AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Microsoft Office 2004
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microsoft Office 2004 - Page 2

post #41 of 193
1/9/04 at 8:30am
I just hope the new Entourage gives us some of this Exchange specific features like:

* PST support
* Out of Office assistant
* Multiple Exchange accounts
* Server Side rules
* GAL browsing
* email group browsing
* real public folder support
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 193
1/9/04 at 1:03pm
Has anyone heard about the upgrade path of Virtual PC 7? Do you think it'll be available for those of us who never upgraded to 6.0, or will we have to buy the full version?
Reply
Reply
post #43 of 193
1/9/04 at 1:07pm
i assume that VPC7 will run on a G5, correct?

i hadn't seen it mentioned in this thread anywhere, so i figure no news is good news.

i haven't had to use VPC once since i bought my G5, but i figure better safe than sorry.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 193
1/9/04 at 1:21pm
According to MacMinute, VPC7 will indeed support the G5, and feature -ahem- performance improvements.

I wonder what kind of performance improvements we'll see in G4sville?
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 193
1/9/04 at 1:47pm
Quote:
Originally posted by piwozniak
If that suite would come from any other dev team we all would run over each other to post how great it is and all that, but since it comes from ms, everyone tries to find something to bash it for.

Actually MBU has some great developers, and office is really good piece of software. Sure Microsoft is shit, but don't you think that those guys are macheads too?, just so happens that they work for MS.

Give them a break


This has little to do with them being macheads. Even Macheads can steal from each other.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 193
1/9/04 at 3:18pm
I must say that I for one was quite impressed with what the MacBU showed us @ Macworld.
Kudos to the team!
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 193
1/9/04 at 3:24pm
Without MS Office i wouldn't buy ANY of our macs at work.

How many people need MS office?

Give me something better, and i may join the crowd.
What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch? _(W.C. Fields)
Reply
What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch? _(W.C. Fields)
Reply
post #48 of 193
1/9/04 at 6:03pm
Quote:
Originally posted by piwozniak

Actually MBU has some great developers, and office is really good piece of software. Sure Microsoft is shit, but don't you think that those guys are macheads too?, just so happens that they work for MS.

Give them a break


Give them a break because they're smart and have good skills, but choose to work for evil monopolists that perpetuate their stranglehold on the industry by blackmail and intimidation?

I will give them a break when Microsoft is bankrupt and Bill Gates is safely behind bars.
Reply
Reply
post #49 of 193
1/12/04 at 7:26am
Quote:
Originally posted by hearn
Give them a break because they're smart and have good skills, but choose to work for evil monopolists that perpetuate their stranglehold on the industry by blackmail and intimidation?

I will give them a break when Microsoft is bankrupt and Bill Gates is safely behind bars.

your full of shit. try to find a job these days in the tech sector, let alone one that pays better then MS...

[insert rebuttle about MS employees selling out...]

when you have a kid, tell me how important being anti corporation is...

what? buy apple products instead?

hate to break it to ya, its a corporation too... and not any less competetive than microsoft, and every bit as willing to compete and take advantage of demand
i freebase user interface
Reply
i freebase user interface
Reply
post #50 of 193
1/12/04 at 9:12am
Quote:
Originally posted by piwozniak


Give them a break




Naaaaahhhhhhh.
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 193
1/12/04 at 11:36am
Well, I use Mac..stay Mac. Virtual PC holds "virtually" no interest for me. I do understand that there are those who are not as fortunate as myself to work and play *only* on Mac. I did stray long ago, even built and networked PCs as a living. Long gone are those days- and here is one in hopes of Apple getting more market share! - CHEERS!


8)
( it is already in use )
Reply
( it is already in use )
Reply
post #52 of 193
1/12/04 at 12:14pm
You know what? It might be alright. Well, Im sort of praying for it.

