I actually went over to Open Office for a few years, but with the release of office 07 and 08 I came back because they were genuinely better and easier to use. Changes can be previewed instantaneously, formulas are a lot more complete and power points are a lot easier to make.
I also tried iWork briefly and it seemed really bad with the exception of Keynote which is miles ahead of PPT, which is impressive. In the end though MS still makes the best productivity software in my book.
Obviously I am a lurker, but I could have sworn I've posted at least a couple of times prior to now. Maybe I was using some other account...
I won't buy Office for the all in one Outlook but I couldn't agree more. I have started to use a very simple CRM for Mac called Relationship 2 (no affiliation) and it does indeed combine all three and some other project management features. It uses the AddressBook db as well as the iCal db so there are no sync issues. Unfortunately the Mail client part is not very sophisticated - it downloads new copies of all your mails - but it allows you to easily attach key emails to users or projects. Not perfect but not a deal breaker for me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordjeremias
and this i also strongly agree. the 3 apps is moronic. specially because at least two of them are seriously ill designed.
i have been trying to set a default address for a contact and what should be a pain free task is a nightmare. i must go to the address book in apple mail. then select a shade that means this is the default one, then go edit the "distribution lists as i have several with the same contact, then change it in every one of them, then check again in the main list, and also try to make address book put one email first than another and god knows what else, all to fail every last time. when i start typing the address, the wrong one comes on top, because its alphabetically "higher" than the one i want.
also, address book is an interface confusion. the white page with several fields and plus and minuses is aesthetically ugly, confusing and just awkward to use.
mail inboxes separated from the sub-folders is another moronic decision. it either makes me go around fishing for mail or simply resort to have rules to organize email in the subfolders, but use an intelligent folder to see what i've received today.
also, a simple efficient way to know if there is any new mail since the last time i checked seems something that the messiah jobs haven't decided to waste time yet. in outlook, you get a nice mail icon on the system tray when there is new mail. you open it and the folders with new ones unread are in bold . if you close or minimize the window, the tray icon disappears. and will only appear if you receive a new one.
now in email, i have a useless new message number in the dock icon. should i memorize the number every time i check it? or should i read every single mail i receive, even if it is just publicity or spam or some other stuff i don't want to read now just to make sure that if i'm absent during 5 minutes from the mac, i can know if some new mail has arrived?
i find myself opening the mail app and wasting time far more than when i use/used windows outlook.
i really wished that apple behaved more like a "real company" and start listening to customers, start expanding it's engineering and designers team so that not all things are depending on the messiah jobs and we could get real program and quirks corrections based on consumer feedback. Now it seems everything hits a brick wall and we must wait around or send an email to the CEO...
I can't stand the 3 apps in one idea, it was bad enough when they put notes in with the mail app, If i want mail I'll check my mail in a nice clean mail app, if i want to check calender I will open the calender app and so on, if you ask me the worst thing about Outlook is the cluttered interface you get from ramming 3 programs into one.
While I usually use iWork at home it's not really up to the task when interfacing with thousands of Windows users in a Fortune 10 company. If Outlook for Mac can simply keep up with it's Windows peer when it comes to Exchange integration it'll be worth the upgrade because Entourage sucks and always has.
Not to mention just copying existing software doesn't really lead to changes that can actually make software work better for users. It's always a good idea to take a step back from "the standard" and see if there isn't a better way to do things. Whether you think they succeeded or failed, at least they are working on improving the spreadsheet, not just copying someone else.
But they didn't improve the spreadsheet. I didn't say Apple should have copied Excel. In fact I said they didn't need to. However, what they did was wrong and that was change the fundamental concept of a spreadsheet and I don't understand why. I've used Numbers for over a year and it still just doesn't do things it needs to... simple things like selecting a range of cells to print. Is there any legitimate reason why Numbers can't do something so basic as this?
To show that my views aren't just rooted in "we've always done it like this", I use Pages and Keynote and strongly prefer them over Word and Powerpoint.
You joined four years ago and this was your first post? Defending Vista's honor? Really?
I'll admit I don't have the urge to post messages on Internet forums very often.
I, too, noticed it was my first post on AI, and I was a bit surprised. Looking at the timestamps on the e-mail messages there was 8 hours between the "Action Required" e-mail and the "Account validated" e-mail, so I presume there was some delay in e-mail or the activation. So by the time I could post, that particular urge had passed.
