I mean, seriously, who needs a 64-bit version of Office now?
This is the computer world's equivalent of Keeping Up with the Joneses. We don't need something, but gosh darn do we want it!
For example, can you provide a plug-in that provides access to Twitter and Facebook that allows us to embed a live News Feed in an Excel worksheet's cell?
What? Can't do it? What a crappy application.
I think some people have very large Excel spreadsheets, though maybe those projects should be reviewed to make sure XL is the best tool for the job. Most of us don't need 64 bit office for the short term. What's more worrying is 2011 software is still planned as a carbon app suite. Office for Mac is supposed to be Microsoft's most profitable pieces of software, I don't know what's up with that.
All of Apple's own laggards should be kicked up to Cocoa too.
From the screenshots it is looking better than the previous version.
The Apple version will still have the menus too, so you'll get a visual instruction of the keyboard shortcut, if there is one. The Windows Office ribbon doesn't tell you those keyboard shortcuts, not on hover, clicking, right clicking... This really slows you down if you haven't used it for a while. Never mind the switching between ribbons.
For very small docs -- for anything of any size or complexity I would not want to work with the iPad (using Pages or MS Word). I am a huge iPad fan but I just don't see the use case for creating large documents. I do see a case for reading, reviewing and commenting -- maybe seven as a minor collaborator. I just do not think that the current multitouch interface (and especially virtual keyboard) cuts it. That is nt to say that it cannot be enhanced and refined to do so.
Give me 'Word Lite' that renders correctly and lets me see what will be produced and allow me to at least markup and embed comments like in Reader. I suspect that that would fulfill most users desires - but the key is the ability to render documents from both Mac and Windows accurately (as well as across versions).
For very small docs -- for anything of any size or complexity I would not want to work with the iPad (using Pages or MS Word). I am a huge iPad fan but I just don't see the use case for creating large documents. I do see a case for reading, reviewing and commenting -- maybe seven as a minor collaborator. I just do not think that the current multitouch interface (and especially virtual keyboard) cuts it. That is nt to say that it cannot be enhanced and refined to do so.
Give me 'Word Lite' that renders correctly and lets me see what will be produced and allow me to at least markup and embed comments like in Reader. I suspect that that would fulfill most users desires - but the key is the ability to render documents from both Mac and Windows accurately (as well as across versions).
This comment makes no sense to me at all.
First you make some arbitrary line between "big" and "small" documents when a more sensible line to draw is document complexity? Secondly, while there are fairly obviously some missing features in the initial offering of Pages on the iPad, those will almost certainly be filled in with the next release.
Finally, you end up with a plea for "Word lite" when in fact the current Pages offering on the iPad is basically that. It has flaws, it's not as full featured as the desktop version, etc.
It sounds to me like you just like or prefer Word. That's fine, but don't try to frame some silly argument that Pages is just for "lite" documents, and then turn around and ask for "Word lite."
It's nonsensical and just comes across as an insult.
I really like iWork and moreso on the iPad but lets be honest in saying that, as of right now, iWork for iPad is a stripped down version of the Mac. iWork on the Mac is a stripped down version of Office. There are even compatibility issues between the Mac and iPad versions of iWork.
It still has a long way to go on the iPad and hopefully Apple will continue to invest in it. Numbers doesn't even have Excel support and considering that iWork tends to have problems with extremely large documents on the Mac, I expect an even worse situation on the iPad. For 95% of the population iWork is enough but for the business crowd they will need something more powerful.
I welcome Office for the iPad because, not only can competition be a good thing, but it would also help push the legitimacy of the iPad as the next PC. For all the hatred of Office (which is somewhat well-deserved) it is the standard and the most purchased app on the Mac. I'm sure MS is paying attention to iPad sales and they should know that they will make a killing off such a product. It would continually be in the top 5 of purchased app and the App Store would be a good way for preventing piracy.
I realize that the vast majority of users don't need a 64-bit office application but there are certainly some that do. I'm a grad student working in molecular modeling, which generates large amounts of data. It would be nice to occasionally be able to use Excel for certain things but, as it stands, Excel is virtually unusable for this application. Sadly, it looks like it will remain unusable for the foreseeable future.
