Talk:Office Assistant

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Well, it's about time that those last three paragraphs were deleted. I wasn't vandalising! Any tips on how to INFORM the moderators that what I did was indeed helpful?

"Clippy" is not, and has never been the name of the paperclip. The (really lousy imo) comic strip User Friendly is responsible for popularizing the wrong name. The primary reference to the default Office Assistant should be "Clippit" throughout.

Also, I cannot find any reference to Seiko Sensei or the monkey elsewhere on the web. If the name is searchable when presented in its native language (japanese? chinese?) then the native language name should be in the article.

"Clippy" is used by Microsoft. A Google search on "site:microsoft.com clippy" gives "about 258" results. "site:microsoft.com clippit" gives "about 50" results. Microsoft themselves seem to prefer "Clippy" - David Gerard 19:16, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

'Clippit' was the original name, but Microsoft changed it to 'Clippy' about two or three years ago. I don't know why but my best guess is that 'Clippit' is some sort of trademark infringement. --Smallbone10 16:09, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Actually, Microsoft Word still calls it Clippit. Just look at the Office Assistant menu. -WVI

Would I be out of line to request that images of the Seiko Sensei and the Monkey be added if possible to complete the set, and as those are the least likely to have been seen by English-speaking readers? - IsaacSapphire 03:09, 28 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a reference link on the article. --190.28.85.251 (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

office assist

Rocky was actually inspired by a program not made by microsoft but by Hallmark (the card company). Amazingly rocky used to be a flying (superhero) dog named rover until microsoft saw the dog hallmark (it was software that acted like publisher) had made and decided to buy it.

Have you got any proof, 67.168.99.180? see edit history here --rjcuk 10:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are very very confused, Rocky is not the superhero dog or Rover. Rover was a different character that provided help in Microsoft Bob and the flying dog is Powerpup, he was an Office Assistant in 97 and isn't related to Rocky. --190.28.85.251 (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

International Assistants

The article says that there are some office assistants that are exclusive to the japanese version of office XP multilingual pack. Are there assitants in other languages (like portuguese, greek, arabic, etc.)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.28.252.116 (talk) 20:13, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True or urban myth?

Remember hearing way back in the late 1990s about religious groups complaining to Microsoft about the anthropomorphic paperclip, but I've never seen any articles... but I can't seem to find any references on Snopes.com to confirm or deny this either. Any truth to this? --I am not good at running 22:31, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Easter egg

The article currently has an external link to a google search under the title 'Easter egg on a Google search for "Clippy"'. I don't see anything out of the ordinary there. Am I missing something, or should the link be removed? Rufous 18:14, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User Reaction

Should not the article say how universally detested this egregious, annoying piece of patronising silliness was? Adam 06:35, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's a non-neutral Point-of-View, but there's no problem in adding a section on customer's reaction, if you can back it up with some good references. Rufous 14:21, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm all for it, under a "Criticism" section. 201.37.132.46 03:48, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know a lot of people who loved clippy (I'm one of them)

Who's that one guy?

I noticed on that picture showing all the office assistants, there's one that looks like Shakesphere (sp?). He's not listed in the part that describes the characters though. Define? --Red Pooka 18:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly enough, before reading your comment (but after you posted it), I added a caption to the picture listing their names. Powers ^T 02:02, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is Shakespeare, he appears as Will in Office 97.--190.28.85.251 (talk) 15:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Office 2004"?

It mentions an "Office 2004" in the page, but there never was an Office 2004... edit: Nevermind. I didn't think of Office Mac. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.119.211.30 (talk • contribs) .

Download

How do you download Microsoft Word or have Office Assistant on Word Perfect?--Princess Homestar 00:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried the Reference Desk? Specifically, the Computing Reference Desk? Powers ^T 15:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yoiu have to buy Microsoft word, but you can't have Office Assistants in WordPerfect.

Melinda Gates

Nobody is going to mention that the PM of microsoft BOB was Bill Gates future wife, and that her product ended up being shoved into Office against the wishs of the Office team? 67.168.20.28 18:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Overview"

The "Overview" section shouldn't just jump into criticizing the Office Assistant right off the bat like it does now. All the stuff about its negative reception should be completely separate from a neutral description of the program itself and, more importantly, come afterwards. It doesn't necessarily have to be a whole new criticisms section, but it should at least be separated out into its own paragraphs. --Foot Dragoon 06:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think it has it's own paragraph now. --rjcuk 10:27, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Education

I recall an older version of this article mentioned that in one version of word Clippy's credentials were present and indicated he studied at Brown University. Anyone know anything about this?

