What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
Who Gets To Use Unsold Cruise Cabins at Huge Discounts view!
howlifeworks.com - How to access once-in-a-lifetime trips at significantly less than full price
55 Comments
- madIvan, on 10/12/2007, -5/+44Because some people (and particularly businesses) are not college students?
- madIvan, on 10/12/2007, -6/+23Sometimes functionality is worth money... When OpenOffice delivers anything near what Office can, then it might become an option...
- madIvan, on 10/12/2007, -4/+17@NetElemental
Then you really weren't looking hard enough... I have seen a lot of business-critical tools built on top of Office, and doing them in OO would not be an option.
Having said that, for _home_ use OO might be just fine. - samdu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Even most businesses don't use 10% of the "features" of MS Office. Which is why I think they should go to a modular model. Buy the basic suite at a low cost and buy the features you need as plug-ins. Kinda like Firefox.
- iceperson, on 10/12/2007, -5/+13"It's almost preposterous for the average home user to spend $400 on office software..."
hmm. perhaps that's why it's called OFFICE 2007? - Toupee, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11It's almost preposterous for the average home user to spend $400 on office software when perfectly competent stuff is available for free. But admittedly, Office 2007 is one of the most dramatic, useful, and surprisingly "sexy" upgrades I've ever seen.
- chad78, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12$150 is a couple of paychecks for you? You must still live at home.
- ae92, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8I have to say, anyone who hasn't at least used Beta 1 or seen a live demo of this software probably shouldn't be commenting on how Office is full of features nobody uses, as the point of the new interface and workflow is to make them useable.
Actually, speaking of the "10%" thing, I went to a demo of the software, and they pointed out that the urban myths we love to repeat about Office (nobody uses more than 10% of the features, etc.) don't stand up to their test data... yeah, a lot of people only use 10% of the package, but everyone uses a *different* 10%... I've been testing Beta 1 since (and will be testing Beta 2 as soon as MS adds some bandwidth... come on, guys!) and have found it a huge improvement over the old. I'm a consultant who bills clients hourly, but a lot of the tasks I use Office for are administrative, so if it can save me a half hour per month, it's well worth the cost.
Not to knock Open Office... for a home user, to be honest, Open Office is probably enough. (Although I'd rather see someone like my dad using Word 2007, as it's so much easier for a casual user to get up and creating decent looking pages in the new version.) - trollenlord, on 10/12/2007, -8/+15Open Office lacks. A lot. And that new Office 2007 will introduce completely new workflow. Try the beta out. The whole logics of the application are now way more task centered and context sensitive. It's hard to describe but it's really awesomely usable and efficient. The bump from the present Office suite to 2007 is in fact HUGE.
Furthermore, OpenOffice covers only a few functions whereas Microsoft Office tries to cover a lot more of the information sharing functions of the office environments. There is really no contest on corporate environments - OOo loses even as free. - FreakyT, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9The "Home" version of this will be $150, which, depending on your point of view, could be worth it, given the quality of most free alternatives.
- Company_Man, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11What part of
"...compelling features and tools, and reminded us why enterprises continue to rely on the productivity suite."
don't you understand? - aurrea, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8I think a lot of people forget that "MS Office" is not an electronic typewriter. Although I don't use all the features of the suite, businesses have many uses for it's function.
CypherXero, if you are typing up some papers for college just use Wordpad it too is free. - Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@djnick
That's the thing though. MOST people don't do anything more than basic word processing. - cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5 deadbaby,
This is why it is important to note that this version of Office is trying to get back to that simplicity, while still providing the
power that more experienced users expect. - bloodmoney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Is there a way in Office 7 to turn off the formatting for copy & paste operations....because that ***** annoying as hell
- trollenlord, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5I was really stunned how easy it is to create something that actually looks awesome with the 2007 edition. Also they have managed to "hide all that bloat" while preserving the functionality. It's really couple years ahead the competition now.
Only disappointments for me so far have been Publisher and Infopath, they don't follow the new way of thinking with the GUI and workflows. - EtherGnat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I dugg your comment but it is possible, albeit inconvenient, to paste unformatted text. Use "Paste Special" > "Unformatted text"
- cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Because it has not been the exact same interface over that 10 year period.
- djnick, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8dont even compare open office to microsoft office. Open office lacks a ton of features that ms office has, its a basic office suite, it can in no way replace the office suite which millions of people and companies use. While i agree its a worthwhile replacement, people who do more than just basic word processing will appreciate ms office series
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6I agree that MS Office has more features than OpenOffice but MS Office has also reached the point of being so bloated with features that it's getting hard to do simple stuff in it. I still talk to users desperately clinging to Office 97 because they simply can't figure out how to use never versions. There's something to be said about a program like OpenOffice that focuses on being usable instead of adding every feature known to mankind in one tiny GUI.
- RobotCitizen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3People criticized MS for the previous Office updates for being incremental at best. Now MS has put some real effort into revamping the suite (for the better IMHO), and people are in a twist over the radical changes. It seems contradictory. I accept that retraining staff is expensive and time-consuming, but at the same time, this update looks surprisingly intuitive in how it organizes functions. It should balance out.