I understand the sentiments that MS (and Adobe) have had plenty of time to get their apps moved to Cocoa, but note that Apple also had the same time and more to get their apps moved to Cocoa and there seem to be plenty that are 32-bit Carbon apps.
If Apple isn't going to be on the ball migrating their apps then I can't cry foul on MS for doing the same. Sure, Apple's iWork is completely Cocoa but it's a new suite that started off as Cocoa so it's not a great argument in Apple's favour.
I just got Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac from school after first trying Open Office (runs terribly on in MAC OS), then I stuck with Neo Office for over a year. It was good, not great. Office 2008 can get sluggish, which is annoying. But yeah, its much more compatible with Windows folks, and does a better job at grammar and spelling I've found.
I have Office 2007 on my PC at work, and I actually like it a lot. I do not like the separate window that floats around in Office 2008 and Pages that pulls all the font/spacing/styles/margin/paragraph etc out of the top bar. Come to think of it, I bet theres a way to put all that stuff in the top menu in Office 2008 where it belongs.
The biggest challenge to using Office that it is so slow. Even on a Mac Pro, for crying out loud.
Startup takes forever, pagination is like watching paint dry.
I assume that it's all interpreted intermediate-code that MS compiles into native on Windows, but that's just a guess. I can not think of any other reason why everything takes so long.
I don't really care about 32-bit vs. 64. I'd rather just be able to get my work done today instead of having to finish it tomorrow
I have to agree with you here. It takes forever, and on a PC it loads and runs pretty zippy.
Why do the Windows and Mac versions look so different? It seems completely pointless to have one application that runs of two different platforms and not have identical visual functionality layout. They may have different colors and such but it seems ridiculous to have different layouts and different naming conventions.
Long time ago their was a good Mac word processor named MS Word 5 for Mac. Then Microsoft decided to absorb the MacBU back into MS's application division with the goal of developing both WIndows and Mac Word from the same code base, same look, same GUI. That abomination was called Word 6 for Mac.
It was big. It was slow. It was buggy. The college I was attending refused to support it because it was so bloated it had difficulty running on the campus macs and was so different in style that they needed to retrain students and staff on how to use it.
Nobody liked it and Microsoft eventually released the MacBU from their application division and let them do their mac thing. And people rejoiced.
Office 2011 will be a welcome upgrade as I need Excel because Numbers is a toy and can't hold a candle to Excel when it comes to working with pivot tables.
I mean, seriously, who needs a 64-bit version of Office now?
This is the computer world's equivalent of Keeping Up with the Joneses. We don't need something, but gosh darn do we want it!
I can't help but recall back when I owned a computer store in England. 16 bit machines were making appearances and all the same talk went on the. "Who the hell needs 16 bit software? 8 bit is all you need for .... "
Long time ago their was a good Mac word processor named MS Word 5 for Mac. Then Microsoft decided to absorb the MacBU back into MS's application division with the goal of developing both WIndows and Mac Word from the same code base, same look, same GUI. That abomination was called Word 6 for Mac.
It was big. It was slow. It was buggy. The college I was attending refused to support it because it was so bloated it had difficulty running on the campus macs and was so different in style that they needed to retrain students and staff on how to use it.
Nobody liked it and Microsoft eventually released the MacBU from their application division and let them do their mac thing. And people rejoiced.
Be that as it may it still makes little sense. You would have thought they would merge the two over time to find a GUI that was acceptable to both Windows and Mac users. I remember jumping from Dreamweaver on Windows to Mac and being frustrated at the differences. Why not the same? Sure, stick to platform conventions but beyond that try to make them as damn near identical as possible. Just makes life easier for everybody.
I will remain with Office 2004 until it quits working. At that point it's OpenOffice time.
Too bad, you're missing out on iWork. It's a nice suite, and inexpensive. OOo is still kinda ugly, and it isn't as smooth. But, it is free, so that's nice.
First you make some arbitrary line between "big" and "small" documents when a more sensible line to draw is document complexity? Secondly, while there are fairly obviously some missing features in the initial offering of Pages on the iPad, those will almost certainly be filled in with the next release.
Finally, you end up with a plea for "Word lite" when in fact the current Pages offering on the iPad is basically that. It has flaws, it's not as full featured as the desktop version, etc.
