Office 2003

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Peter, Sep 3, 2003.

  1. Peter

    Peter Guest

    what's coming up in MS Office ...
    http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5069246.html

    "Analysts say it represents a badly needed new avenue for boosting sales of
    Microsoft's server software and an opportunity to lock out competitors,
    including older versions of Office. It also gives businesses that skipped
    on the last round or two of Office upgrades a new reason to bite this
    time."

    So, all you folks out there still happily using Office 97 - too bad, MS
    wants your cash.


    Peter
     
    Peter, Sep 3, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Peter

    Howard Guest

    My prediction is that the pre-2003 install base will remain too large for
    the 2003 format to be come the default standard* for inter-entity document
    exchange.

    Too many users will not be able to open the attachment, and after a few too
    many complaints and requests for resending, people will be careful to save
    as 97/2000 format for interchange - if they save as word format at all.

    *Even though it shouldn't be - see:
    http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
     
    Howard, Sep 3, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Peter

    dOTdASH Guest

    "Peter" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > what's coming up in MS Office ...
    > http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5069246.html
    >
    > "Analysts say it represents a badly needed new avenue for boosting sales

    of
    > Microsoft's server software and an opportunity to lock out competitors,
    > including older versions of Office. It also gives businesses that skipped
    > on the last round or two of Office upgrades a new reason to bite this
    > time."
    >
    > So, all you folks out there still happily using Office 97 - too bad, MS
    > wants your cash.
    >
    >
    > Peter
    >


    Oh look ! A Conspiracy Theorist !
     
    dOTdASH, Sep 3, 2003
    #3
  4. Peter

    Murray Symon Guest

    On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:04:59 +1200, Peter wrote:

    >
    > what's coming up in MS Office ...
    > http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5069246.html
    >
    > "Analysts say it represents a badly needed new avenue for boosting sales
    > of Microsoft's server software and an opportunity to lock out competitors,
    > including older versions of Office. It also gives businesses that skipped
    > on the last round or two of Office upgrades a new reason to bite this
    > time."
    >
    > So, all you folks out there still happily using Office 97 - too bad, MS
    > wants your cash.
    >
    >
    > Peter


    I think this will open a real can of worms. It may prove to be worse than
    the usual format incompatibilities that users have to put up with every
    time MS releases a new version of its Office suite of programs.
    I see that you will need a MS 2003 Server for full DRM authentication.
    And if something goes awry with your authentication (Murphy's Law) you
    will be stuck with a bunch of files that you can't open. That's unless
    the file locking is as ineffective as CSS, who knows?

    I think many will be avoiding this "feature", IMHO.
    It may even encourage customers to avoid the product entirely.

    What's the thought of the NG - is MS-DRM a good thing to have for
    your Word documents and Excel spreadsheets?
    If it is - had you already considered an encryption solution?

    --
    Murray
     
    Murray Symon, Sep 3, 2003
    #4
  5. Peter

    steve Guest

    Peter allegedly said:

    > what's coming up in MS Office ...
    > http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5069246.html
    >
    > "Analysts say it represents a badly needed new avenue for boosting sales
    > of Microsoft's server software and an opportunity to lock out competitors,
    > including older versions of Office. It also gives businesses that skipped
    > on the last round or two of Office upgrades a new reason to bite this
    > time."
    >
    > So, all you folks out there still happily using Office 97 - too bad, MS
    > wants your cash.
    >
    > Peter


    Or they orphan your software.

    By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade path.
     
    steve, Sep 3, 2003
    #5
  6. Peter

    dOTdASH Guest

    snippity snip snip snip
    >
    > I think many will be avoiding this "feature", IMHO.
    > It may even encourage customers to avoid the product entirely.
    >
    > What's the thought of the NG - is MS-DRM a good thing to have for
    > your Word documents and Excel spreadsheets?
    > If it is - had you already considered an encryption solution?
    >
    > --
    > Murray


    Your last question is the $64,000 one. Using MS-DRM requires the use of
    Office 2003. If somebody deliberately chooses Office 2003 to provide DRM
    capabilities which have been available via alternative technologies
    (encryption etc) for a long time it says a lot for Microsoft's marketing and
    the inability of other providers to tell a story that end users understand.
    Nobody is forcing existing Office users to upgrade to Office 2003 and
    openoffice is "free". I am looking forward to seeing how the market votes
    with its wallet.
     
    dOTdASH, Sep 3, 2003
    #6
  7. On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:31:07 +1200, dOTdASH wrote:

    > "Peter" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> what's coming up in MS Office ...
    >> http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5069246.html


    > Oh look ! A Conspiracy Theorist !


    Mmmmmm Astroturf !!
     