Word has features I really need and use every day. With all the animations, sound effects, tips and unilateral, pre-emptive editing features turned off, and all the toolbars apart from the formatting palette hidden, the interface is alright. It looks good and its actually simple to use. You have to make a little effort, which I admit is an important failure, but you can get it to do what you want without any fuss.

It works. Its the bugs and the speed of the thing that make it so terribly, terribly, frustrating. Fix those alone and Id actually be happy with it. And sort out the SHIT preferences management and the counter-intuitive dictionaries and stuff, and give me localisation that works, and settings that stay set, and Id even say it was good.

What if theyve been sorting all this out? Thatd be pretty alright, no?

Its not perfect, but its damn powerful and it does the job: and until someone in Cupertino gathers together some open source Office code and sticks it behind a really, properly decent front end, I know Im going to keep on using the slag, so, hey.
Reply
Reply
post #53 of 193
1/12/04 at 7:03pm
I've always said, MS Office works well (except for PPT ) but MBU really needs to work on the speed of their software. It can be painful at times. Anyone have a link to 2004 screenshots?
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 193
1/12/04 at 8:36pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
I've always said, MS Office works well (except for PPT ) but MBU really needs to work on the speed of their software. It can be painful at times. Anyone have a link to 2004 screenshots?

Here are some: http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/...=1073468789000
Reply
Reply
post #55 of 193
1/13/04 at 6:28am
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
I've always said, MS Office works well (except for PPT ) but MBU really needs to work on the speed of their software. It can be painful at times. Anyone have a link to 2004 screenshots?

In all the official comments about the upcoming Office release, I have heard none about performance issues. Did I miss something? Or perhaps mentioning it would mean that MS would have to admit the problem in the first place. Perhaps they will fix it without mentioning it. Or perhaps they won't fix it....
tribalfusion?
Reply
tribalfusion?
Reply
post #56 of 193
1/13/04 at 7:54am
I'd like to see Omni make some kind of note scribbling thingy like in Word 2004.

Something that could make good use of the microphone to record notes and InkWell or whatever to scribble notes or drawings anything that isn't worth typing.

Sometimes I sit in class and wish I could just take a pen and draw rough diagrams or write math equations (it's really not easy to write equations rapidly into any word processor) into the computer.

A bluetooth pen and a computer would suffice to take any notes, vocal, textual or graphic.
Reply
Reply
post #57 of 193
1/13/04 at 1:11pm
now that a week or so have gon by... has anyone seen or heard of any evidence of Office '04 using ADDRESS BOOK for contact management?
I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.
Reply
I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.
Reply
post #58 of 193
1/13/04 at 3:46pm
Quote:
Originally posted by ZO
now that a week or so have gon by... has anyone seen or heard of any evidence of Office '04 using ADDRESS BOOK for contact management?

It doesn't. I asked a MS rep that would know.

But Project Center looks awesome, from a collaborative point of view!
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 193
1/14/04 at 4:33am
crap... isnt there at least someway to keep them properly syncronized? That AppleScript shareware thing is a pain in the ass to use...
I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.
Reply
I'm having deja-vu and amnesia at the same time. I think I've forgotten this before.
Reply
post #60 of 193
1/14/04 at 5:18am
I really don't understand what makes Office so good software.
Excel I understand, I've seen some people do really handy things with it, and I'm starting to use it in simple calculations myself. It feels like "honest" software somehow. Doesn't try to tell you what to do.

But Word?
I edit my documents as text. That way you get better editors, version control systems like CVS work properly, and you can easily e-mail, IRC and ICQ the document or parts of it to someone else. I totally hate having to put a change history in a Word doc, not to mention that is bound to be out of date, and it will never mesh right with code changes in version control. (I'm guessing the latest versions of Word have some sort of history built in... do they?)

My editor of choice is vim, but I'm no zealot. When I have to "present" stuff to others or print the documents I put them through a RTF editor like Wordpad or Textpad, select all, set the base font, then change the headlines. I plan to learn LaTeX later so that I can deal with bigger documents.
Reply
Reply
post #61 of 193
1/15/04 at 6:49am
I'll echo what other have said...