It sounds to me like you just like or prefer Word. That's fine, but don't try to frame some silly argument that Pages is just for "lite" documents, and then turn around and ask for "Word lite."
It's nonsensical and just comes across as an insult.
First thing I said was about small docs or more complex larger docs. Did you read what I wrote?
MS interface has long been the kitchen sink version of a sucky WinWord GUI. Why do they feel this need to put everything in the front like a pawn shop (i.e. toolbar, ribbon and menus from hell)?
I actually prefer Pages for creating a document.
I find that in the business world (developing software and such) that I need to use Word. I have no desire to have that huge hunk of bloatware on my machines. I do however find it to be almost a requirement since there is so much of the world that has standardized on it.
The point I was trying to making was that preparing large (yes -- a subjective term, because it is not that easily quantified) and/or complex documents are not suited for creation on the iPad IMO. I would however, embrace the idea of an application that accurately rendered all Word documents, both cross platform and cross version, and then allowed me to mark up, do some limited editing, and comment on existing formatted content but not necessarily for the creation of complex/large docs.
I hear regularly that Pages will render 98% of a Word doc, or OpenOffice can handle all but a few MS Word features here and there. Until it can do it all it does not meet what I would like to have. Hell MS does not have a product AFAIKT that can translate all of even there latest version documents cross platform. It seems there is always some exception.
I never said Pages was a lite version of anything -- you did. I certainly did not plea for it but would be more than willing to use a product that met the requirements above. I am no lover of MS and would love to see Apple deliver with Pages in a version that would be able to read it all. It is a shame that MS got in and managed to play a part in the standardized XML format. It would have been nice to have had a platform agnostic file format.
As far as being an insult I think you must have some other interest here that I am not aware of since I made no disparaging remarks about Pages. WTF? Having a bad day are we?
Actually, I use Office 2008 for work every single day. Sadly, it is only because iWork doesn't do Office templates that well - at least well enough that I can pass them to the editor. What I put up with everyday is worse than any application I've ever paid money for: very few OSX keyboard shortcuts, horrid placement commands, tables, objects: everything moves of its own free will, 100% crap expose control (windows change at their whim), and many other problems.
32-bit, 64-bit, it doesn't matter. First, Microsoft just have to treat the Mac like a Mac, not like a Windows machine. If I could paste with no formatting via the ubiquitous alt-ctrl-shift-, that alone would save me probably an hour per day. Then if Expose transitions wouldn't plop me into another window altogether (only happens with this shyte suite of apps), it would be another 20-30 minutes saved.
Even if I could shift--s, it would be a huge 'hello'. The most embarassing thing, however is the dictionary which doesn't catch about 5/20 words I use to write middle-school English textbooks! Middle school! I can count on Office 2008 to fail about 40% of the time, to cause me lost time in almost every area, and to be a drag on all but template support.
Microsoft, who cares about 64-bit, just get your effins shyte soft working like an Apple app on the Mac. Right now, it is the WORST app I've ever bought on any platform.
I can feel your pain.. every time I use these apps I loose time shifting stuff around or some other clean-up jobs that isn't productive. It's a real time-waster and frustrating... and if I didn't have to use them I definately wouldn't.
I don't think MS will ever grasp how to make a sleek Office suite. They are in "more is better" land
Give me a yell in a couple years when you finally get your act together, maybe I'll consider it then.
so what is the advantage of 64 bit that makes it so vital for a program like Office.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ktappe
Why is MS's MacBU at WWDC? There are no Mac tracks at WWDC. It's all iOS.
thank you for playing but no. WWDC is not all iOS.
3 of the special events had nothing to do with iOS. One was by NASA, one by some folks at Pixar and one by CNN. The sessions and labs cover both iOS and MacOS. As is fitting since it is the DEVELOPERS Conference and not the iphone conference
More than 4GB of RAM for a spreadsheet? As previously noted by a poster who needs it for scientific data collection.
That is specific to one person, even one small subset. Not something that everyone would need and thus the application is total shite.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iReality85
Zing.
It certainly isn't fail. No one forced Microsoft to port Office to Mac (or now via Cocoa), they are doing it by their own graces, and having Office across both Windows and OS X benefits everyone.
