I've been using Publisher 2000 since it came out and I'm very happy with
it. And, I thought I "should" upgrade to 2003. After all, newer is
better, right?
I'm sure glad I didn't.
I've talked to several people who have and they are not happy with
2003's web publishing problems. And, after reading the general comments
here about it, I decided to keep plugging away at 2000. It does the job
and so..
Anyhow, thanks to all here who helped me make this decision and I'll
continue to read here and hopefully contribute as I can.
PeterL
David Bartosik [MSFT MVP] - 14 Feb 2005 21:58 GMT
It has been and continues to be my recommendation that 2000 be used over
2002/2003 for a serious web site despite a few new features in the latter.
David Bartosik - [MSFT MVP]
www.publishermvps.com
www.davidbartosik.com
> I've been using Publisher 2000 since it came out and I'm very happy with
> it. And, I thought I "should" upgrade to 2003. After all, newer is better,
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> PeterL
Beverly-Texas - 23 Feb 2005 22:05 GMT
I already have 2003 - anyway to go back to 2000? What are the major
advantages of going back to 2000? Do pictures load faster?
> It has been and continues to be my recommendation that 2000 be used over
> 2002/2003 for a serious web site despite a few new features in the latter.
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> >
> > PeterL