REAL EXCHANGE SUPPORT!

That is the only feature that will mean anything to most corporate Mac users. Just this morning, I had to figure out why my bosses filenames where showing up garbled when she mailed them to PC users. It turns out that the files had been originally sent to her by another employee. When she saved them out of Entourage, the names where truncated to include a '...' in place of the missing letters.

Its not huge, but when you couple that with half-assed exchange support, it seriously handicaps the Mac in a corporate environment. Two VPs in my company would have switched to a Mac recently, but they changed their minds when they realized the limitations of Entourage. So, this strategy seems to be working for M$...keep the Mac out of the work place as much as possible.

There was a recent thread in the OSX (?) forum about Apple's enterprise strategy. In that thread, it was repeated, time and time again, that Apple (or a 3rd party) must provide a real alternative to Exchange in order for the Mac to make any head-way in corporations.

Some people in my company are still running Outlook in Classic because they say its better than Entourage for getting mail w/Exchange. I wish M$ would include full Exchange support, but I don't think they want to.
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 193
1/16/04 at 11:23pm
It would be great if MS offered software parity with the PC version. I'd love to see apps like MS Project and Visio on the Mac. Then I would have no problem shelling out money to purchase a "professional" version of Office. Those two apps are really important for project managers and information architects (usability experts). Running them on VPC is just painful.

Those two apps and exchange support would really kick up sales for both MS and Apple. It's those two programs that make Office so unique compared to other professional office suites.

well, in my opinion anyway.
.: trowa
.: "To see with eyes unclouded by hate"
Reply
.: trowa
.: "To see with eyes unclouded by hate"
Reply
post #63 of 193
1/16/04 at 11:27pm
something that bugs me is no mention on whether Office will be able to sync Apple's Address book or iCal with Entourage. You would think that would be a major feature. That was something I was really looking forward to in the next revision.

update: nevermind...didn't read the above posts carefully.
.: trowa
.: "To see with eyes unclouded by hate"
Reply
.: trowa
.: "To see with eyes unclouded by hate"
Reply
post #64 of 193
1/17/04 at 11:44am
Quote:
Originally posted by Alpha Mac
Word Note is just a crap cut down port of MS OneNote 2003, wich may have been taken form Circus Ponies Notebook

EVERYTHING M$ produces is stolen in one way or another...windows 3.1=mac os (mach 1984) win 2000 = os 8.?
office = claris works, IE = mosaic (a bit of a strech i know)
windows media player = quick time
all these have a common theme, all the m$ nock-offs SUCK in comparison to the original. so why do 9? % of people use the crummy copies, are there that many suckers in the world, or is bill gates realy ino voo-doo
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #65 of 193
1/17/04 at 3:34pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
It doesn't (address book integration). I asked a MS rep that would know.

This irks me to no end. How freaking tough would it be to hook into the system's address book? That way, Entourage becomes a more useful program by allowing its data to be used directly with iSync. Who at the MacBU thought about this and thought that it WOULDN'T be a good feature to implement?

And I could be totally hallucinating here, but I could SWEAR that I remember the MacBU stating when iSync and Address Book came out that they would take advantage of these Apple technologies.

Or maybe I'm just wishful thinking....

Damn Microsoft....
--
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.
Reply
--
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.
Reply
post #66 of 193
1/17/04 at 6:09pm
Quote:
Originally posted by highfalutintodd
This irks me to no end. How freaking tough would it be to hook into the system's address book? That way, Entourage becomes a more useful program by allowing its data to be used directly with iSync. Who at the MacBU thought about this and thought that it WOULDN'T be a good feature to implement?

And I could be totally hallucinating here, but I could SWEAR that I remember the MacBU stating when iSync and Address Book came out that they would take advantage of these Apple technologies.

Or maybe I'm just wishful thinking....

Damn Microsoft....

i wonder if it's possible to run LDAP service in OS X, then i guess you could tell Entourage (i don't know since i have never used it, but it should be an option there..) to look up names on local host.

