Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Computing/2023 December 5

= December 5 =

Autorecovery Save in Word no longer works on timer
I am having a problem with Autorecovery saving in Word. I bought a new Dell Inspiron desktop computer about six months ago that is running Windows 11, and am using the latest version of Word, in what I think is now called Microsoft 365. (I am not asking whether it will work on 29 February 2024, or whether it will be upgraded to Microsoft 366.) I have always used the Autorecovery save option to save my work every 10, 12, or 15 minutes, to AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Word. This feature was working on my previous computer, and was still working when I upgraded to my new computer. However, within about the past month, I have noticed that Word isn't creating the Autorecovery files every 12 minutes, or whatever I have set the time to. It is periodically saving my documents, but, if I am actively editing a document, it isn't being actively saved, just saved when it wants to save them. The Autorecovery is less important than it was, because the combination of my processor, the memory, the operating system, and the word processor is more reliable with Wndows 11 and a newer machine, but I would still like to have the Autorecovery backups performed. Has there been a change to Word that downgrades this feature, or is there a setting that may have been changed, maybe in my registry, that makes this feature less reliable? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:55, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * could you check the File>Options menu and then the "save" tab? For me it shows the options you have, which should mean it should still work as described for autorecovery. Note that Word may check your document for changes and choose not to overwrite the autorecovery if no changes have been made.
 * Alternative to the Auto-recovery, there is the autosave option, which saves your documents on the OneDrive that you get when taking an Office365 subscription. Rmvandijk (talk) 09:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, User:Rmvandijk - When I go to File>Options>Save, what I see is Word Save Options.png.
 * I think that is what you said. But it doesn't result in an Autorecovery save of the document being edited every 10 minutes.  I am seeing that an Autorecovery save of all of the  Word documents that I have open is done periodically, every few hours or something like that, not just the ones that I have modified, but not at the interval that I have specified.  Is there some setting that changes how Autorecovery Saving is done?  Robert McClenon (talk) 05:18, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I think that my Autorecovery problem may have been solved by Microsoft updates. I picked up updates to Microsoft 365, and my initial observation, too soon to be sure, is that the Autorecovery feature is now working the way it did about two months ago.  Sometimes bugs actually get fixed.  Robert McClenon (talk) 21:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * We've been trying to fix Bugs for some time, we're on version 0.93 beta. MinorProphet (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Color printer for infrequent use?
Can anyone suggest a general type (specific model great but not required) of color printer that's good for printing a few pages once in a while? Cost of the printer and supplies are an issue, though more the up front cost since volume will be low. Physical space used by the printer is an issue. Print quality is relatively unimportant since if I need a good photographic print I can get it done at a shop. Basic "business graphics" level of print quality is ok. Finally it will be used with Linux and mustn't require binary blob Windows drivers.

Ink jets are terrible because if you unseal an ink cartridge to print a page, then let it sit for a few weeks or months, the rest of the ink dries up.

Ribbon-style laser printer could be ok I guess, though they take a lot of space, plus the cartridges are silly expensive.

I have been wondering about old fashioned impact printers with multi-color ribbons. Are those still a thing?

Other alternatives?

Thanks. 2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:6375 (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * A color laser printer won't clog from lack of use. The toner is a powder, so it likes to be dry. They used to be very expensive, but I've seen home models under $500. Toner refills go for about $50/color pack, similar in price to ink jet. As with ink jet, you can risk the cheap knock-off stuff to try and save a few dollars, even though you know it won't really work and you'll end up buying the real toner later. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 11:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, yeah I guess I'll consider that in the long run. I have a monochrome laser printer now, so if a color one can also print monochrome, maybe I can upgrade someday.  I don't want two bulky printers if I can help it.  2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:6375 (talk) 20:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * We have a Canon laser printer in the staff area here and an Epson ink well printer in the public area. The ink well printer is slightly larger than the laser printer, but effectively, they are the same size. I know that some laser printers are huge, but those are not the home models. 97.82.165.112 (talk) 13:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * But inkwell printers, in my experience, clog even worse than cartridge printers if they are underutilized. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 01:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Dumbest mobile phone I can buy?
Any suggestions about the dumbest mobile phone I can buy? It's for a family member who can't deal with technological complexity. There used to be tons of phones like that, but they are all bricked now since the 2G and 3G mobile networks have been shut down. So that leaves LTE and 5G phones and they are all over complex.

Seeking a phone with:
 * NO internet
 * NO browser
 * NO camera
 * NO photo viewer
 * NO music player
 * NO video games
 * NO touch screen if possible (physical buttons preferred)
 * NO pretentious minimalist "design" with "elegant" typefaces and accompanying ridiculous yuppie price tag. Just a plain single function workingman's phone.  Cheap is good, but as long as it's under $100 I won't get too angry.

Does anything made today come close to that? Thanks.

PS: I have looked at this page and those people do not get it. They list small feature sets as a con rather than a pro. But the ones that suck the least on that list seem to be the Kyocera (price not shown but around $100) and the Alcatel. I'm looking into those. The BLU Megatank is just what I want except that the networks capable of supporting it have shut down.

2601:644:8501:AAF0:0:0:0:6375 (talk) 21:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you ask is possible but these look pretty basic https://www.tracfone.com/basic-phones RudolfRed (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 01:23, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Also check out Doro phones. Shantavira|feed me 09:45, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * So I think your options are impossible. If you have a phone with a camera, you can just not use it right? Without internet there's no problem of the photo's going anywhere.
 * I think the name of the type is "feature phone". If I look for this I find for example the Nokia 110(4G). Its the 2023 model, also available without 4G, which you don't want. I think that this (or comparable) is as close as you'll get. In my region, it's about 45 euros Rmvandijk (talk) 10:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Try a search for senior mobile phone - you will find several which seem to fit your requirements. --TrogWoolley (talk) 11:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)


 * If you have a phone with a camera, you can just not use it right? Not necessarily. Unused features don't just provide zero benefit. They can also exact a significant cost: in cognitive load, in confusion, in time spent finding the one feature you do want in the midst of all the ones you don't. —scs (talk) 13:02, 12 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Instead of "dumb phone" try searching for "elder phone". I don't think you will find a phone completely free of non-phone functions, but there are some phones that have larger buttons, a simpler appearance, one touch agent assistance, and other design feature designed just for the elderly. -- Tom N talk/contrib 00:38, 13 December 2023 (UTC)