Office 2000 was the last version I cared for in Windows.
2004 is the last version on Mac. Still using a PowerMac as my primary machine, but 2004 works fine under Rosetta on my MacBook. No interest in upgrading.
I've been writing on my Ubuntu netbook in OpenOffice lately just for a change of environment. No complaints at all. When 2004 becomes unusable on my Macs I'll be upgrading to OO on those machines . . .
MacBU has made far too many mistakes. I have no reason to show them loyalty at this point.
So basically whatever features Apple added *last* year to iWorks and MobileMe, are now going to be in Office *next* year. Wow.
Unless you *have* to for your job, why would anyone use Office on the Mac?
If you aren't using it for your job (i.e. shared tasks, calendars, meeting scheduling, SharePoint integration etc etc) then any one of the dumbed down consumer packages will do. Personally I prefer Open Office as I don't think Google Docs is up to scratch quite yet.
I can't see why anyone would hand over the dollars to use Office at home. It has a better interface and tighter integration than the other packages, but IMO it would be hard to justify the extra cost. I also can't see why anyone would put a Mac into an enterprise environment unless they absolutely had to, which is probably why Office for Mac sales aren't that great!
But they didn't improve the spreadsheet. I didn't say Apple should have copied Excel. In fact I said they didn't need to. However, what they did was wrong and that was change the fundamental concept of a spreadsheet and I don't understand why. I've used Numbers for over a year and it still just doesn't do things it needs to... simple things like selecting a range of cells to print. Is there any legitimate reason why Numbers can't do something so basic as this?
To show that my views aren't just rooted in "we've always done it like this", I use Pages and Keynote and strongly prefer them over Word and Powerpoint.
I used to use spreadsheets a lot more than I do now and I used that feature frequently. I would hardly describe that as changing the fundamental concept of a spreadsheet - more like a missing feature - but I get your point. Numbers has been evolving very slowly. The one feature that I personally miss is a keyboard shortcut for fill down, right, etc.
, just hit command S. If you're in the habit of that, it's almost as good as autosave.
Another inane argument. It's not "almost as good" since it relies on you doing it. It "fails open", which is always the worst case scenario for any modern design.
Having the computer do it automatically and continuously is fool proof and always the best option.
There really is no excuse in this day an age to not have such functionality.
So funny, you guys act like you were never a new user.
God forbid someone else have an opinion.
Not sure what you are talking about. Are you feeling slighted or are you referring to some other post? Generally speaking it is best to include what you are referring to in your post or else you may appear to be talking out of context... which you do.
(I'm talking about Word 2004, as I will never update to a "ribbon" interface).
You really should give it a chance. After a month of using Office 2007 I can't go back to Word (or Excel) without the Ribbon. There are things about the Ribbon that do annoy me, but you can move the quick work bar below the ribbon and then put commands you frequently use - that solved the issues I had with the Ribbon.
And for Word 2010, the Navigation Pane is pure genius! I live in lots of large, well structured documents. The Navigation Pane is the single greatest feature they have added to Word in over a decade. Yup, it's not dependent on the Ribbon, but even if I didn't like the Ribbon I would live with it just to get the Navigation Pane headings view:
I do loathe the basic search via the navigation pane. Thankfully the find/replace dialog is still there and can be used to do heavy duty finding still. People seem to be excited about the new search so perhaps I just need to explore with it too.
I'm a Mac user, but apparently not 'any' because I don't know how MS saved Apple 13 years ago. Are you referring the non-voting shares thy bought at a value much less than what Apple paid for NeXT or value of Apple at the time?
That's exactly what I'm referring to. Apple was three months away from going out of business.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Mac, circa 1984; but you surely meant it would no linger exist but note that the iMac was the machine that spurred a significant jump in Mac sales, then again with Intel chip to replace the high TDP PPC chips that were no longer offering performance advantages or evolving quickly enough to satisfy PC needs, not any 3rd-party SW. I bet we can also see dramatic interest in Mac sales when the unibody notebooks were introduced.
The iMac was the first machine that got Apple going again but they wouldn't have had the chance without MS and the cash infusion.
Mac Office has been the #1 selling Mac 3rd party software for over 20 years. If it had been discontinued (like was rumored before Steve came back) without even offering Boot Camp the Mac may have been dead. This is also considering the success of the original iMac.
That's exactly what I'm referring to. Apple was three months away from going out of business.