I have default OS X e-mail app set up to look up addresses on my Domino server, so i don't think it would be hard to do in Entourage.
What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch? _(W.C. Fields)
Reply
What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch? _(W.C. Fields)
Reply
post #67 of 193
1/17/04 at 6:16pm
Sure, there's always something to complain about, but would it kill apple to make iSync more universal? I keep my appointments in lotus Notes, as this is what we use @ work, address book-same thing, but i also keep a copy of all my contacts in address book, as it offers bluetooth, sms messaging, and it's more convenient. Still wouldn't it be nice to iSync data from MOST popular applications? There are not that many, c'mon apple.
What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch? _(W.C. Fields)
Reply
What contemptible scoundrel has stolen the cork to my lunch? _(W.C. Fields)
Reply
post #68 of 193
1/17/04 at 6:39pm
Quote:
Originally posted by piwozniak
Sure, there's always something to complain about, but would it kill apple to make iSync more universal? I keep my appointments in lotus Notes, as this is what we use @ work, address book-same thing, but i also keep a copy of all my contacts in address book, as it offers bluetooth, sms messaging, and it's more convenient. Still wouldn't it be nice to iSync data from MOST popular applications? There are not that many, c'mon apple.

I know the DayLite Contact Manager can sync its contacts with the Address Book, so I would venture that the frameworks are already there, it's just that Microsoft and others aren't using them.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #69 of 193
1/18/04 at 9:03am
Quote:
Originally posted by Frank777
I know the DayLite Contact Manager can sync its contacts with the Address Book, so I would venture that the frameworks are already there, it's just that Microsoft and others aren't using them.

That's my understanding of how Address Book works. There is actually a system-level database that the Address Book application is merely a front-end for. Any program can access this database, which any other program can then access as well.

Of course, it's totally possible that Microsoft doesn't want to allow this simply because you're no longer locked into using ENTOURAGE as your PIM. If something better were to come along, you could simply start using that.

Still, it would be nice if Microsoft would serve its customers rather than itself all the time.

That being said, if it were at all possible for Apple to write an iSync plug-in that would access the Entourage database, I say go for it! It's got to be possible, since there is a Palm conduit available for Entourage. But what do I know.
--
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.
Reply
--
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime, doubly so.
Reply
post #70 of 193
4/5/04 at 11:30pm
Office 2004 to arrive in stores next month

Production to start April 14; street date expected to be in third week in May.

Pre-orders accepted starting today (Tuesday)

Pricing same as for Office v. X: $399 for Standard Edition

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/05/office/
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/8363866.htm

What I want to know is, what are the upgrade options for owners of Office X? All I'm aware of is the "Technology Guarantee" for people who bought since Office 2004 was announced in January.
Why am I whispering?
Reply
Why am I whispering?
Reply
post #71 of 193
4/6/04 at 8:36am
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
office = claris works

Microsoft Office predated ClarisWorks 1.0 by a several years. In 1991, Microsoft was on its second or third Mac edition of Office.
Reply
Reply
post #72 of 193
4/6/04 at 8:47am
Upgrade pricing for users of Office v.X who purchased prior to the announcement of Office 2004 is the same as the upgrade pricing from Office 2001 to Office v.X.

I think the new Entourage looks great. I already use the program because of its metadata tagging abilities which Apple's programs just can't match. Project Center will be very helpful at my office, if I can get my boss to swing the $150 for it.
Reply
Reply
post #73 of 193
4/6/04 at 8:50am
Quote:
Originally posted by CaseCom
Office 2004 to arrive in stores next month

Production to start April 14; street date expected to be in third week in May.

Pre-orders accepted starting today (Tuesday)

Pricing same as for Office v. X: $399 for Standard Edition

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/05/office/
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/8363866.htm

What I want to know is, what are the upgrade options for owners of Office X? All I'm aware of is the "Technology Guarantee" for people who bought since Office 2004 was announced in January.