That's not entirely true. Microsoft did initially decide on their own to make a Mac version of Word etc. But then were prevented from stopping due to a lawsuit. Actually a couple of them, from the early 90s. it's a big complex mess but in the end, Apple agreed to install IE as the Mac web browser for a set period of years and Microsoft agreed to keep updating Office for Mac. For the same period of time. Now it's a matter of keeping the inflow of money as many businesses are so engrained in Office that they don't want to relearn to switch to iWork.
Comments
I mean, seriously, who needs a 64-bit version of Office now?
This is the computer world's equivalent of Keeping Up with the Joneses. We don't need something, but gosh darn do we want it!
For example, can you provide a plug-in that provides access to Twitter and Facebook that allows us to embed a live News Feed in an Excel worksheet's cell?
What? Can't do it? What a crappy application.
I think some people have very large Excel spreadsheets, though maybe those projects should be reviewed to make sure XL is the best tool for the job. Most of us don't need 64 bit office for the short term. What's more worrying is 2011 software is still planned as a carbon app suite. Office for Mac is supposed to be Microsoft's most profitable pieces of software, I don't know what's up with that.
All of Apple's own laggards should be kicked up to Cocoa too.
The Apple version will still have the menus too, so you'll get a visual instruction of the keyboard shortcut, if there is one. The Windows Office ribbon doesn't tell you those keyboard shortcuts, not on hover, clicking, right clicking... This really slows you down if you haven't used it for a while. Never mind the switching between ribbons.
agreed...everyone will be using iwork on ipad
For very small docs -- for anything of any size or complexity I would not want to work with the iPad (using Pages or MS Word). I am a huge iPad fan but I just don't see the use case for creating large documents. I do see a case for reading, reviewing and commenting -- maybe seven as a minor collaborator. I just do not think that the current multitouch interface (and especially virtual keyboard) cuts it. That is nt to say that it cannot be enhanced and refined to do so.
Give me 'Word Lite' that renders correctly and lets me see what will be produced and allow me to at least markup and embed comments like in Reader. I suspect that that would fulfill most users desires - but the key is the ability to render documents from both Mac and Windows accurately (as well as across versions).
For very small docs -- for anything of any size or complexity I would not want to work with the iPad (using Pages or MS Word). I am a huge iPad fan but I just don't see the use case for creating large documents. I do see a case for reading, reviewing and commenting -- maybe seven as a minor collaborator. I just do not think that the current multitouch interface (and especially virtual keyboard) cuts it. That is nt to say that it cannot be enhanced and refined to do so.
Give me 'Word Lite' that renders correctly and lets me see what will be produced and allow me to at least markup and embed comments like in Reader. I suspect that that would fulfill most users desires - but the key is the ability to render documents from both Mac and Windows accurately (as well as across versions).
This comment makes no sense to me at all.
First you make some arbitrary line between "big" and "small" documents when a more sensible line to draw is document complexity? Secondly, while there are fairly obviously some missing features in the initial offering of Pages on the iPad, those will almost certainly be filled in with the next release.
Finally, you end up with a plea for "Word lite" when in fact the current Pages offering on the iPad is basically that. It has flaws, it's not as full featured as the desktop version, etc.
It sounds to me like you just like or prefer Word. That's fine, but don't try to frame some silly argument that Pages is just for "lite" documents, and then turn around and ask for "Word lite."
It's nonsensical and just comes across as an insult.
agreed...everyone will be using iwork on ipad
I really like iWork and moreso on the iPad but lets be honest in saying that, as of right now, iWork for iPad is a stripped down version of the Mac. iWork on the Mac is a stripped down version of Office. There are even compatibility issues between the Mac and iPad versions of iWork.
It still has a long way to go on the iPad and hopefully Apple will continue to invest in it. Numbers doesn't even have Excel support and considering that iWork tends to have problems with extremely large documents on the Mac, I expect an even worse situation on the iPad. For 95% of the population iWork is enough but for the business crowd they will need something more powerful.
I welcome Office for the iPad because, not only can competition be a good thing, but it would also help push the legitimacy of the iPad as the next PC. For all the hatred of Office (which is somewhat well-deserved) it is the standard and the most purchased app on the Mac. I'm sure MS is paying attention to iPad sales and they should know that they will make a killing off such a product. It would continually be in the top 5 of purchased app and the App Store would be a good way for preventing piracy.
