Office365 for Mac So, I've reinstalled twice and same issue. If I have Word (or any software from the package) open, it will only open files from my desktop, not my server, and then it will only open one. If I try to open a second file it will put up a dialog box that says, 'Additional permissions are required to access the following files:' When I follow the prompts to select the file, and Grant Access, Word then tells me that it can't open the document because the user does not have access privileges. Is this a Word issue or a Mac permissions issue? It only happens with Office apps. Hi MeasureCJ, Based on your description, this is a known issue in Word 2016 for MAC.

I suggest try this method and check the method of Joshua A. Solomon: 'click 'cancel' 3 times. The dialog will go away. Open a blank document. From the 'word' menu, select 'preferences.' Select 'spelling & grammar.'

Click the 'Dictionaries.' That stupid dialog box will pop up. Click 'cancel' 3 times. Un-tick Custom.Dictionary.dic. Deal with the dialog box again. Navigate to the enclosing folder (Microsoft; not Office 2011). Now you can close all the windows and quit word.

Solved the problem for me. ' You can get this method from this link and you can also refer to another method of Rich Michaels - MVP at the same link: Hope it's helpful.

Regards, Emi Zhang TechNet Community Support Please mark the reply as an answer if you find it is helpful. If you have feedback for TechNet Support, contact.

An anonymous reader writes: We all know the ill-fated history of IBM's OS/2 Warp, while some others may not know about the first OS/2-OEM distribution called eComStation. Now a new company called Arca Noae, not happy with the results of this last distribution, has signed an agreement with IBM to create a. They announced a this last October; this will be based on OS/2 Warp 4.52 and the SMP kernel. The OS/2 community has taken this news with positivism and the everybody that has developed for OS/2 on the past to open source their source code to collaborate.

Introducing New Positivism Positivism can help with feelings of negativity, despair, hopelessness and issues arising from low self esteem. Positivism is not for everyone, ask your doctor if they are stupid enough to prescribe Positivism for you.

Positivism may cause sudden sexual arousal and should only be used around really good friends. Test subjects also reported uncontrollable urges to lick someone's ear. Other reported side effects include sudden explosive flatulence combined with diarrhea, random r.

I remember being so blown away by OS2/Warp's ability to multi-task so many applications at once, with such a clean UI. That was in the Windows 3.11 days, before Win95 changed everything. I had a friend who migrated to OS2, and I was seriously considering it myself. But in the end, I decided to wait for Win95.

I think if OS2/Warp had come out just a little earlier and gotten more promotion in non-geek circles, it may have become the dominant OS and we would be looking at a very different desktop landscape to. I think it was more due to really bad advertising from IBM.

I remember OS/2 Warp Commercials, I was computer savvy enough to know OS/2 was an Operating system. Others at that time had no idea what they were trying to sell. Just a bunch of psychedelic colors and people looking amazed at the screen. Without actually showing the OS or its features. Microsoft actually showed the product and what new features it could do, although many of such features were inferior to what OS/2 can do, people actually could s. I remember being so blown away by OS2/Warp's ability to multi-task so many applications at once, with such a clean UI. As an older programmer, let me suggest one ought to be reticent about saying things like that.

I know that by any reasonable standard it should make you sound experienced and therefore worth listening to, but if you have any gray in your hair it's bound to have a very different effect. Like the time I sat next to a guy at a banquet who was reminiscing about when his department got an IBM 701. 'Yep,' he said with evident satisfaction, 'that was a stored program jobbie.' Employers are looking for programmers who were in diapers while you were being blown away by OS/2, so ixnay on that kind of alktay. Instead practice saying things like 'Node.js is so 2015.' And when someone asks you what you mean, turn to them, raise one eyebrow, then literally turn your back on them. Draconic, fascist Windows 10 comes out and Microsoft proceeds to try to force it down everyone's throat, and out of left field comes, after what seems like a geologic age, a new version of OS/2.

Not sure what to think of that timing. This was prophesised in Revelations. Lo, and the huge and evil beast with 10 horns was smote by the small usurper, bent over twice in rebirth, and cast out of the heavens into the fiery pit. Yea and verily, not until this comes to pass shall the chip be righted, and a thousand years of peace come to pass.

'contribute' I think I'm done paying for any OS, and I have no interest in 'donating' money either, as if I have any to spare anymore. I've got an old P4 laptop I got for free that's still running XP, I think I'll be picking out a Linux distro of some sort and learning how to use that, then when I build a new desktop finally I'll be all ready to load it up with that. The one or two pieces of software that I need to use that only have Windows versions will run just fine under WINE, from what I'm told. Amigas and C/64 machines playing block/character graphics games. Amiga, block/character games?

You obviously haven't grown up with computers from that era, because the C/64 had graphics that were way ahead of the other similar 8-bit computers and the Amiga had the best graphics of them all. The competition at the time was the Color Computer 2, the TI-99/4A, the PC with either Hercules, CGA or EGA graphics, the Mac with black and white graphics or the Atari ST with much fewer colours on the screen. Both the C/64 and the Amiga were king of their own class of computers.

That is, until Commodore sat on their asses and everybody passed way ahead of them. I remember 2.0 back in about 92 or 93 and it was alright but not really special. And then it pretty much died. I can't imagine there are any significant projects still using it. Though I'll probably be told about several who never gave up on it. After all, there are still projects running Motif. Well quite a few big companies bought into and built their own apps on it.

And IBM of course continued to ship apps for OS/2. And there has also been a loyal geek user base which has ported a fair amount of open source projects to the platform. It is Posix compliant so porting isn't that difficult. I must say, I liked OS/2 - especially Warp. It ran well on the hardware of the day and was way better than Windows. But IBM weren't as smart at marketing as Microsoft! My school had some systems that ran on it in the mid-90s.

