Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The answer: "Well, we're drowning in resumes. And they're applying in an IT related job. They should be more detail oriented, and smart enough to know, ... NOT to assume that everyone has upgraded or will upgrade to MS Office 2007..."
She had a point. I still didn't agree with it, though.
Her point isn't valid since you don't have to upgrade to Office 2007 to view docx documents. Any 1/2 way competent IT department will install the updates to the previous versions of office to make sure they are readable. Same argument to people who constantly complain about PPT presentations being e-mailed because they didn't buy it/don't have it installed download the viewer and shut up. Microsoft just like Adobe doesn't require you to pay to view their documents but if you want to write/create them then yes you have to shell out the $$$.
I'm pretty sure the Home Use Program is only available for government employees. Even if it is open to non-government employees it requires the company to sign up, make enough purchases, and supply a code. Most people won't have access to the program.
I definitely don't work for the government. The program is sponsored by my employer though.
Her point isn't valid since you don't have to upgrade to Office 2007 to view docx documents. Any 1/2 way competent IT department will install the updates to the previous versions of office to make sure they are readable. Same argument to people who constantly complain about PPT presentations being e-mailed because they didn't buy it/don't have it installed download the viewer and shut up. Microsoft just like Adobe doesn't require you to pay to view their documents but if you want to write/create them then yes you have to shell out the $$$.
I understand and agree with you. There are default viewers for these.
Let me clarify: the company is an IT consulting firm that recruits and places consultants/contractors. Thus, they take in a resume, read it for certain qualifications, call the candidate for a preliminary phone interview, choose their potential candidates, reformat their resumes, removing personal information like home address, phone numbers and email adresses, before they forward it to some of their client companies for their review.
While I don't agree with their deleting the files, with thousands of resumes everyday, I can understand why they won't bother to convert these .docx files when they have others that are already in the correct format.
They can email those that sent in a .docx file and ask for the correct format. Do you really think they'll bother? The potential candidate already failed one of their criteria: attention to detail.
The only time they would do that is when the email correspondence spells out that they previously worked at the target client company. Then that candidate might be worth pursuing further, cause he might have a leg up at being called back by the client company.
I know this alone won't kill open office, but with this kind of thinking, Oracle could really slow things down on open source adoption.
Then again, Oracle is making a ton of money, while Sun is gone. So maybe they're doing something right?
I know of several mid-sized companies (including where I'm at now) that have standardized on Open Office for over a year now and everything seems to be working well. The Open Office suite is an excellent product.
I bought a Mac so I could use Apple's iWork. I have never been so productive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.