MS got caught with their pants down on VPC. First the move to the G5s and then the surprise move to Intel. When they delivered on the G5 version they restricted it to supporting only 2000 and XP. Now Parallels comes along and supports all MS OS's as well as a raft of others. MS simply doesn't have the Mac oriented personnel to handle that conversion as well as Office, where the money is.
As far as VBA goes, what percent of the Office users use it? 3 - 5%? I think that's an easy decision when MBU is allocating their programmers to various tasks. The first priority is to get out a basic Universal Office, which is a tough road for them - probably close to a full rewrite.
That's just it. Microsoft cannot afford to lose billions on the Xbox. It is doing everything it knows to make a profit there. However, the Xbox cannot get any hotter than it is now, but it still loses money. When it cools off, where does Microsoft go.
They make virtually all of their profits on OS's and Office. They can afford to lose money elsewhere, or else they wouldn't be doing it, and still have the highest profitability in the software industry.
Quote:
Losing Mac sales is not Microsoft's strategy for mitigating losses elsewhere. Microsoft cuts its losses by dropping non-revenue generating products like Internet Explorer:mac and Windows Media Player:mac. The situation with Office:mac is a case of Microsoft's past sins catching up with it.
The contract with Apple is strictly PR. Microsoft produces Office:mac because it has a significant positive impact on Microsoft's bottomline.
The Mac BU has sales of about $300 - $400 million a year. that's a drop in the bucket for MS whose sales are over $50 billion a year. they could drop the entire BU, and not remember they did it.
MS got caught with their pants down on VPC. First the move to the G5s and then the surprise move to Intel. When they delivered on the G5 version they restricted it to supporting only 2000 and XP.
Not true. I'm running two flavours of Linux and WinNT4 on mine. I've ran Minix, BeOS and even DOS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kenaustus
As far as VBA goes, what percent of the Office users use it? 3 - 5%? I think that's an easy decision when MBU is allocating their programmers to various tasks. The first priority is to get out a basic Universal Office, which is a tough road for them - probably close to a full rewrite.
It really could do with a rewrite too.
Whilst I agree that only a small percentage of Office users use VBA, if the Windows version runs it and the Mac version doesn't then people won't buy the Mac version as they know some things will not work.
The Mac BU has sales of about $300 - $400 million a year. that's a drop in the bucket for MS whose sales are over $50 billion a year. they could drop the entire BU, and not remember they did it.
Didn't they roll the MacBU into the XBox division?
Perhaps that's how they're going to make the XBox division make money.
Does this mean it comes back to the OS version? Is VB available in OO 2.0 or NeoOffice?
Neither. It's available on SLED, Novell's Linux Enteprise Desktop, integrated into OpenOffice that ships with the product.
Not to derail the discussion but isn't the aim of OS such that if you add such a thing at VBA to OO that you need to make that available back to the community??? I'm still trying to understand the details of OS. Thanks in advance.
Not to derail the discussion but isn't the aim of OS such that if you add such a thing at VBA to OO that you need to make that available back to the community??? I'm still trying to understand the details of OS. Thanks in advance.
The other possibility is that Novell has a license from MS.
If in 5 years time Microsoft stopped developing the Mac version of Office. I don't think it would do a great deal of harm.
Apple have now got 5 years to develop the pants off of iWork and make it a really great suite (it looks like it's heading in the direction of greatness). iWork will eventually become the new 'Office' for Macs. Plus it would still include (and expand on) the .Doc/PDF/XML import, export options etc... Organizations who really 'needed' the vast range of MS Office features could simply buy the PC version and use the ole faithful Boot Camp or a virtualization solutions.
Well, iWork and MS Office have some significant differences in their approaches (and, thus, in the results). iWork is as thoroughly "KISS" as possible, whereas MS Office (and, surprise, also OpenOffice.org) tries to accommodate for every possible usage case, be it for the typical consumer or a homongous organization's user. iWork really only (or at least primarily) caters for the former, but it does so much better.