Search at just about any Apple Authorized online reseller, you'll see the upgrade options. For example:
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/promo...p?p=office_mac

Office 2004 Std. Upgrade: $219
Office 2004 Pro Upgrade: $295
What the problem is?
Reply
What the problem is?
Reply
post #74 of 193
4/6/04 at 8:57am
Quote:
Originally posted by MCQ
Search at just about any Apple Authorized online reseller, you'll see the upgrade options. For example:
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/promo...p?p=office_mac

Office 2004 Std. Upgrade: $219
Office 2004 Pro Upgrade: $295

According to that MacMall link, we won't be seeing the pro version until late July. That explains the lack of info about VPC 7. I'm pretty sure that this is the original timeline they announced for VPC 7 though.
Reply
Reply
post #75 of 193
4/7/04 at 1:45am
Looks like Office 2004 will support long document names (yay!) and brings back the good old Scrapbook from the early Mac OS, but this time as a more functional Office suite tool.

It also appears that Microsoft is actually responding to the Keynote challenge by building in much more impressive graphics and transitions as part of PowerPoint 2004 though I'm sure they won't be fully compatible with Windows PowerPoint 2003. Score one for Apple. :-)

All in all, it looks like a nice upgrade. Particularly since I can get it for the $150 student price. If Entourage 2004 is as good as it appears to be, I'd almost be willing to pay that much for Entourage alone.

I was afraid that this might be the generation where Windows Office finally one upped the Mac version of Office and began to pull away in terms of functionality and flexibility. Aside from the lack of XML support and IRM support (which I can't say I'll miss), it looks like Office 2004 keeps the Apple-specific release of the suite technologically ahead of its dominant Windows cousin.

Microsoft may do a lot of scandalously lousy things, but it's still home to some of the best Mac programmers around.
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 193
4/7/04 at 5:25am
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkland
Looks like Office 2004 will support long document names (yay!) and brings back the good old Scrapbook from the early Mac OS, but this time as a more functional Office suite tool.

It also appears that Microsoft is actually responding to the Keynote challenge by building in much more impressive graphics and transitions as part of PowerPoint 2004 though I'm sure they won't be fully compatible with Windows PowerPoint 2003. Score one for Apple. :-)


Excellent. These are all features I'll be sure to use. What I'm hoping for in PowerPoint is some way to drag and drop the order of transitions, rather than having to use those annoying up-and-down buttons.

Where did you read about long document names though? I've been looking for some sort of official/reputable rumour site word on this and haven't seen anything.
Reply
Reply
post #77 of 193
4/7/04 at 6:14am
missing xml support is a downer for me.

and i have not found any evidence of long file name support
Trying hard to think of a new signature...
Reply
Trying hard to think of a new signature...
Reply
post #78 of 193
4/7/04 at 6:18am
Has anyone seen any word on the basic speed of the new Office? I guess MS would not actually say anything about this - even if they fixed it - because it would mean admitting that the initial port to OS X was a bit stinky - as it was.
tribalfusion?
Reply
tribalfusion?
Reply
post #79 of 193
4/7/04 at 7:24am
  • Ebby
  • RIAA's Most Wanted
Quote:
Originally posted by mpls244
I went from Word 5.1 to Office 98 (I bought Word 6, but never used it, it was so damn slow on my Centris).

I still use word 5.1. It is fast, stable, and not filled with BS. Although I am thinking of buying 2003 (now 2004).
horrid misuse of cool technology
SSBA.COM
Reply
horrid misuse of cool technology
SSBA.COM
Reply
post #80 of 193
4/7/04 at 7:36am
Quote:
Originally posted by Gabid
Where did you read about long document names though? I've been looking for some sort of official/reputable rumour site word on this and haven't seen anything.

I read the weblogs of several Microsoft developers. Unfortunately, I don't have the address here at work.

Also, Exchange support through Entourage is reportedly much better.

Kirk
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Microsoft Office 2004