    Olson Johnson, Sep 3, 2003
    #7
  8. Peter

    dOTdASH Guest

    "Olson Johnson" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Wed, 03 Sep 2003 19:31:07 +1200, dOTdASH wrote:
    >
    > > "Peter" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > >>
    > >> what's coming up in MS Office ...
    > >> http://news.com.com/2100-1012_3-5069246.html

    >
    > > Oh look ! A Conspiracy Theorist !

    >
    > Mmmmmm Astroturf !!
    >


    Are you kidding ? I've spent hours watering this lawn :)
     
    dOTdASH, Sep 3, 2003
    #8
  9. Peter

    Patrick Bold Guest

    "steve" <> wrote in message
    news:xbh5b.906$...
    > Peter allegedly said:
    >
    > >
    > > So, all you folks out there still happily using Office 97 - too bad,

    MS
    > > wants your cash.
    > >
    > > Peter

    >
    > Or they orphan your software.
    >
    > By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade path.
    >


    Assuming, that is, you can afford to hire a team of Linux programmers to
    implement the upgrade -- and that everyone you do business with is happy
    to do the same.
     
    Patrick Bold, Sep 3, 2003
    #9
  10. Peter

    Peter Guest

    this quote is from Patrick Bold of Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:36 :
    > "steve" <> wrote in message
    >>
    >> By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade path.

    >
    > Assuming, that is, you can afford to hire a team of Linux programmers to
    > implement the upgrade -- and that everyone you do business with is happy
    > to do the same.


    Sorry, that's not even close to reality.
    At home, I can keep my Linux systems running fine. Mandrake is easy update
    with urpmi. (and I'm just a user, no IT training or experience.)
    At work, we have a whole team of IT specialists, with MS training and certs,
    and they work full time to keep the MS systems going - need hired help
    sometimes, too.


    Peter
     
    Peter, Sep 3, 2003
    #10
  11. Peter

    Howard Guest

    Patrick Bold wrote:

    >> By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade
    >> path.
    >>

    >
    > Assuming, that is, you can afford to hire a team of Linux programmers
    > to implement the upgrade -- and that everyone you do business with is
    > happy to do the same.


    It hardly requires a "team of linux programmers" to install Open Office,
    especially on Windows...
     
    Howard, Sep 3, 2003
    #11
  12. Peter

    Howard Guest

    T.N.O. wrote:

    > I have found Open Office on Windows to not be able to replace MS
    > Office. It simply chokes on some files, wont open them at all.


    Interesting. I have found the reverse. While Word would refuse to open a
    corrupted word.doc file, OOo would open it with the corrupted part
    highlighted...
     
    Howard, Sep 3, 2003
    #12
  13. Peter

    Gavin Tunney Guest

    On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:09:26 +1200, Peter <>
    wrote:

    >this quote is from Patrick Bold of Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:36 :
    >> "steve" <> wrote in message
    >>>
    >>> By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade path.

    >>
    >> Assuming, that is, you can afford to hire a team of Linux programmers to
    >> implement the upgrade -- and that everyone you do business with is happy
    >> to do the same.

    >
    >Sorry, that's not even close to reality.
    >At home, I can keep my Linux systems running fine. Mandrake is easy update
    >with urpmi. (and I'm just a user, no IT training or experience.)
    >At work, we have a whole team of IT specialists, with MS training and certs,
    >and they work full time to keep the MS systems going - need hired help
    >sometimes, too.
    >
    >


    It's a lot closer to reality than the fantasy world some of the Linux
    community live in Peter. Maybe you should sit down & think about it
    all for a while, before next portraying people in the game as idiots.

    Microsoft software isn't the only computer equipment used by
    businesses, you home user Linux mob are so narrow minded when it comes
    to Windows as to be myopic.

    If you change operating systems then all the other software that a
    business has built into their infrastructure has to be changed as
    well, because the (very expensive) software licences they own need
    Windows to work! The accounts, database & other vital business
    software, the graphics packages, the printers & scanners &
    communications devices etc... all the useful labour & time-saving
    stuff that a business has purchased & installed over the years. All
    the resources that make the average business stay in business and make
    a profit......they're all Windows based as well, start looking at the
    entire picture for a change.

    Take even the average small business who uses MYOB. MYOB is a Win32
    application, what are they going to use for their accounts after
    you've zapped Windows & put Linux on everything?

    The investment the average business has in MS stuff is inconsequential
    compared to the overall investment they have in other equipment, and
    resources, that are reliant on Windows for it to work & for the
    business to make a profit. That's reality.

    Larger businesses usually lease their equipment. and most leases last
    2-3years. You sometimes have a window of opportunity there, that comes
    at the end of a leasing period, to get a complete alternative into
    those businesses. Any other time & the costs are out of this world.


