Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Select multiple non-consecutive words in Word 2004' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Select multiple non-consecutive words in Word 2004
Authored by: rkleim on Nov 03, '05 09:59:52AM

What am I missing here? It has been a feature of Apple/Windows ever since their inception as a way to select non-contiguous areas - you use the command or control key. This isn't a hint - it's a real beginner point which I teach in my introductory Windows XP classes, as well as intro MAC OSX classes. If you don't know how to use shift to select contiguous areas or ctl/cmd to select non-contiguous areas, you need to go back and read the very basic intro to XP/OSX/Word texts.



[ Reply to This | # ]
No so, Mr. smarty pants. ;-)
Authored by: Blah on Nov 03, '05 11:48:18AM

I don't have a Tiger box here in front of me to test, but I can tell you that in TextEdit v1.3 on 10.3.9 (and TextWrangler, since I have it open) the instant you press down on the mouse button, even with the command key pressed, the currently selected text is deselected. That has been the default text selection behavior for over 20 years. Has Tiger changed this basic behavior?

Word has had various niceties like this for years if you know the magic modifier keys. But how many Mac folks are regular users of Word?

This is a great tip, even though it's quite simple.



[ Reply to This | # ]
Oh, yeah
Authored by: hamarkus on Nov 03, '05 01:39:35PM

Three basic steps in learning how to use computers:
1) How do I select?
click, hold and drag
2) Now, how do I select the next item without deselecting the first?
press shift while selecting additional items
3) But how do I select something that is not adjacent to my first selection?
Press crtl/cmd while selecting additional non-adjacent items

Unfortunately, this last method has, historically, long been considered as an advanced feature and has only slowly crept into OSs and programs, and was even touted as a great new feature in software revisions. Even nowadays it is not implemented everywhere (in order not to confuse people or because of lazyness?).

This hint could have been about announcing a new feature in Word 2004 (even though I thought this feature existed already prior to Office 2004).



[ Reply to This | # ]
I think this was a GREAT hint.
Authored by: garneaum on Nov 04, '05 02:44:43PM

I get pretty tired of reading people making comments like you've made on this hint. This may not be a HINT to you, but it is certainly going to be a HINT to someone. Just because you teach it in your beginning class doesn't mean it's not worth sharing in this forum.

Do you criticize your students for asking questions that may be "simpler" than you would like to answer or discuss?

Let's let people post hints and spare the criticisms. Afterall, the poster did start out with "this may be common knowledge to most".

Just my 2cents.



[ Reply to This | # ]
I think this was a GREAT hint.
Authored by: hamarkus on Nov 04, '05 03:34:19PM

Did you like the hint because it said:

1) "In a lot of programs, selecting non-contigeous items can be achieved by cmd-click, and by the way since Office 2004 this also works in Word" (the later part of this statement I would dispute since I think this has been a feature of Office for quite some time).

Or because it said:

2) "Selecting non-contigeous items via cmd-click now also works in Word (since Office 2004)" (which as I said would most likely be incorrect).

Meaning 1) would fall into the category "Useful feature, which not everybody might be aware of" akin to saying cmd-clicking a link in tab-savvy browser opens the link in a new tab in the background.

Meaning 2) would fall into the category "New feature in latest version of program X".

Maybe one could create a category "Modifier key hint of the day" or one called "New features in popular apps".

One can critisize this hint for stating the obvious or for claiming novelty where none exists.



[ Reply to This | # ]