What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Watch a scene from 2012, in theaters November 13 view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - Get ready for the biggest event in history – the end of time. How will you survive? 2012- opening 11/13
91 Comments
- ThinkBox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Speaking of brushing up on digg... there is a reply button, you press it if you are replying to a certain post.
- Annon, on 10/12/2007, -3/+17.docx
.xlsx
You've got to be kidding me... what is the point? If you're going to make them longer why not just do something like .word? - junk92, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14The full list of all file formats and extensions and the original article is here: http://www.aviransplace.com/index.php/archives/2006/04/05/the-new-office-2007-file-formats/
I'm sorry for not linking directly to the source, Digg did not let me submit this link, so I put it in the comments - RompeRatones, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14word: .lol
excel: .lmao
powerpoint .wtf - newezra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9You have it backwards. You're not going to be able to open the new Office 2007 documents in Office95/97, but they will open in Office 2000 (if the article is correct).
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Adding an 'x' to the end of everything always makes it cooler guys! Dont you not see that! :D
Anyways...
They will make is so you can save a document in office 97, 2000, xp, or 2003 format just as they do now. A 2003 document wont work in Office XP, so you can save it as an Office XP file and it works fine. May not have all the new fancy stuff, but it would work. - smeager, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7The new file format will use the OpenXML format (that's where the "x" at the end comes in to play). You will be able to open a .docx/.xlsx or .pptx file in Office down to 2000 but you will have (or be prompted) to download a file converter to convert the file to its standard doc/xls/ppt format (unless they release an update so older version of Office will support the new format). It good that they finally use open formats, making it easier to work with other programs like OpenOffice, Abiword, etc. but breaking compatibility could cause more problems in the corporate world. Could you imagine receiving an email with a .docx extension trying to open it and being told that you have to convert the file with another piece of software. Talk about IT hell. Of course I could be completely wrong with everything but hey.
- chrono13, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7If you had ever used anything other than Windows you would know that Linux and such do not use extensions, hidden or otherwise. I can name my jpg file .doc, .txt, whatever - and it will still open properly.
In Windows, it is great having the extension hidden. So something that looks like a picture is actually an exe. Or something that looks like a text file is actually a virus, so on and so forth.
And I have had much trouble with extensions in Windows. After "recovering" corrupted data (that Windows XP corrupted), it spilled GIGS of data in one folder... all without any file extensions. Couldn't tell what was what for thousands of files.
Booted into Linux, and each file opened appropriately. I was able to rename them with their respective extensions (thanks Linux!) and continue on with Windows XP.
It is now four months later. I almost exclusively use Linux now. When I save a file, I just give it an appropriate name, and don't have to worry about extensions at all. Not to create a file, not to save one, and not to open one. It is great that the OS actually detects what type of file it is based on the file itself - not the name of it. - Zippo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So... they added an x to the end of every extension. That must have taken days of brainstorming.
- transfire, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8A whole 4 letters? Woow! Don't knock yourself out!
Seriously, do we name things with type extensions in real life?
"Hi, I'm Tom.man. Nice to meet you."
Why don't our file systems have a frak'n type field yet? - corduroy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm just a casual reader when it comes to this stuff but I have a question.
Are they inserting metadata into the office files so that when WinFS is released, they can do away with extensions?
(I know it's convenient to be able to rename a file to change what opens it, but that could easily be changed to a right click and edit metadata) - bdr529, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6this is not new at all. here is a link to an artical that even explains the 'x' and was written in july of last year...
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1835250,00.asp - kola_kidd, on 10/12/2007, -5/+9.porn
- drwtsn32, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Office 2003/2007 allows *you* to configure DRM for documents. You define what can be done to your document. DRM is not a bad thing when you are in control.
- Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Hmmm. By default, Office 2007 does not save files compatible with previous versions of Office. You have to *specifically* imply backwards-compatibility upon saving. Sounds an awful lot like an argument Microsoft (and fanboys) were using against Open Office...
- Cerberus047, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Great, now a kid will buy it, type his paper out, save it, bring it to school, and cry that its not working.... the world will be in chaos!!