- Escamillo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You do realize that Microsoft Publisher has been around since the early 90's long before Pages was even a twinkly in Jobs' eye, don't you?
- kevincannon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@Herolint
Actually, you're wrong on that one. The Office UI team have a very detailed blog explaining their thought processes and stats on usage. They found that there's no 'average" office user, and all the features are actually used by different types of users. Nearly all the features of Office actually are used.
If you really want to learn about the Offiec UI I would read th 8 posts entitled "Why the UI" on the blog. You'll find that designing office is a very tough call, and most of the decisions made have solid thought behind them that people just don't know about.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jensenh/archive/2006/04/11/573348.aspx - mpancha, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3For all the people saying businesses can move to Open Office, that's not necessarily true.
My job is, I work as an outsources IT dept. I go around to different client's each day and catch up on their IT needs. In plain english, they save up a list of their problems, give it to me, I take care of it. Two of my bigger client's are printing presses, and I tried switching both companies to Open Office (the latest version). One company works well with it b/c all they do is the basics in an office suite. The other company, tried for a week, but couldn't collaborate, a feature they used extensively each day. Needless to say, company #2 is back on Office 2003.
to summarize, not every company can survive on Office, and the "only 10%" of the world uses all the features of Office, that's not true.
That aside, the article was pretty informative. Good article. - Escamillo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Yes, complaining that Office is bloated because lesser apps are fine for college papers is idiotic. I wrote my college papers with MacWrite back in the day, which didn't have the functionality of today's Windows' free WordPad and Mac's free TextEdit. That WordPad and TextEdit are fine for simple papers does NOT mean that the advanced features of Office are not useful in other spaces, particularly the corporate world.
- odysseus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Dunno why you're being dugg down. You're exactly right.
BTW you can download Beta 2 at:
http://www.microsoft.com/office/preview/beta/download/en/default.mspx - samdu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Or $375 for Office Pro...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16837116142 - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just think of all the marginally computer-literate temp workers out there that are going to see the new interface and say "WTF!?" It'll be back to training for them.
- threepio, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5The question remains: Why would I be interested in mildly incremental feature increases (Workflows are revolutionary??) when they're paired with a brand new, confusing to the average ID10T end user, UI?
After spending 10 years using the same interface is there a good reason to take the time and effort (not to mention money) to retrain everyone on a new UI? With an organization 10,000 strong - it's not compelling. This is similar to the jump from the old blue DOS Word Perfect to Word - without the jump in end user usability.
Between this and Vista it almost feels as if we're expected to buy a new OS or a new Office suite because "It's Time(tm)" - I think, this time around instead of seeing "It's Time(tm)" you'll see a lot of "What we've got already is Good Enough(tm)" - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I downloaded the beta today and I gotta say the UI is really very cool. Ever since I bought my iBook there's a certain crappiness to most of the Windows software I've come in contact with; Office 2007 doesn't posses that crappiness. It's really very well done.
So, a couple of fundamental truths of the Windows UI:
1. The menu bar in Windows has never made any sense. It belongs attached to the top of the screen. If it's attached to the window then there's no reason to constrain it to a single line of text-only items.
2. Tiny, rearrangeable menu bars containing tiny little buttons with tiny icons have always sucked.
Office 2007 has given the Windows GUI a much needed and long overdue overhaul. If all Windows applications worked this way Windows would be a much better operating system. - hayden.evans, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1holy ***** they finally put pdf support in office! WOW!
the microsoft "publisher" thing seems a lot like pages, but pages templates look better so I'm gonna stick with that. - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[quote]I don't care what else Microsoft do, Office is something they make well. Microsoft may make a shoddy OS but their Office suite is second to none.[/quote]
Yes. I wish they'd get out of the OS business entirely. - wazzzup, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I hate Microsoft - I really do but Office is a top-flight product. 2007 looks really compelling with UI changes. It seems well thought out.
I'm a Mac user and I'm jealous of a PC program. Here's hoping the next Mac Office will take alot from the 2007 Office (and not be "Hey - we're a universal app now! Pony up."). - OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1[quote]given the quality of most free alternatives.[/quote]
Maybe "most." But just one good free alternative is enough. As long as that exists, there is still hope to defeat this MS menace. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1OpenOffice is free
Train people to not use closed document/media formats that [may] require purchase of an Office Suite and/or operating system and instead teach them from the beginning to use free and open source and open document/media formats. - Smokezz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Businesses aren't going to spend the hundreds of dollars per license AND then have to pay to retrain all their employees to use the new interface. Its easy for a computer geek to say "Its easy to use", but people that are very used to the File menu are not going to adjust to this very easily... they'll need retraining. Multiply that by thousands of employees in some cases and businesses will just stick to older versions until they actually NEED something 2k7 has.
- deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Office is a good product.. hopefully they'll get the unibin version of 2k4 out by the end of the year.
- samdu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"I have to say, anyone who hasn't at least used Beta 1 or seen a live demo of this software probably shouldn't be commenting on how Office is full of features nobody uses"
And for what it's worth, I tried to get the latest beta, but after logging into the beta site, getting the key emailed to me, and downloading the crappy MS download manager software, said software won't let me download the beta because it says my account is invalid (the same account I used to download the frickin' software - ARGH!!!!). - toxicorange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Most of the companies I deal with still use Office 2000!!!
