• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Bleeding Edge / The Office 2010 font problem: Microsoft Support

The Office 2010 font problem: Microsoft Support

July 21, 2010 JimK 4 Comments

I told you all in a previous post that my experience with Microsoft support on what turned out to be a font problem with Office 2010 was abysmal. I promised to spare you details then, and I won’t rehash that call now. However, yesterday I received a signoff e-mail from the support tech. The critical section read as follows:

“Agreement of Issue: to use outlook 2010 
Resolution/Recommendations: case was resolved by performing office upgrade”

I had sent the tech a detailed message describing what I went through to troubleshoot the problem and how I eventually fixed it. From the resolution section, it looks like the tech either didn’t read or didn’t understand what I sent him. This is frustrating for me on two levels.

First, it demonstrates what I have noted before: that communications with Microsoft’s support tends to be unidirectional. They’re very happy to tell you what to do, but they’re not willing or able (I’m not sure which) to understand a detailed explanation of the problem. This means that the solutions suggested are often demonstrably inappropriate based on information already given to them. I go to a great deal of effort to pin down the problem before a call support about it. Often, it seems like the effort is wasted.

Second, the fact that the tech did not understand what I did to solve the problem means that that solution will not be available to other people who call Microsoft about similar problems. When I solve a problem, it makes me feel better if I believe that my solution can help others. It looks like that’s not going to happen this time, at least through Microsoft.

Over the last 10 or 20 years, I found that Microsoft’s tech support is usually pretty good. However, I’ve had two recent experiences which are causing me to change my opinion. In both cases, I wasted a lot of time and energy, got minimal help from tech support, and ended up having to solve the problem on my own.

The Bleeding Edge

← Office 2010 crashes: why’d they happen? Office 2010 and Acrobat: a gotcha →

Comments

  1. Susan says

    March 23, 2011 at 1:19 pm

    I had the same experience with Microsoft. They refused to take the report of a problem –or help solve it–despite several users having the same experience.

    Reply
  2. Jim says

    March 23, 2011 at 2:04 pm

    It’s sad. They used to be OK. They’re only hurting themselves with this attitude.

    Jim

    Reply
  3. John Livingston says

    June 16, 2011 at 3:38 pm

    I would be fascinated to know how you solved the problem. I use Microsoft Office 2007 at work, but would like to work on documents at home where I have Office 2010. I need to see how my documents will look when printed and cannot do so with this font issue.

    Reply
    • Jim says

      June 16, 2011 at 4:27 pm

      As I said in an earlier post:

      “I did a web search for “outlook 2010 crashes reading pane”, and found a forum with this statement: “In Windows 7, I checked Fonts through Control Panel and my Helvetic[a] icon instead of displaying “ABC” was showing “$%&””, together with information that the author had fixed his reading pane problems by deleting the (probably corrupted) font. I found a similar (not quite the same because I had several Helvitica fonts installed) thing in the font control panel on both computers that were experiencing Outlook abends. I removed the fonts.

      Problem solved.”

      You need to remove the fonts that Office doesn’t like.

      Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.