- MioTheGreat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5OpenOffice is nice, I use it when in Linux, but it hasn't reached the level of quality that Office has. ESPECIALLY Office 2007...OpenOffice just 'feels' too much like older versions of Office.
Office 2007 is, to say the least, amazing thus far. - stmiller, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3The format isn't actually openXML. There's nothing 'open' about it. [OpenOffice uses a truely open format.] I suspect we will hear a lot of marketing from MS about their new 'open' document format.
- DennisLaumen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"XPS is a file format that allows for advanced digital rights."
Sounds scary...
Is it already known how open these formats will be? (legally speaking) - drw2583, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Obviously they do, or it would not have made it to the front page of digg.
You REALLY need to brush up on how digg works, guy. - Seidoger, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7Good ol' Microsoft.. lol.. same old, same old!
17 new formats, seems to compliement well the i-forgot-how-many versions of Vista will be sold. - Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3OS X has extensions you just have the option of not displaying them.
- BobbyOnions, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3There is no length restriction, there hasn't been for years, it's just tradition.
For example, the extension ".html" works just fine under Windows. I use SubVersion and .svn directories are perfectly fine even though they don't have a traditional filename, per se, the filename *is* just a traditional extension. - compu73rg33k, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Are you suggesting is isn't!?
- pivic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Quite right, other commenters: files saved in the Office 2007-formats will not be opened in earlier versions than Office 2000. Microsoft will distribute add-ins for Office 2000/XP/2003-users to enable them to open Office 2007-files, but Office 95/97 are left for dead.
The main reason for this is that the new Office 2007-formats pack the contents of the file in a ZIP-container, hence compressing the files. They become significantly smaller, and in Office 2007, users can finally compress pictures. Yee-haw! I still admin users who add extremely big BMP's in their Word-documents and wonder why they are several MB's large. - MioTheGreat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Have you USED it though?
- davidleeroth, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Didn't you mean, "YOU FREAKING GUY!!!!!!!!!!!!"?
- bcoughlin, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I'm looking forward to Dell suing Microsoft over the XPS name cause they're mad MS isn't shipping Vista for XMas.
- Snakey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The biggest difference is that DOC is stored as a BINARY file and docx is stored as Microsoft Office OpenXML, which allows other programmers to easily integrate these documents in their software.
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The world is moving towards XML. If Open Office is ahead of the trend, that does NOT mean that everyone else is copying them.
- SuperJdynamite, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I think the Macs had a good thing going with the Creator and App fields for files (though the implementation was botched because these fields actually lived on the filesystem, not in the file, though if this feature actually appears in a new file format we can hope the implementors will learn from past mistakes).
If you embed an App code in a file, it gives you four bytes to specify the type.
The Creator field is used to associate that file with a program. This means that you can have one JPEG file that opens in PhotoShop when you double click it, and another JPEG file that opens in Paint.NET when you double click it. No more mass association of files with a single program based on file type.
MS had to modify the Portable Execution (PE) format when they released .NET -- why couldn't they have reserved eight bytes for this system? Would have been nice. - brenthals, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"Yeah because extensions cause SOO much trouble in my daily computer use. You do realize that associated files types have all their extensions hidden in XP by default right? Stop trying so hard to be a fanboy."
It's not that he's a fanboy, it's just that extensions suck. Mac hasn't used them (yes, even before OSX) and apparently neither does Linux. So, if only MS uses extensions, and there are better ways to work without them (not just hiding them), why not. All this means is that now I have to type an extra letter if I want Windows to open a file. - sleepwalkers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Do you realize how many versions of XP there are right now? 6
XP Home, XP Pro, XP MCE, XP N, XP 64-bit edition, XP Tablet PC edition.
Do you realize how many versions of Vista there will be? According to Microsoft's site, 5.
So I'm not sure what you're complaining about. - chubbly0, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Except now there will be a difference between .doc and .docx file formats. You need to install a viewer for the .docx to work in previous versions of Office. Can you imagine how much of a pain in the arse it would be if you couldnt differentiate the two types of files? THAT would be a huge headache.
- dist0rti0n, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I wonder if they picked "x" to fall in line with what they did with ASP, going from "asp" to aspx". That would be funny if it were true since Scott Guthrie picked "aspx" as the extension on a whim while he was working on the initial ASP.NET code.