Office 2003 was too expensive a jump for too little.
If you have to retrain your staff and pay $400 a pop why not change to OpenOffice if it fits the bill.
I agree collaboration is good. But aside from Outlook, where is this in Office? How many compaines who can afford this don't already have network file sharing functionality in place, and e-mail to pass around or share output from Excel, Word and Powerpoint?
My advice, try the Beta, if it floats your boat to the tune of $400 go for it. But don't just read the review with it's quotes of amazing collaborative functions and be fooled into thinking this is the best thing since the spectrum's rubber keys!
My vote is for a modular version. Cut the price, cut the bloat and give the users more choice. AND DEFINITELY use a world standard for the format. - NetElemental, on 10/12/2007, -7/+7@madIvan
I agree that sometimes functionality may be worth money, but I do not believe this to be the case with OpenOffice. I have found OpenOffice to contain every feature of MS Office that I have used, and I have in fact found more features in OO than in MS Office. - mpancha, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2"I have to say, anyone who hasn't at least used Beta 1 or seen a live demo of this software probably shouldn't be commenting on how Office is full of features nobody uses, as the point of the new interface and workflow is to make them useable. " ... good point.
- Herolint, on 10/12/2007, -9/+9@trollenlord
Naw. The real truth of the matter is that most of the functionality that people use in Microsoft Office is also found in Notepad. Very few office people know how to do anything significant with it. OpenOffice will suit most users just fine. - cquinnd, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1MOST people do a lot more than just basic word processing; but they associate all the other functions as side tasks in the effort to make their documents.
- Eddible, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I don't care what else Microsoft do, Office is something they make well. Microsoft may make a shoddy OS but their Office suite is second to none.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Cool, its nice to see advancements in Office...go Microsoft!
- samdu, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3"a lot of people only use 10% of the package, but everyone uses a *different* 10%"
I'd call ***** on that, but I don't feel like arguing it, so I'll grant it as true for the sake of argument. Which brings me back to my modular idea. Sell a basic foundation version and let the consumer decide which features he/she wants and get them as plug-ins. That way you only have the bloat you find useful.
"Not to knock Open Office... for a home user, to be honest, Open Office is probably enough. (Although I'd rather see someone like my dad using Word 2007, as it's so much easier for a casual user to get up and creating decent looking pages in the new version.)"
Decent looking pages? What more does the average document need other than text and basic formatting? You can do that in any word processor and MS Office is WAY overkill for such things. Start putting graphics and crap in a text document and you've let the technology get in the way of the message. Graphics and the like have their place, but letters and standard corporate communications ain't it. Outlook is the only Office component that really is worth crowing about and most of it is reliant on Exchange for its functionality. Most small busniesses (read: most businesses in America) don't run Exchange and don't need to. Likewise they are the ones that are using the 10% of Office's capabilities. Enterprise clients are another story completely. But if a small business or home user feels like they need more than the absolute basics of Word, then they're overthinking the process. Bang out the letter and move on. - modestmouse, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Does anyone know how you can be a beta tester for Office 2007?
- sdcarter, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Personally I can't wait for the new version of Office. I'm a college student and work full time for a market consulting firm and I can honestly say that we will probably have at least half our systems running 2007 by this time next year. I still think the price is outrageous; but lets face it, Office has always been around those prices and will always be "expensive." There really isn't any competition to MSO so the price, while high, is justified. Sure there are alternatives, but most of the clientelle isn't as tech savvy and we all know that the people writing the checks and making the decisions definitely aren't.
Consumers, specifically in the business world, want compatability, functionality, productivity, and reliability. If everyone you know is running MSO, it's in your best interest to run it as well. Functionality... well... we all know how frustrating it can be to find applications that do what MSO does. Sure you can find suites, but they may have compatibility issues you don't anticipate. You could buy applications a la carte, but who really wants to do that? As for productivity, MSO constantly improves itself with every new version. I still remember my eyes bugging out when I finally found a use for macro between the different applications. And in terms of reliability, ok we all know Microsoft isn't well known for their reliability. But just like everything else, they improve with each new version, given time. If everything I'm reading about how much easier file recovery will be with MSV/O is true then I'm sure our IT guys will be quietly thanking Microsoft for freeing up all the time they spend recovering files for inept users so they can focus on real issues.
Now that the semester is over, I may actually get around to installing MSV/O betas and trying them out. And for the record, I'm not an MSFanboy. Personally I think it's hilarious how much Vista looks like OSX and IE7 looks like Firefox. I just think it's good to see Microsoft doing their research into what people want. Now all they need to do is be the first to develop a concept instead of riding on everyone elses coat-tails. - pabster, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1But the great Micro$oft FUD machine will convince at least 50% they NEED Vista and they NEED Office 2007.
- GlassCasket, on 10/12/2007, -9/+3Microsoft seem to be missing the point that it's not quantity, but quality.
And there is no way in hell i'm shelling out a couple pay checks for this. ;) -
Show 51 - 55 of 55 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is