I'm still confident that we will see iWork expanded into a more complete suite, but it will never have the level of complexity Office has, and for good reason. It is this very simplicity that makes Apple's application design shine. They try to do just one thing, but do it well.
Albeit this is not 100% applicable in the case of enterprise software development (or perhaps this is precisely where software development is headed), but I once read something along the lines of:
"Perfection is not found at the point where you can no longer add any more, but at the point where there is nothing else to take away."
I've been a Windows user for 95% + of my life, and switched to a Mac last year with the purchase of a 17" Powerbook. To spare everyone from a review like praising of Apple, I'll simply say that simplicity is innovative. Again, I acknowledge that high-end capabilities and functionalities are a must for business, but we all know that Apple could surely create a program as robust as MS Office (Excel specifically), but with the ease of use to blow away any chance of MS recovery. If Apple has been secretly heading in this direction then bravo! If Apple has not, then it's time to get crackin'.
everyone forget about Crossover office? should be a beta out soon, and final relase out before new MS Office is out. Itll let you run the Windows version of office (and other apps) in OSX without having a copy of Windows.
Sweet. Pirate (Arrghh Mat13!!) MS Office 2007 (or when ever the hell it comes out), and run it on a purcha$ed copy of Crossover Office. Problem solved.
Albeit this is not 100% applicable in the case of enterprise software development (or perhaps this is precisely where software development is headed), but I once read something along the lines of:
"Perfection is not found at the point where you can no longer add any more, but at the point where there is nothing else to take away."
I've been a Windows user for 95% + of my life, and switched to a Mac last year with the purchase of a 17" Powerbook. To spare everyone from a review like praising of Apple, I'll simply say that simplicity is innovative. Again, I acknowledge that high-end capabilities and functionalities are a must for business, but we all know that Apple could surely create a program as robust as MS Office (Excel specifically), but with the ease of use to blow away any chance of MS recovery. If Apple has been secretly heading in this direction then bravo! If Apple has not, then it's time to get crackin'.
I was reading an article in ComputerWorld the other day about Office, and its competitors.
What they said is that while most users only use 20% of the features of Office, different users use a different 20%. That's what makes it so valuable. One suite can serve the needs of many populations of people.
Simpler programs can't do that.
There is also a large developer community out there making add-ons to the suite. Large companies have their own IT departments write custom software as well.
All of this must be overcome. One reason why Star Office, and its open source brother, OO, haven't made much of a dent is because they aren't compatible with most of these add-ons that these businesses require.
Apple will have that same problem, even if they do develop an alternative to Office, which, right now, at least publicly, they don't seem to be interested in.
Of course, in five years, if the Mac has gained decent marketshare, and the virtualizarion programs have gotten better, or perhaps CrossOver Office has, it won't matter. The Windows version might be all we need.
But, then MS wins there, and we lose.
How many other companies will look at that and think that they could do that as well?
What they said is that while most users only use 20% of the features of Office, different users use a different 20%. That's what makes it so valuable. One suite can serve the needs of many populations of people.
Quite possible. Every company I've ever worked for has given me a copy of Office despite me only having a need for Word for writing specs and tech docs. I've never used Powerpoint in my life and my Excel use could be described at best as fiddling about with CSV files or prototyping code before sticking them in an SQL Server database.
Quite possible. Every company I've ever worked for has given me a copy of Office despite me only having a need for Word for writing specs and tech docs. I've never used Powerpoint in my life and my Excel use could be described at best as fiddling about with CSV files or prototyping code before sticking them in an SQL Server database.
You can probably guess why I won't use Access.
So that probably counts for my 20% usage.
I'm the same way, though I tend to use InDesign for writing. I know that sounds backwards, but it's really no more of a problem than using a word processor.
Organizations who really 'needed' the vast range of MS Office features could simply buy the PC version and use the ole faithful Boot Camp or a virtualization solutions.