If Apple isn't going to be on the ball migrating their apps then I can't cry foul on MS for doing the same. Sure, Apple's iWork is completely Cocoa but it's a new suite that started off as Cocoa so it's not a great argument in Apple's favour.
I have Office 2007 on my PC at work, and I actually like it a lot. I do not like the separate window that floats around in Office 2008 and Pages that pulls all the font/spacing/styles/margin/paragraph etc out of the top bar. Come to think of it, I bet theres a way to put all that stuff in the top menu in Office 2008 where it belongs.
The biggest challenge to using Office that it is so slow. Even on a Mac Pro, for crying out loud.
Startup takes forever, pagination is like watching paint dry.
I assume that it's all interpreted intermediate-code that MS compiles into native on Windows, but that's just a guess. I can not think of any other reason why everything takes so long.
I don't really care about 32-bit vs. 64. I'd rather just be able to get my work done today instead of having to finish it tomorrow
I have to agree with you here. It takes forever, and on a PC it loads and runs pretty zippy.
Why do the Windows and Mac versions look so different? It seems completely pointless to have one application that runs of two different platforms and not have identical visual functionality layout. They may have different colors and such but it seems ridiculous to have different layouts and different naming conventions.
Long time ago their was a good Mac word processor named MS Word 5 for Mac. Then Microsoft decided to absorb the MacBU back into MS's application division with the goal of developing both WIndows and Mac Word from the same code base, same look, same GUI. That abomination was called Word 6 for Mac.
It was big. It was slow. It was buggy. The college I was attending refused to support it because it was so bloated it had difficulty running on the campus macs and was so different in style that they needed to retrain students and staff on how to use it.
Nobody liked it and Microsoft eventually released the MacBU from their application division and let them do their mac thing. And people rejoiced.
I mean, seriously, who needs a 64-bit version of Office now?
This is the computer world's equivalent of Keeping Up with the Joneses. We don't need something, but gosh darn do we want it!
I can't help but recall back when I owned a computer store in England. 16 bit machines were making appearances and all the same talk went on the. "Who the hell needs 16 bit software? 8 bit is all you need for .... "
Long time ago their was a good Mac word processor named MS Word 5 for Mac. Then Microsoft decided to absorb the MacBU back into MS's application division with the goal of developing both WIndows and Mac Word from the same code base, same look, same GUI. That abomination was called Word 6 for Mac.
It was big. It was slow. It was buggy. The college I was attending refused to support it because it was so bloated it had difficulty running on the campus macs and was so different in style that they needed to retrain students and staff on how to use it.
Nobody liked it and Microsoft eventually released the MacBU from their application division and let them do their mac thing. And people rejoiced.
Be that as it may it still makes little sense. You would have thought they would merge the two over time to find a GUI that was acceptable to both Windows and Mac users. I remember jumping from Dreamweaver on Windows to Mac and being frustrated at the differences. Why not the same? Sure, stick to platform conventions but beyond that try to make them as damn near identical as possible. Just makes life easier for everybody.
I will remain with Office 2004 until it quits working. At that point it's OpenOffice time.
Too bad, you're missing out on iWork. It's a nice suite, and inexpensive. OOo is still kinda ugly, and it isn't as smooth. But, it is free, so that's nice.
This comment makes no sense to me at all.
First you make some arbitrary line between "big" and "small" documents when a more sensible line to draw is document complexity? Secondly, while there are fairly obviously some missing features in the initial offering of Pages on the iPad, those will almost certainly be filled in with the next release.
Finally, you end up with a plea for "Word lite" when in fact the current Pages offering on the iPad is basically that. It has flaws, it's not as full featured as the desktop version, etc.
It sounds to me like you just like or prefer Word. That's fine, but don't try to frame some silly argument that Pages is just for "lite" documents, and then turn around and ask for "Word lite."
It's nonsensical and just comes across as an insult.
First thing I said was about small docs or more complex larger docs. Did you read what I wrote?
MS interface has long been the kitchen sink version of a sucky WinWord GUI. Why do they feel this need to put everything in the front like a pawn shop (i.e. toolbar, ribbon and menus from hell)?
I actually prefer Pages for creating a document.