    Gavin
     
    Gavin Tunney, Sep 3, 2003
    #13
  14. Peter

    T.N.O. Guest

    "Howard" wrote
    > > I have found Open Office on Windows to not be able to replace MS
    > > Office. It simply chokes on some files, wont open them at all.

    >
    > Interesting. I have found the reverse. While Word would refuse to open a
    > corrupted word.doc file, OOo would open it with the corrupted part
    > highlighted...
    >


    nah, OOo is very handy for recovering Word docs that are corrupt, but I mean
    just some files, normally ones that have large tables in them from having a
    quick look.
     
    T.N.O., Sep 3, 2003
    #14
  15. Peter

    T.N.O. Guest

    Nice post... snipped a heap of it, but copied it for my own collection.

    "Gavin Tunney" wrote
    > Larger businesses usually lease their equipment. and most leases last
    > 2-3years. You sometimes have a window of opportunity there, that comes
    > at the end of a leasing period, to get a complete alternative into
    > those businesses. Any other time & the costs are out of this world.


    If the business is large enough, you dont really have an opportunity for
    this either, I do Lease PC rollouts as well, we do about 35-50 a month, we
    simply couldnt flick to Linux, except in the managment areas maybe, where
    email seems to be about the only thing they do(you know what I mean,
    standard office, email and internet stuff)
     
    T.N.O., Sep 3, 2003
    #15
  16. Peter

    Allistar Guest

    Gavin Tunney wrote:

    > On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 07:09:26 +1200, Peter <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>this quote is from Patrick Bold of Thu, 04 Sep 2003 02:36 :
    >>> "steve" <> wrote in message
    >>>>
    >>>> By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade path.
    >>>
    >>> Assuming, that is, you can afford to hire a team of Linux programmers to
    >>> implement the upgrade -- and that everyone you do business with is happy
    >>> to do the same.

    >>
    >>Sorry, that's not even close to reality.
    >>At home, I can keep my Linux systems running fine. Mandrake is easy
    >>update
    >>with urpmi. (and I'm just a user, no IT training or experience.)
    >>At work, we have a whole team of IT specialists, with MS training and
    >>certs, and they work full time to keep the MS systems going - need hired
    >>help sometimes, too.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > It's a lot closer to reality than the fantasy world some of the Linux
    > community live in Peter. Maybe you should sit down & think about it
    > all for a while, before next portraying people in the game as idiots.
    >
    > Microsoft software isn't the only computer equipment used by
    > businesses, you home user Linux mob are so narrow minded when it comes
    > to Windows as to be myopic.
    >
    > If you change operating systems then all the other software that a
    > business has built into their infrastructure has to be changed as
    > well, because the (very expensive) software licences they own need
    > Windows to work! The accounts, database & other vital business
    > software, the graphics packages, the printers & scanners &
    > communications devices etc... all the useful labour & time-saving
    > stuff that a business has purchased & installed over the years. All
    > the resources that make the average business stay in business and make
    > a profit......they're all Windows based as well, start looking at the
    > entire picture for a change.
    >
    > Take even the average small business who uses MYOB. MYOB is a Win32
    > application, what are they going to use for their accounts after
    > you've zapped Windows & put Linux on everything?
    >
    > The investment the average business has in MS stuff is inconsequential
    > compared to the overall investment they have in other equipment, and
    > resources, that are reliant on Windows for it to work & for the
    > business to make a profit. That's reality.
    >
    > Larger businesses usually lease their equipment. and most leases last
    > 2-3years. You sometimes have a window of opportunity there, that comes
    > at the end of a leasing period, to get a complete alternative into
    > those businesses. Any other time & the costs are out of this world.
    >
    >
    > Gavin


    I recently upgraded my computer at work (from a PII 266 to a P14 2.4GHz by
    buying new RAM, MB and CPU). Windows 98 does not do a computer like this
    justice, so I decided to install a more advanced operating system. Here
    were my options:

    The windows way:
    - buy windows XP @ $700
    - but Office XP @ $1000
    - have the draconian EULA

    The linux way:
    - get Mandrake 9.1 cds @ $0
    - download Open office @ $0
    - buy VMWare to run the last Windows app that won't run on Linux @ $500
    (I used my W98 license from the previous incarnation of my PC).

    From a financial point of view choosing Linux over Windows made a lot of
    sense. In my opinion I now have a better system because of it, with the
    best of both worlds.

    Don't tell me that businesses can't do this as they have a lot of Windows
    software they still need to be able to run as VMWare takes care of all of
    that. If they still want to run MYOB they can, with no issues.

    The investment businesses have in MS stuff can be enormous, from a licensing
    perspective alone.

    Allistar.
     
    Allistar, Sep 3, 2003
    #16
  17. "Howard" <> wrote in message
    news:mMg5b.135981$...
    > My prediction is that the pre-2003 install base will remain too large for
    > the 2003 format to be come the default standard* for inter-entity document
    > exchange.