Therein lies the basic problem. Organisations are very unlikely to buy the PC version and run it on Macs. They will just buy PCs and run Office on them and a lot of people who used to be able to use Macs at home and PCs at work, including many potential switchers, no longer can without being slugged extra expense.
Therein lies the basic problem. Organisations are very unlikely to buy the PC version and run it on Macs. They will just buy PCs and run Office on them and a lot of people who used to be able to use Macs at home and PCs at work, including many potential switchers, no longer can without being slugged extra expense.
It is possible that companies will continue to do what they do now. If an employee needs Office to do work at home, they will give it to them. As long as they have paid for the seats, that's fine.
Therein lies the basic problem. Organisations are very unlikely to buy the PC version and run it on Macs. They will just buy PCs and run Office on them and a lot of people who used to be able to use Macs at home and PCs at work, including many potential switchers, no longer can without being slugged extra expense.
Sure they can. They can just steal Windows. Fuck you Microsoft, looks like the plan backfired. I bet tons of people here and out there steal Windows. Don't most people? I remember seeing a staggeringly high statistic. Same thing with Office. I myself plan on stealing Windows and Office and running it in Crossover. Whoops that was a typo, I meant I'm going to buy Windows XP, and Office, and Windows Vista. And Parallels or VMWare. Gee that's probably going to be more than my MacBook will cost. Yep but I'm going to buy it. Why? Microsoft deserves my hard-earned money, and I mean that, I've been working outside in 105 degree heat in jeans on a farm for a month, for 8.00 an hour, for a professor for research. I'm going to fork that money right over to Microsoft. Definitely not going to download it. No way.
I think MS's plan may backfire, with this as an example. Sometimes, when you charge a customer too much, or piss them off too much, you risk things like this. I think there will be a lot of illegal copies of Windows and Office on Macs. What a surprise. I hope this Genuine Advantage crap calms down or someone comes out with a hack for it.
Comments
Does this mean it comes back to the OS version? Is VB available in OO 2.0 or NeoOffice?
Neither. It's available on SLED, Novell's Linux Enteprise Desktop, integrated into OpenOffice that ships with the product.
OpenOffice.org, aka the-project-that-will-never-innovate?
Innovation is not always important or necessary.
As far as VBA goes, what percent of the Office users use it? 3 - 5%? I think that's an easy decision when MBU is allocating their programmers to various tasks. The first priority is to get out a basic Universal Office, which is a tough road for them - probably close to a full rewrite.
That's just it. Microsoft cannot afford to lose billions on the Xbox. It is doing everything it knows to make a profit there. However, the Xbox cannot get any hotter than it is now, but it still loses money. When it cools off, where does Microsoft go.
They make virtually all of their profits on OS's and Office. They can afford to lose money elsewhere, or else they wouldn't be doing it, and still have the highest profitability in the software industry.
Losing Mac sales is not Microsoft's strategy for mitigating losses elsewhere. Microsoft cuts its losses by dropping non-revenue generating products like Internet Explorer:mac and Windows Media Player:mac. The situation with Office:mac is a case of Microsoft's past sins catching up with it.
The contract with Apple is strictly PR. Microsoft produces Office:mac because it has a significant positive impact on Microsoft's bottomline.
The Mac BU has sales of about $300 - $400 million a year. that's a drop in the bucket for MS whose sales are over $50 billion a year. they could drop the entire BU, and not remember they did it.
MS got caught with their pants down on VPC. First the move to the G5s and then the surprise move to Intel. When they delivered on the G5 version they restricted it to supporting only 2000 and XP.
Not true. I'm running two flavours of Linux and WinNT4 on mine. I've ran Minix, BeOS and even DOS.
As far as VBA goes, what percent of the Office users use it? 3 - 5%? I think that's an easy decision when MBU is allocating their programmers to various tasks. The first priority is to get out a basic Universal Office, which is a tough road for them - probably close to a full rewrite.
It really could do with a rewrite too.
