if
> > another company produces a better product. But what happened to companies
> > that really care about the quality of their product, rather than simply,
> > gee,
> > I don/t see how we can make any additional money if we make the product
> > better?
> >
> >
> >
> > "Steve Rindsberg" wrote:
> >
> >> In article <6383BFA2-EAA0-4A86-8591-85B626E5328B.TakeThisOut@microsoft.com>, Dwarkin
> >> wrote:
> >> > Pia, this does not help: using this merely takes away the
> >> > security-restrictions; we´ve tryed that. The problem is that Microsoft
> >> > has
> >> > not implemented any converter for those elder file-types in 2007. But
> >> > as
> >> > Microsoft wrote: we users may learn that our content is limited by
> >> > decisions
> >> > from MS. This mean, merely as long accessible as Microsoft is willing
> >> > to
> >> > allow us to do so.
> >> > I´m very curious how long it will take until EU-Commission or
> >> > US-authorities
> >> > will watch this as using market-power against customers.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't hold my breath. It's rare that programs read files from more
> >> than a
> >> few versions back; I've never heard of the government stepping in and
> >> demanding
> >> that they do so. If it's in the company's competitive and financial
> >> interests
> >> to make it happen, they'll do so. Otherwise no.
> >>
> >> Realistically, how many people do you imagine are still using files from
> >> PowerPoint 95 and earlier (from 12 or more years ago)? I doubt very much
> >> that
> >> it'd be worth MS' time and money to build the converter, particularly
> >> when
> >> anyone with a copy of an earlier version of PPT can convert the files to
> >> something that 2007 can read.
> >>
> >> There's a macro here that'll automate it in fact:
> >>
> >> Batch re-save presentations; update older presentations to newer
> >> PowerPoint
> >> version
> >> http://www.pptfaq.com/FAQ00740.htm
> >>
> >>
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >> Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
> >> PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
> >> PPTools: www.pptools.com
> >> ================================================
> >> Live and in personable in the Help Center at PowerPoint Live
> >> Sept 21-24, San Diego CA, USA
> >> www.pptlive.com
> >>
> >>
>
>
>