    What 2003 format?
    There is no new file format in Office 2003!
     
    Nathan Mercer, Sep 4, 2003
    #17
  18. Peter

    Patrick Bold Guest

    "Howard" <> wrote in message
    news:txr5b.136485$...
    > Patrick Bold wrote:
    >
    > >> By comparison, Linux gives you a consistent and reliable upgrade
    > >> path.
    > >>

    > >
    > > Assuming, that is, you can afford to hire a team of Linux

    programmers
    > > to implement the upgrade -- and that everyone you do business with

    is
    > > happy to do the same.

    >
    > It hardly requires a "team of linux programmers" to install Open

    Office,
    > especially on Windows...
    >


    Apples and oranges. Face it -- Microsoft Office is the business
    standard. Off the shelf, Open Office simply can't get the job done when
    it comes to automated document management and data analysis -- the core
    of what business users need. Granted, many home users -- and undoubtedly
    some business users with simple needs -- can make do with Open Office
    (or Notepad, for that matter). But for those seeking "a consistent and
    reliable upgrade path" to a serious office suite, you would indeed need
    to pony up the cash for either 1) a set of Microsoft Office licenses or
    2) a team of Linux programmers capable of replicating the Microsoft
    Office functionality in some custom application.
     
    Patrick Bold, Sep 4, 2003
    #18
  19. Peter

    T.N.O. Guest

    I agree with parts of what you have said, so I'll reply inline.

    "Patrick Bold" wrote
    > Apples and oranges. Face it -- Microsoft Office is the business
    > standard.


    True, no matter what anyone says, it is a standard, and it is a standard
    because it does what it says it will.

    > Off the shelf, Open Office simply can't get the job done when
    > it comes to automated document management and data analysis -- the core
    > of what business users need.


    True, OOo just isnt polished enough for use in a business environment(IMHO)

    > Granted, many home users -- and undoubtedly
    > some business users with simple needs -- can make do with Open Office
    > (or Notepad, for that matter).


    I actually use Wordpad for a hell of a lot of the work I do, it makes nice
    small word documents.

    > But for those seeking "a consistent and
    > reliable upgrade path" to a serious office suite, you would indeed need
    > to pony up the cash for either 1) a set of Microsoft Office licenses or
    > 2) a team of Linux programmers capable of replicating the Microsoft
    > Office functionality in some custom application.


    I see OOo on Linux as the default Office suite, as it is simply great on
    Linux, however the Windows version.. well I compare it to Netscape 4.x, it
    is slow...
     
    T.N.O., Sep 4, 2003
    #19
  20. Peter

    Gavin Tunney Guest

    On Thu, 4 Sep 2003 10:03:07 +1200, "T.N.O." <> wrote:

    >Nice post... snipped a heap of it, but copied it for my own collection.
    >
    >"Gavin Tunney" wrote
    >> Larger businesses usually lease their equipment. and most leases last
    >> 2-3years. You sometimes have a window of opportunity there, that comes
    >> at the end of a leasing period, to get a complete alternative into
    >> those businesses. Any other time & the costs are out of this world.

    >
    >If the business is large enough, you dont really have an opportunity for
    >this either, I do Lease PC rollouts as well, we do about 35-50 a month, we
    >simply couldnt flick to Linux, except in the managment areas maybe, where
    >email seems to be about the only thing they do(you know what I mean,
    >standard office, email and internet stuff)
    >


    Yeah, leasing has changed over the years & they do a perpetual upgrade
    in many places now so instead of a complete rollout business-wide it's
    incremental.

    Expiry of a lease was a good chance to roll out something new. Was
    going to happen anyway, and the inevitable disruption even with
    upgrading software versions is pretty severe so why not take the
    opportunity to look at some other options while you're at it.

    Everything suited there, whether you wanted to do something from
    inside or whether you were an outsider chasing a big contract. Had all
    the time in the world to do development & research, pick out & train
    key staff, iron out compatibility problems & fix bugs etc. A rollout
    of new kit at a time like that could be minimised to have almost as
    little impact as a company-wide upgrade of existing software &
    hardware.

    Just a shame so many people think installing Linux in a typical
    business is a simple affair.

    GT
     
    Gavin Tunney, Sep 4, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jimmy Clay

    Microsoft Office Specialist Study Guide Office 2003 Edition

    Jimmy Clay, Sep 10, 2004, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,319
    Guest
    Sep 10, 2004
  2. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    949
    Zeta Reticulae
    Aug 19, 2003
  3. Gordon
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    756
  4. why?
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,115
  5. Angel Eyes

    Microsoft Office Excell 2003 & Microsoft Office Word 2003

    Angel Eyes, May 19, 2008, in forum: Microsoft Certification
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    922
    lynwood
    Jun 30, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page