References

Someone added a bunch of "references", which I took the liberty of removing. They were really just external links to articles about the paperclip, but none of them were actually referenced in the wp article itself. --Duke33 19:17, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That F***ing Clip

I have no idea if it's true or not, but apparently Clippy goes by a different name within the Office development team: http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=340399&cid=21122885 Richard W.M. Jones 13:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: "TFC"

The article mentions this and cites a MSDN blog. The MSDN blog doesn't explicitly say what "TFC" stands for, but the ./ article does.

Not feeling bold today. Here, you do it. jdstroy (talk) 19:31, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV!

This article is very anti-Clippit. Surely there is some good things about the Office Assistant? At the moment it is "clippism"! microchip08 14:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is the article itself anti-clippit? The article mentions what the software is for, has a cited line stating the overwhelming public hatred (I just added a quote and another source to this effect), a section on the fact that Microsoft themselves had an advertising campaign which basically acknowledges the fact that everyone hates Clippit, and various references to him in other media. All of these things are factual. What else is there to say? If you can find something else that he's good for not covered, or reliable sources to cite showing that there are those who feel differently about him, Be bold and edit the page. If there's another side to the story, I've yet to hear it. 76.204.78.104 02:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's just there's nothing pro-clippit. It's all "annoying", blah. microchip08 07:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the article is quite biased but I find it be humourous.Djskein79 (talk) 18:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If there isn't anything pro-clippit out there, there doesn't need to be anything pro-clippit in the article. Indium (talk) 04:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's safe to close debate on this one. I'm going to remove the tag. Maury (talk) 20:13, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Without tagging the article, it does seem that Clippit is presented as entirely negative. (And perhaps, by extrapolation, the technology, itself.) Comparing it to the enormously popular (and earlier) Talking Moose suggests that *some* aspects, at least, of Clippit were useful. On a subjective note, I read through the MS book on the subject, and felt the underlying technology was viable and even well-considered. I.e., even knowing Clippit's terrible reputation, I was thinking of using the technology.

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 14:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between good idea and good implementation is key. Consider Balloon Help on the Mac, which was (IMHO) an excellent idea but nevertheless derided due to it's annoying implementation. Or AOCE. The problem with OA wasn't the concept, it was the implementation. And that it was widely derided, which is amply supported in references, is simply a statement of fact, regardless of whether or not the idea itself was a good one. Maury (talk) 20:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The tools that sticks out in my mind as the worst were the early versions of the Windows Troubleshooting Wizards. Not because rule-based systems are flawed, but because, as with OA, the implementation was flawed. The troubleshooting always seemed to be fixated on a different problem than the one I had, and invariably failed to provide help.

When a person needs help, and the tool solves their problem, they're all for it. I remember people using OA, even while complaining about it, even while occasionally getting good information. The wrong answers seem to stick in people's minds. What would be nice is if there was sentence or two in the article regarding something it did well.Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 07:06, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:WordHelpers.PNG

Image:WordHelpers.PNG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit

Since so many folks have edited this, there were many different styles and typos, etc. I've done a standard copyedit, with one exception in meaning, which is the sentence describing why the Clippit character is seen most often. It's not, as the original said, because users were trying to activate a different Office Assistant (that doesn't make sense, why would one end up with default if trying to install a different one). It's because using the CD for other Office changes is liable to set the character back to default — would that be right?

Alpha Ralpha Boulevard (talk) 14:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, the default character is Clippit. But in earlier versions of Office (will have to look it up exactly when that changed), selecting/activating a different character required users to insert the original Office disc. Without the disc, it could not be activated. By activated, I mean it copied another character file from the disc to the HDD. (.ACS or ACG) So most users (who either didn't like inserting the CD or didn't have access to the CD at that point) were stuck with Clippy. This behavior was present even if the Office Assistants were set to "Run from My Computer" in Office setup. That's how he became the most popular. - xp client ^talk 02:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]