I think you are confusing your cursade anti-MS (legitimate like any other opinion) with the simple fact that expecting a de-facto standard to be used is just reasonable, not crazy.
This has nothing to do with any anti-Microsoft sentiment I have. I'd have a similar argument if recruiters required me to have a WordPerfect copy of my resume. Or, for that matter, a LaTeX version, though that would cause less of a personal issue, obviously.
And my argument that Word sucks is also not prejudiced. It works fine for producing a file intended solely for print (though I seriously doubt you'll find it being used in the printing industry) but using it as a portable file format is awful. It renders the document differently depending on what version of Word you're using. Heck, if you have different fonts, the same version will render it differently.
Case in point: I recreated my whole resume as a DOC and I got back an email this afternoon from my recruiter that it had rendered wrong for her to the point of losing data. (I suspect tabs are the culprit.)
If a recruiter needs an editable file of your CV, what would you expect them to ask you? Anything other than Word, in 2010, would be less convenient.
There is no reason a recruiter needs to edit my resume, and I don't even really care that much if they do.
Previous Topic
Index
