«

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/25/office_2010_2007_2003_upgrades/>:

“CPU and RAM requirements approximately doubled between Office 2003 and
Office 2007,” noted Microsoft’s Alex Dubec.

Dubec said that the addition of features such as the much-derided
arrival of the Ribbon, along with the 64-bit Office’s debut among other
things has beefed up that footprint considerably.

He also reaffirmed that Office 2010 didn’t represent a major release for
Microsoft, in part to ensure an easier transition from Office 2007 - if
not Office 2003.

Looks like the Great Moore’s Law Compensator
<http://www.infoworld.com/t/applications/fat-fatter-fattest-microsofts-kings-bloat-278>
is still roaring along unchecked...

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:11:22 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> He also reaffirmed that Office 2010 didn’t represent a major release
> for Microsoft, in part to ensure an easier transition from Office
> 2007 - if not Office 2003.

I wonder if that means Micro$oft won't be _fully_ supporting the ISO standard file formats that it shoved
through the standards approval process?

I'll be pleasantly surprised if M$ _fully_ supports the Open Document file format, but I don't expect that
to happen anytime soon as they weren't invented by M$ and nor have they been subverted by them
(yet).


--
"Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"

On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 03:11:22 +1300, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

> Looks like the Great Moore’s Law Compensator
> <http://www.infoworld.com/t/applications/fat-fatter-fattest-microsofts-kings-bloat-278>
> is still roaring along unchecked...

"Case in point: Microsoft Office 2007, which, when deployed on Windows Vista, consumes more than
12 times as much memory and nearly three times as much processing power as the version that graced
PCs just seven short years ago, Office 2000."

I'm not convinced that this means Micro$oft's software is more efficient.


--
"Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"