Whilst I agree that only a small percentage of Office users use VBA, if the Windows version runs it and the Mac version doesn't then people won't buy the Mac version as they know some things will not work.
The Mac BU has sales of about $300 - $400 million a year. that's a drop in the bucket for MS whose sales are over $50 billion a year. they could drop the entire BU, and not remember they did it.
Didn't they roll the MacBU into the XBox division?
Perhaps that's how they're going to make the XBox division make money.
Does this mean it comes back to the OS version? Is VB available in OO 2.0 or NeoOffice?
Neither. It's available on SLED, Novell's Linux Enteprise Desktop, integrated into OpenOffice that ships with the product.
Not to derail the discussion but isn't the aim of OS such that if you add such a thing at VBA to OO that you need to make that available back to the community??? I'm still trying to understand the details of OS. Thanks in advance.
Didn't they roll the MacBU into the XBox division?
Perhaps that's how they're going to make the XBox division make money.
Heh!
Drat, no more short pithy replies.
Not to derail the discussion but isn't the aim of OS such that if you add such a thing at VBA to OO that you need to make that available back to the community??? I'm still trying to understand the details of OS. Thanks in advance.
The other possibility is that Novell has a license from MS.
Apple have now got 5 years to develop the pants off of iWork and make it a really great suite (it looks like it's heading in the direction of greatness). iWork will eventually become the new 'Office' for Macs. Plus it would still include (and expand on) the .Doc/PDF/XML import, export options etc... Organizations who really 'needed' the vast range of MS Office features could simply buy the PC version and use the ole faithful Boot Camp or a virtualization solutions.
Well, iWork and MS Office have some significant differences in their approaches (and, thus, in the results). iWork is as thoroughly "KISS" as possible, whereas MS Office (and, surprise, also OpenOffice.org) tries to accommodate for every possible usage case, be it for the typical consumer or a homongous organization's user. iWork really only (or at least primarily) caters for the former, but it does so much better.
I'm still confident that we will see iWork expanded into a more complete suite, but it will never have the level of complexity Office has, and for good reason. It is this very simplicity that makes Apple's application design shine. They try to do just one thing, but do it well.
Albeit this is not 100% applicable in the case of enterprise software development (or perhaps this is precisely where software development is headed), but I once read something along the lines of:
"Perfection is not found at the point where you can no longer add any more, but at the point where there is nothing else to take away."
I've been a Windows user for 95% + of my life, and switched to a Mac last year with the purchase of a 17" Powerbook. To spare everyone from a review like praising of Apple, I'll simply say that simplicity is innovative. Again, I acknowledge that high-end capabilities and functionalities are a must for business, but we all know that Apple could surely create a program as robust as MS Office (Excel specifically), but with the ease of use to blow away any chance of MS recovery. If Apple has been secretly heading in this direction then bravo! If Apple has not, then it's time to get crackin'.
everyone forget about Crossover office? should be a beta out soon, and final relase out before new MS Office is out. Itll let you run the Windows version of office (and other apps) in OSX without having a copy of Windows.
Sweet. Pirate (Arrghh Mat13!!) MS Office 2007 (or when ever the hell it comes out), and run it on a purcha$ed copy of Crossover Office. Problem solved.
Albeit this is not 100% applicable in the case of enterprise software development (or perhaps this is precisely where software development is headed), but I once read something along the lines of:
"Perfection is not found at the point where you can no longer add any more, but at the point where there is nothing else to take away."
I've been a Windows user for 95% + of my life, and switched to a Mac last year with the purchase of a 17" Powerbook. To spare everyone from a review like praising of Apple, I'll simply say that simplicity is innovative. Again, I acknowledge that high-end capabilities and functionalities are a must for business, but we all know that Apple could surely create a program as robust as MS Office (Excel specifically), but with the ease of use to blow away any chance of MS recovery. If Apple has been secretly heading in this direction then bravo! If Apple has not, then it's time to get crackin'.