I find that in the business world (developing software and such) that I need to use Word. I have no desire to have that huge hunk of bloatware on my machines. I do however find it to be almost a requirement since there is so much of the world that has standardized on it.
The point I was trying to making was that preparing large (yes -- a subjective term, because it is not that easily quantified) and/or complex documents are not suited for creation on the iPad IMO. I would however, embrace the idea of an application that accurately rendered all Word documents, both cross platform and cross version, and then allowed me to mark up, do some limited editing, and comment on existing formatted content but not necessarily for the creation of complex/large docs.
I hear regularly that Pages will render 98% of a Word doc, or OpenOffice can handle all but a few MS Word features here and there. Until it can do it all it does not meet what I would like to have. Hell MS does not have a product AFAIKT that can translate all of even there latest version documents cross platform. It seems there is always some exception.
I never said Pages was a lite version of anything -- you did. I certainly did not plea for it but would be more than willing to use a product that met the requirements above. I am no lover of MS and would love to see Apple deliver with Pages in a version that would be able to read it all. It is a shame that MS got in and managed to play a part in the standardized XML format. It would have been nice to have had a platform agnostic file format.
As far as being an insult I think you must have some other interest here that I am not aware of since I made no disparaging remarks about Pages. WTF? Having a bad day are we?
Microsoft Office 2008 woes
Actually, I use Office 2008 for work every single day. Sadly, it is only because iWork doesn't do Office templates that well - at least well enough that I can pass them to the editor. What I put up with everyday is worse than any application I've ever paid money for: very few OSX keyboard shortcuts, horrid placement commands, tables, objects: everything moves of its own free will, 100% crap expose control (windows change at their whim), and many other problems.
32-bit, 64-bit, it doesn't matter. First, Microsoft just have to treat the Mac like a Mac, not like a Windows machine. If I could paste with no formatting via the ubiquitous alt-ctrl-shift-, that alone would save me probably an hour per day. Then if Expose transitions wouldn't plop me into another window altogether (only happens with this shyte suite of apps), it would be another 20-30 minutes saved.
Even if I could shift--s, it would be a huge 'hello'. The most embarassing thing, however is the dictionary which doesn't catch about 5/20 words I use to write middle-school English textbooks! Middle school! I can count on Office 2008 to fail about 40% of the time, to cause me lost time in almost every area, and to be a drag on all but template support.
Microsoft, who cares about 64-bit, just get your effins shyte soft working like an Apple app on the Mac. Right now, it is the WORST app I've ever bought on any platform.
I can feel your pain.. every time I use these apps I loose time shifting stuff around or some other clean-up jobs that isn't productive. It's a real time-waster and frustrating... and if I didn't have to use them I definately wouldn't.
I don't think MS will ever grasp how to make a sleek Office suite. They are in "more is better" land
Fail.
Give me a yell in a couple years when you finally get your act together, maybe I'll consider it then.
so what is the advantage of 64 bit that makes it so vital for a program like Office.
Why is MS's MacBU at WWDC? There are no Mac tracks at WWDC. It's all iOS.
thank you for playing but no. WWDC is not all iOS.
3 of the special events had nothing to do with iOS. One was by NASA, one by some folks at Pixar and one by CNN. The sessions and labs cover both iOS and MacOS. As is fitting since it is the DEVELOPERS Conference and not the iphone conference
so what is the advantage of 64 bit that makes it so vital for a program like Office.
More than 4GB of RAM for a spreadsheet? As previously noted by a poster who needs it for scientific data collection.
More than 4GB of RAM for a spreadsheet? As previously noted by a poster who needs it for scientific data collection.
That is specific to one person, even one small subset. Not something that everyone would need and thus the application is total shite.
Zing.
It certainly isn't fail. No one forced Microsoft to port Office to Mac (or now via Cocoa), they are doing it by their own graces, and having Office across both Windows and OS X benefits everyone.
That's not entirely true. Microsoft did initially decide on their own to make a Mac version of Word etc. But then were prevented from stopping due to a lawsuit. Actually a couple of them, from the early 90s. it's a big complex mess but in the end, Apple agreed to install IE as the Mac web browser for a set period of years and Microsoft agreed to keep updating Office for Mac. For the same period of time. Now it's a matter of keeping the inflow of money as many businesses are so engrained in Office that they don't want to relearn to switch to iWork.