Okay, so a $150M saved a company worth $5B. And this beleaguered company begging at MS? door was able to get them to buy non-voting shares and agree to hold onto for 5 years. DOES NOT COMPUTE!
Quote:
The iMac was the first machine that got Apple going again but they wouldn't have had the chance without MS and the cash infusion.
So only MS had money? No one could have loaned Apple money or saved them as you stated ?[Apple] wouldn't have had the chance without MS?. Sounds like you are revising even the revised history. Again, DOES NOT COMPUTE!
But if you want to go with fanciful scenarios that can?t be proven how about this one: If Apple had licensed their OS the way MS did and the way the PC OEMs begged them to year after after then MS wouldn?t have a fraction of the OS marketshare Apple does now.
Quote:
Mac Office has been the #1 selling Mac 3rd party software for over 20 years. If it had been discontinued (like was rumored before Steve came back) without even offering Boot Camp the Mac may have been dead. This is also considering the success of the original iMac.
So me let get this straight, you?re saying MS was going to pull the "#1 selling Mac 3rd party software for over 20 years? from the Mac? Once again, DOES NOT COMPUTE!. And you?re also saying that people buy Macs specifically to run Office for Mac? Do you really believe that? While it certainly popular 3rd-party retail software that doesn?t mean it?s the primary reason people by Macs. DOES NOT COMPUTE!
Perhaps you should look into the deal Apple forced MS to make due to the firm grip they had on MS? balls over QT code theft. MS was trying to save its ass from a more costly lawsuit. Plain and simple.
I do for example. And so does almost every Mac user in our research facility. For some work I prefere to work with MS Office for some I use iWorks. Of course I hope very much that one day i could say that I don't need MS Office any more. But until that time I an happy for all the improvements the Mac-Girls and -Boys at MS are implementing.
Comments
sarrica
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 1
Wow good topic to make your debut since 2002.
I actually went over to Open Office for a few years, but with the release of office 07 and 08 I came back because they were genuinely better and easier to use. Changes can be previewed instantaneously, formulas are a lot more complete and power points are a lot easier to make.
I also tried iWork briefly and it seemed really bad with the exception of Keynote which is miles ahead of PPT, which is impressive. In the end though MS still makes the best productivity software in my book.
Obviously I am a lurker, but I could have sworn I've posted at least a couple of times prior to now. Maybe I was using some other account...
I won't buy Office for the all in one Outlook but I couldn't agree more. I have started to use a very simple CRM for Mac called Relationship 2 (no affiliation) and it does indeed combine all three and some other project management features. It uses the AddressBook db as well as the iCal db so there are no sync issues. Unfortunately the Mail client part is not very sophisticated - it downloads new copies of all your mails - but it allows you to easily attach key emails to users or projects. Not perfect but not a deal breaker for me.
and this i also strongly agree. the 3 apps is moronic. specially because at least two of them are seriously ill designed.
i have been trying to set a default address for a contact and what should be a pain free task is a nightmare. i must go to the address book in apple mail. then select a shade that means this is the default one, then go edit the "distribution lists as i have several with the same contact, then change it in every one of them, then check again in the main list, and also try to make address book put one email first than another and god knows what else, all to fail every last time. when i start typing the address, the wrong one comes on top, because its alphabetically "higher" than the one i want.
also, address book is an interface confusion. the white page with several fields and plus and minuses is aesthetically ugly, confusing and just awkward to use.
mail inboxes separated from the sub-folders is another moronic decision. it either makes me go around fishing for mail or simply resort to have rules to organize email in the subfolders, but use an intelligent folder to see what i've received today.
also, a simple efficient way to know if there is any new mail since the last time i checked seems something that the messiah jobs haven't decided to waste time yet. in outlook, you get a nice mail icon on the system tray when there is new mail. you open it and the folders with new ones unread are in bold . if you close or minimize the window, the tray icon disappears. and will only appear if you receive a new one.
now in email, i have a useless new message number in the dock icon. should i memorize the number every time i check it? or should i read every single mail i receive, even if it is just publicity or spam or some other stuff i don't want to read now just to make sure that if i'm absent during 5 minutes from the mac, i can know if some new mail has arrived?
i find myself opening the mail app and wasting time far more than when i use/used windows outlook.
i really wished that apple behaved more like a "real company" and start listening to customers, start expanding it's engineering and designers team so that not all things are depending on the messiah jobs and we could get real program and quirks corrections based on consumer feedback. Now it seems everything hits a brick wall and we must wait around or send an email to the CEO...