I was reading an article in ComputerWorld the other day about Office, and its competitors.
What they said is that while most users only use 20% of the features of Office, different users use a different 20%. That's what makes it so valuable. One suite can serve the needs of many populations of people.
Simpler programs can't do that.
There is also a large developer community out there making add-ons to the suite. Large companies have their own IT departments write custom software as well.
All of this must be overcome. One reason why Star Office, and its open source brother, OO, haven't made much of a dent is because they aren't compatible with most of these add-ons that these businesses require.
Apple will have that same problem, even if they do develop an alternative to Office, which, right now, at least publicly, they don't seem to be interested in.
Of course, in five years, if the Mac has gained decent marketshare, and the virtualizarion programs have gotten better, or perhaps CrossOver Office has, it won't matter. The Windows version might be all we need.
But, then MS wins there, and we lose.
How many other companies will look at that and think that they could do that as well?
What they said is that while most users only use 20% of the features of Office, different users use a different 20%. That's what makes it so valuable. One suite can serve the needs of many populations of people.
Quite possible. Every company I've ever worked for has given me a copy of Office despite me only having a need for Word for writing specs and tech docs. I've never used Powerpoint in my life and my Excel use could be described at best as fiddling about with CSV files or prototyping code before sticking them in an SQL Server database.
You can probably guess why I won't use Access.
So that probably counts for my 20% usage.
Quite possible. Every company I've ever worked for has given me a copy of Office despite me only having a need for Word for writing specs and tech docs. I've never used Powerpoint in my life and my Excel use could be described at best as fiddling about with CSV files or prototyping code before sticking them in an SQL Server database.
You can probably guess why I won't use Access.
So that probably counts for my 20% usage.
I'm the same way, though I tend to use InDesign for writing. I know that sounds backwards, but it's really no more of a problem than using a word processor.
Besides the fact the lack of a spell check in CS!
I'm not sure I know what you mean. I use Apple's.
Organizations who really 'needed' the vast range of MS Office features could simply buy the PC version and use the ole faithful Boot Camp or a virtualization solutions.
Therein lies the basic problem. Organisations are very unlikely to buy the PC version and run it on Macs. They will just buy PCs and run Office on them and a lot of people who used to be able to use Macs at home and PCs at work, including many potential switchers, no longer can without being slugged extra expense.
Therein lies the basic problem. Organisations are very unlikely to buy the PC version and run it on Macs. They will just buy PCs and run Office on them and a lot of people who used to be able to use Macs at home and PCs at work, including many potential switchers, no longer can without being slugged extra expense.
It is possible that companies will continue to do what they do now. If an employee needs Office to do work at home, they will give it to them. As long as they have paid for the seats, that's fine.
Therein lies the basic problem. Organisations are very unlikely to buy the PC version and run it on Macs. They will just buy PCs and run Office on them and a lot of people who used to be able to use Macs at home and PCs at work, including many potential switchers, no longer can without being slugged extra expense.
Sure they can. They can just steal Windows. Fuck you Microsoft, looks like the plan backfired. I bet tons of people here and out there steal Windows. Don't most people? I remember seeing a staggeringly high statistic. Same thing with Office. I myself plan on stealing Windows and Office and running it in Crossover. Whoops that was a typo, I meant I'm going to buy Windows XP, and Office, and Windows Vista. And Parallels or VMWare. Gee that's probably going to be more than my MacBook will cost. Yep but I'm going to buy it. Why? Microsoft deserves my hard-earned money, and I mean that, I've been working outside in 105 degree heat in jeans on a farm for a month, for 8.00 an hour, for a professor for research. I'm going to fork that money right over to Microsoft. Definitely not going to download it. No way.
I think MS's plan may backfire, with this as an example. Sometimes, when you charge a customer too much, or piss them off too much, you risk things like this. I think there will be a lot of illegal copies of Windows and Office on Macs. What a surprise. I hope this Genuine Advantage crap calms down or someone comes out with a hack for it.