- slantyeyed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Excel = .xlsx"
how confusing is that? TWICE as many syllables in the file extension than the actual program name itself? why not just make it *.excel? - Boondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11000s of man-hours put in by people who score really high on the geek/autism test.
- MioTheGreat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Well, antivirus isn't an issue. The old stuff won't be able to read the new formats anyway.
- Seidoger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Let me reply to you guys, since my post wasn't meant to be negative
@chubbly0
Microsoft likes to change everything in any new release. Have you seen the new interface? it's all changed. Same for file formats. They need to fuel a tech support market i guess. I can hear all those secretaries calling tech support (and it's not their fault, all the software they once knew changed).
@sleepwalkers
True, you are right, but XP been out since 2001. It's not like you went to Staples and saw all those boxes next to each other! They came out one after another. Plus you still can't see all of them on a store shelf if i'm not mistaken.
We shall see! Just my opinion, not saying it's bad, just seems more confusing than anything else for the average customer. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Portuguese / Brazilian : http://www.htk.com.br/noticia.php?noticia=447
---------------------------------------------------
http://www.htk.com.br/ - jphillips59, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2NOT NEW AT ALL....if you are really intrested in this you sould follow brian's blog....NO DIGG
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/
Josh
http://windowsconnected.com - rustic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I like the approach Microsoft has been taking lately. Using a similar format that Open Office uses makes sense. Sure they are copying OO, but how many features did Open Office copy from MS Office or Word Perfect? As someone else pointed out, the XML will be easier to catalog and search and because the new format isn't naively compatible with previous Office versions, I think they had to change the extensions to minimize confusion.
I think Microsoft is finally acknowledging the impact of open source software, and while they still remain predominately a closed source model, they have been making an effort in the free software field. Visual Studio Express, SQL Server express and Virtual Server 2005 are all free. All of these have open source counterparts that are very strong competition. Most colleges give you a free copy of Office as part of your tuition as well.
So I think, to keep their Office suite as their flagship application, they have to acknowledge the free alternatives out there, integrate what they can and try to stay ahead of the competition. - raremage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Could that be a way to work application type? Possibly, but you're talking about some pretty big changes to the way the operating system works. Currently Windows, Mac OS, and Unix all look to file extension to determine what default app is used to open the file. Calling for a change to this action where the OS is now expected to look to the metadata would be far reaching.
Could it be done? Sure, but it's definitely not trivial. Plus one huge problem is backward compatability - until everyone is running an updated OS and Office suite, many many folks would be unable to open these new extension-less files, or at least, not easily. They would certainly struggle to edit or update them into the proper file name (apps by default will save the extension for their file type) and sending them back to the creator / trying to open them by the creator could result in broken files as well, depending on whether or not the legacy app saved the meta tags properly.
A neat idea, but it will / would take a while to get there. - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Its basically the same as PDF as far as restrictions, etc. AKA 'Metro' project.
- barbobot, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4it's microsoft, they aren't exactly known for innovation
/mod me down
//i deserve it
/// http://roflmaobbq.com - mzhao, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That would be bad for developers. For example, say you have three files with the same filename: index.php, index.css, and index.js. In an extensionless environment, you or your OS would have to rely on metadata just to determine which file is which.
Besides, I like how easily hackable files are with extensions; just change the extension and make it compatible with something else. - CatcherInTheWhy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You are completely retarded amdma2003:
MS-Office had its own XML file format in OFfice 2003 and I think it would be much much more easy to find ways OpenOffice copies MS-Office but that doesn't even matter.
Everyone should please stop talk about who copies who, because ultimately, ideas are allowed to be copies, as long as people don't copy code. - ElectricGrandpa, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1You're missing the whole point of digg: centralization. We don't need to be experts at everything anymore...
- northerncomfort, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://www.eightysevenfour.com/2006/12/easily-open-docx-on-a-mac/
- FuzzyLumpkins76, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Uh oh... my boss just got used to .doc and .xls. How am I going to explain this to him?
-
Show 51 - 91 of 91 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is