I can't stand the 3 apps in one idea, it was bad enough when they put notes in with the mail app, If i want mail I'll check my mail in a nice clean mail app, if i want to check calender I will open the calender app and so on, if you ask me the worst thing about Outlook is the cluttered interface you get from ramming 3 programs into one.
Quintius
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1
You joined four years ago and this was your first post? Defending Vista's honor? Really?
Ha ha. You got to hand it to him for planning ahead. Probably a professional. He has a lot more where that came from just in case.
I pity the fool who is shackled to a winbox all day.
Not to mention just copying existing software doesn't really lead to changes that can actually make software work better for users. It's always a good idea to take a step back from "the standard" and see if there isn't a better way to do things. Whether you think they succeeded or failed, at least they are working on improving the spreadsheet, not just copying someone else.
But they didn't improve the spreadsheet. I didn't say Apple should have copied Excel. In fact I said they didn't need to. However, what they did was wrong and that was change the fundamental concept of a spreadsheet and I don't understand why. I've used Numbers for over a year and it still just doesn't do things it needs to... simple things like selecting a range of cells to print. Is there any legitimate reason why Numbers can't do something so basic as this?
To show that my views aren't just rooted in "we've always done it like this", I use Pages and Keynote and strongly prefer them over Word and Powerpoint.
Quintius
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1
You joined four years ago and this was your first post? Defending Vista's honor? Really?
I'll admit I don't have the urge to post messages on Internet forums very often.
I, too, noticed it was my first post on AI, and I was a bit surprised. Looking at the timestamps on the e-mail messages there was 8 hours between the "Action Required" e-mail and the "Account validated" e-mail, so I presume there was some delay in e-mail or the activation. So by the time I could post, that particular urge had passed.
2004 is the last version on Mac. Still using a PowerMac as my primary machine, but 2004 works fine under Rosetta on my MacBook. No interest in upgrading.
I've been writing on my Ubuntu netbook in OpenOffice lately just for a change of environment. No complaints at all. When 2004 becomes unusable on my Macs I'll be upgrading to OO on those machines . . .
MacBU has made far too many mistakes. I have no reason to show them loyalty at this point.
So basically whatever features Apple added *last* year to iWorks and MobileMe, are now going to be in Office *next* year. Wow.
Unless you *have* to for your job, why would anyone use Office on the Mac?
If you aren't using it for your job (i.e. shared tasks, calendars, meeting scheduling, SharePoint integration etc etc) then any one of the dumbed down consumer packages will do. Personally I prefer Open Office as I don't think Google Docs is up to scratch quite yet.
I can't see why anyone would hand over the dollars to use Office at home. It has a better interface and tighter integration than the other packages, but IMO it would be hard to justify the extra cost. I also can't see why anyone would put a Mac into an enterprise environment unless they absolutely had to, which is probably why Office for Mac sales aren't that great!
But they didn't improve the spreadsheet. I didn't say Apple should have copied Excel. In fact I said they didn't need to. However, what they did was wrong and that was change the fundamental concept of a spreadsheet and I don't understand why. I've used Numbers for over a year and it still just doesn't do things it needs to... simple things like selecting a range of cells to print. Is there any legitimate reason why Numbers can't do something so basic as this?
To show that my views aren't just rooted in "we've always done it like this", I use Pages and Keynote and strongly prefer them over Word and Powerpoint.
I used to use spreadsheets a lot more than I do now and I used that feature frequently. I would hardly describe that as changing the fundamental concept of a spreadsheet - more like a missing feature - but I get your point. Numbers has been evolving very slowly. The one feature that I personally miss is a keyboard shortcut for fill down, right, etc.
God forbid someone else have an opinion.
pressing command+S every hour or so was too much work hey?
Yes, because one should have to remember to do something that could otherwise be trivially automated.
That's such a perfect justification for Pages missing a very elementary feature
, just hit command S. If you're in the habit of that, it's almost as good as autosave.
Another inane argument. It's not "almost as good" since it relies on you doing it. It "fails open", which is always the worst case scenario for any modern design.
Having the computer do it automatically and continuously is fool proof and always the best option.
There really is no excuse in this day an age to not have such functionality.
So funny, you guys act like you were never a new user.
God forbid someone else have an opinion.
