Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

[Sorry that this is all quite off topic for a conversation about surface.]

So imagine you have 4 authors: person A writes a document, and person B makes one set of changes, while person C makes a different set of changes, with person D working off of C’s version. Now person A wants to accept some but not all of C’s changes, and some but not all of B’s changes, and person D wants to “rebase” his document to add the changes that A approved from B and C, but not the changes that A did not approve...

How do you handle it? You’re saying MS word now has a solution for this that avoids conflicts? I guess I’m not enough of a power user to know about it.

Okay, now imagine that you want to both want to open and type on the same document at the same time, real-time-collaboration style. You’re saying Word has a solution for this one too?




Not sure about the first but for the second Office online does that now. Not sure if you can do it completely in the desktop app but the online UI isn't horrible from what I've used of it.


The first is basically a rather complicated workflow that is handled for instance with plain text documents in git. I doubt Word can do that (wouldn't know, haven't used it for a long time), after all it's core thing is being a word processor. Now I didn't read your rant, but ranting that something is a pile of junk and then using a rather far-fecthed missing feature as an example of why it is a pile of junk, as a counter-argument to someone questioning your reasoning, is not proper logic. Can't think of a proper analogy atm, but claiming git is a pile of junk and then coming up with git diff not being able to deal with Word files as one of the reasons would probably come close: it makes no sense.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: