No, poster is incorrect. It is bad design on Microsofts part to have such an issue.
If something cant be save, you, the user, should be notified at the time you click save. It ain’t rocket science and is fundamentally basic software design that should have been flagged up during the QA process that Microsoft no longer bother to employ.
No, poster is incorrect. It is bad design on Microsofts part to have such an issue.
If something cant be save, you, the user, should be notified at the time you click save. It ain’t rocket science and is fundamentally basic software design that should have been flagged up during the QA process that Microsoft no longer bother to employ.
Its also a bad mark on the testing applied to office 365. The lack of basic testing from Microsoft in recent years drives me up the effing wall.
What should have happened is they should have tested PowerPoints reaction to saving a file to:
If your hdd had filled up I bed PowerPoint would have had something to say. It probably has no idea that the cloud storage was full, because someone didn’t test for that and highlight that the cloud storage back end (onedrive) was probably never given such functionality.
As a former software tester I would have not signed off PowerPoint nor onedrive until such a quality assurance UX flaw had been addressed. That’s what I used to do, I certainly affected the design of the software as I found the design flawed many times, not just unable to handle an error but also to have the wrong or non existent feedback to users.
When I worked in a company that used 365 (dont any more thankfully) onedrive was a pain in the effing IT support buttocks. It was constantly getting “stuck”, constantly and silently failing to sync conflicting files, its UI lacked the basic usability features needed to let the user detect this and deal with it without me getting involved.
No
But storage is technically memory.
When I get around to it I will have certain images printed out properly on optical paper.
This is the same technology used to make prints from negatives, the paper can be exposed to the negative or a digital image can be printed to it using a laser.
Fuji and Ilford offer it as archival type of printing. I’m sure many others do.
People wanting to print at home using inkjet can use archival paper and inks but I gave up inkjet years ago because unless you actually print then it just dries up.
I have a colour laser instead but I’d not consider that photo quality.
If you want the best archival quality look for companies that use Fuji’s Crystal Archive paper. Same kind of stuff used with negatives thus same multi-decade stability.
Ah yes. The “You are holding it wrong” response.