Not sure what you are talking about. Are you feeling slighted or are you referring to some other post? Generally speaking it is best to include what you are referring to in your post or else you may appear to be talking out of context... which you do.
(I'm talking about Word 2004, as I will never update to a "ribbon" interface).
You really should give it a chance. After a month of using Office 2007 I can't go back to Word (or Excel) without the Ribbon. There are things about the Ribbon that do annoy me, but you can move the quick work bar below the ribbon and then put commands you frequently use - that solved the issues I had with the Ribbon.
And for Word 2010, the Navigation Pane is pure genius! I live in lots of large, well structured documents. The Navigation Pane is the single greatest feature they have added to Word in over a decade. Yup, it's not dependent on the Ribbon, but even if I didn't like the Ribbon I would live with it just to get the Navigation Pane headings view:
http://news.office-watch.com/t/n.aspx?a=1428
I do loathe the basic search via the navigation pane. Thankfully the find/replace dialog is still there and can be used to do heavy duty finding still. People seem to be excited about the new search so perhaps I just need to explore with it too.
well, at least the first one must be a nut-cracker , as they have failed to implement it in what, 5, 6 versions of iwork?.
iWork is currently in its second release cycle. iLIfe (iMove, Garage Band, etc.) have been out much long.
I can't see why anyone would hand over the dollars to use Office at home.
I get it for $10 due to our enterprise agreement and the home use program?
http://www.microsofthup.com/hupus/ho...?culture=en-US
I realize it's the crack dealer sales ploy - but what the heck, I'm not getting away from Office any time soon so I might as well use it at home too!
I'm a Mac user, but apparently not 'any' because I don't know how MS saved Apple 13 years ago. Are you referring the non-voting shares thy bought at a value much less than what Apple paid for NeXT or value of Apple at the time?
That's exactly what I'm referring to. Apple was three months away from going out of business.
Mac, circa 1984; but you surely meant it would no linger exist but note that the iMac was the machine that spurred a significant jump in Mac sales, then again with Intel chip to replace the high TDP PPC chips that were no longer offering performance advantages or evolving quickly enough to satisfy PC needs, not any 3rd-party SW. I bet we can also see dramatic interest in Mac sales when the unibody notebooks were introduced.
The iMac was the first machine that got Apple going again but they wouldn't have had the chance without MS and the cash infusion.
Mac Office has been the #1 selling Mac 3rd party software for over 20 years. If it had been discontinued (like was rumored before Steve came back) without even offering Boot Camp the Mac may have been dead. This is also considering the success of the original iMac.
That's exactly what I'm referring to. Apple was three months away from going out of business.
Okay, so a $150M saved a company worth $5B. And this beleaguered company begging at MS? door was able to get them to buy non-voting shares and agree to hold onto for 5 years. DOES NOT COMPUTE!
The iMac was the first machine that got Apple going again but they wouldn't have had the chance without MS and the cash infusion.
So only MS had money? No one could have loaned Apple money or saved them as you stated ?[Apple] wouldn't have had the chance without MS?. Sounds like you are revising even the revised history. Again, DOES NOT COMPUTE!
But if you want to go with fanciful scenarios that can?t be proven how about this one: If Apple had licensed their OS the way MS did and the way the PC OEMs begged them to year after after then MS wouldn?t have a fraction of the OS marketshare Apple does now.
Mac Office has been the #1 selling Mac 3rd party software for over 20 years. If it had been discontinued (like was rumored before Steve came back) without even offering Boot Camp the Mac may have been dead. This is also considering the success of the original iMac.
So me let get this straight, you?re saying MS was going to pull the "#1 selling Mac 3rd party software for over 20 years? from the Mac? Once again, DOES NOT COMPUTE!. And you?re also saying that people buy Macs specifically to run Office for Mac? Do you really believe that? While it certainly popular 3rd-party retail software that doesn?t mean it?s the primary reason people by Macs. DOES NOT COMPUTE!
Perhaps you should look into the deal Apple forced MS to make due to the firm grip they had on MS? balls over QT code theft. MS was trying to save its ass from a more costly lawsuit. Plain and simple.
I don't know anyone who does.
I do for example. And so does almost every Mac user in our research facility. For some work I prefere to work with MS Office for some I use iWorks. Of course I hope very much that one day i could say that I don't need MS Office any more. But until that time I an happy for all the improvements the Mac-Girls and -Boys at MS are implementing.