It also, after the member of staff who brought it in left, had nobody who knew how to use it. Our IT 'teachers' were elderly Catholic priests teaching from a series of worksheets that basically had step-by-step instructions on 'how to save a document in Word' and so on. There were no dedicated IT support staff, only an off-site support contractor. I ended up teaching myself to use it and doing a few admin-type jobs for the school, in exchange for a ta. Well, yeah, it really didn't catch on. And that was pretty much Microsoft changing their core APIs to ensure OS/2 broke as much as possible. I think the old saying was 'Windows aint done until Lotus won't run', even if it was just a myth.

Which is really a shame, because while Windows was a still a crappy OS without real hardware-level preemptive multi-tasking, crap resource management, and an inability to actually use all of its memory, OS/2 was a pretty solid operating system which didn't let a single cras. So tell me what was so special about it? I ran it on my desktop for going on a year but gave up on it. Sure, it had preemptive multitasking before Windows NT came out. It was bloated and slow, in large part because IBM paid Microsoft to design a lot of it while paying them per SLOC.

And paying your primary competitor per line of code to write your operating system can't end well. Was it the object oriented API? Again, it made the system bloated and slow. OS/2 may have had a fe.

Being able to preemptively multitask DOS, 16-bit Windows and 32-bit OS/2 apps was pretty special in 1992. And an object-oriented GUI was pretty much exclusive to OS/2 for some time. OS/2 is a special OS - because unlike modern OSes designed for portability, it's one of the few that exploited a lot of x86 specific features. That's how it could not only intermingle 16 bit DOS, Windows and OS/2 apps together, but OS/2 1.x was actually a 16-bit OS.

Later versions moved to 32-bit, but had the capability of runnin. Perhaps your recollection isn't very good at all, because OS/2 2.0+'s user interface with the object-oriented Workplace Shell was a triumph, What? I used 2.1, 3.0, and 4.0, and all of them had shit UI. The defaults were all insane and made you use more buttons for no reason. The GUI elements were all oversized, too, so they wasted screen real estate.

OS/2 was contemptuous of computing resources, because it came from the IBM mindset that anything worth doing is worth spending a lot of money on. When Open Source Unixlikes became a thing, it had no more reason to exist.

The deposition and testimony provided by Garry Norris - IBM's chief negotiator with Microsoft before and after the introduction of Windows 95 - has provided a cornucopia of fascinating evidence in the Microsoft trial. Much of it was previously unknown or unconfirmed. His evidence showed how Microsoft effectively controlled IBM's PC hardware and software businesses by making the price of Windows considerably higher than for other comparable PC makers.

Mr Norris described in detail to Philip Malone, counsel for the Department of Justice, five cases where Microsoft had succeeded in modifying, or had attempted to influence, IBM's choice of. Interesting read. That is also (more) proof that hardware without software is essentially useless.

Microsoft Windows 10: A 64-bit compilation of 32 bit extensions and a graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit operating system originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor written by a 2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition with 0 bit of understanding good UI. (Yes, I know Windows 7 is WinNT 6.1.

Any Word On D:os2 For Mac Pro

Windows 8 is WinNT 6.2, Windows 8.1 is WinNT 6.3, and Windows 10 is WinNT 10.0, all which have b. The AC has it right. First there was a Russian company (forget the name) contracted to write a virtual machine to run OS/2. Eventually that became Parallels for OSX.

Then Innotek partnered with Connectivx to add OS/2 support to Virtual PC and port Virtual PC to OS/2. No sooner then they did this, that MS bought Connectivx and killed the OS/2 port. Then Innotek wrote VirtualBox, based partially on QEMU and released it as GPL (probably had to as it used GPL source) with propriety additions for things like USB. Started my career with OS/2, and IBM's C compiler. Worked on some really nice systems in the 90s that used OS/2: automated trains, banking systems, robotics. But I was burned by IBM: first when they killed OS/2, then when they killed off OCL and their C suite for both Windows and OS/2.

Any Word On D:os2 For Mac Free

Jumped to linux in 2001 and haven't looked back since. But lesson learned: I'd have a hard time trusting an IBM OS or compiler suite. What does bringing back OS/2 do today? It would need something really innova.

As with DOS, IBM contracted with Microsoft to develop OS/2, so it actually started off as Microsoft's code. Both partners were on board for a while and told the entire industry DOS (a CLI running programs in real mode) was going to be replaced by OS/2 (a GUI though it could run DOS in a window using the 80286's protected mode, so a crashed DOS app wouldn't hang the entire computer), so a lot of companies began porting their software over to OS/2. Then there was some sort of falling out. Most people poin. July 1991: ' SteveB went on the road to see the top weeklies, industry analysts. The meetings included demos of Windows 3.1 (pen and multimedia included), Windows NT, OS/2 2.0 including a performance comparison to Windows and a 'bad app' that corrupted other applications and crashed the system'.'

Any Word On D:os2 For Mac Mac

' The demos of OS/2 were excellent, crashing the system had the intended effect - to FUD OS/2 2.0. People paid attention to this demo and were often suprised to our favor. Steve positioned it as - OS/2 is not 'bad' but from a performance and 'robustness' standpoint, it is NOT better than Windows.' You'll be wanting PC-BSD, then. It's FreeBSD with tweaks for desktop use, a different installer, and some extra utilities.

It's more of an add on to FreeBSD than a separate project like Ubuntu is to Debian. If you're used to Debian, bear in mind that updating FreeBSD isn't as streamlined as running apt and walking away. It's not difficult, but it's not as automated as Debian. My advice: stay away from ports unless you need specific options for a piece of software. The way ports interacts with the package.