Microsoft realizes ODF is here to stay and that OpenOffice 3.0 Cocoa is a viable threat to their Mac Business Unit.
I expect to see iWork offer something to truly keep it worth using and also compliment using OpenOffice 3.x.
Is it just me or is there someone else that really doesn't give a hoot about ODF or OpenOffice? iWork kicks it's ass all over the place since OpenOffice is really in its heart just an Office wannabe.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
Years ago Microsoft bought out VirtualPC from Connectix and killed it. Why they have or haven't done a Intel version, who knows? Then again, when Microsoft buys a company we know their history.
They'd probably make more money making Virtual Mac for the PC
No. The problem is a total of 3 people will bother to download, install, and use IE for Mac if ever they do develop and release it.
It would be useful if it remained just as bad and they released it for the Mac. Then I could test web sites in it on the Mac to find what it can't handle correctly without having to run VMWare. It would save me tons of time.
Years ago Microsoft bought out VirtualPC from Connectix and killed it. Why they have or haven't done a Intel version, who knows? Then again, when Microsoft buys a company we know their history.
The didn't kill it, they continued to produce it. They didn't really updated it for the G5 and the Intel switch made it sort redundant. VPC for the Mac was emulation software that emulated x86 hardware on the PPC hardware. If they do a version for Intel, it would be virtualization software.
MS also took the expertise and tech and continues to produce VirtualPC and VirtualServer for Windows host machines. You can run these one you Mac (assuming you boot into Windows)
Is it just me or is there someone else that really doesn't give a hoot about ODF or OpenOffice? iWork kicks it's ass all over the place since OpenOffice is really in its heart just an Office wannabe.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
I agree and you can open almost any file from Office on a Mac these days and that was one useful thing about Open Office a few years ago I now no longer need it for.
Meanwhile although I have used all Apple Pro apps for business these last few years I am finding more and more the iLife and now the iWorks apps are doing stuff I am totally amazed at.
I also think Apple would be wise to include iWorks with Macs for free as they do iLife and also upgrade both at a lower price instead of having to pay full price each upgrade. These suits could be crucial to continuing growth of Macs.
Keeping the user base on the latest version has huge advantages and free apps with low cost updates are the only way to ensure that. I don't say this as I object to the very low costs but because many others simply don't upgrade. One of MS's mistakes (just one mentioned here folks) has been almost encouraging users to stay with old versions of everything due to high cost of updating. Ultimately making an anchor around their own necks.
The didn't kill it, they continued to produce it. They didn't really updated it for the G5 and the Intel switch made it sort redundant. VPC for the Mac was emulation software that emulated x86 hardware on the PPC hardware. If they do a version for Intel, it would be virtualization software.
MS also took the expertise and tech and continues to produce VirtualPC and VirtualServer for Windows host machines. You can run these one you Mac (assuming you boot into Windows)
You are right of course but remember people often get virtualization and emulation mixed. What they mean obviously is ability to run Windows on a Mac ... the technicalities are not important to them.
Actually, Microsoft probably could make more money on the Mac than Windows, if they actually started porting more of their games and software to the Mac. Alot of sales of Halo 2, Halo 3, etc. could be made on the Mac. They probably make more money on MS-Office for the Mac than MS-Office for the PC, not in total sales, but per computer.
Um... but MS doesn't care about total sales per computer, they care about total sales. And if they make 2 times as much sales per computer on each Mac as on each PC, that's a very small drop in the bucket considering that the software they write, they write once and sell as many times as they can. So $100 per PC is worth a tiny bit more than $200 per Mac. TINY bit.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
It's called Outlook, with all its hooks into Exchange Server features that are not available on any other application. Not even Entourage for Macs. People can sit around thumbing their noses and saying stuff like "If the company chose a different server they wouldn't have these problems". But what's done is done. Crying over spilled milk does nothing to help Macs gain more acceptance in the workplace. If Macs are not compatible with the company's established applications, then it will be the Macs that get blamed for the problems. I have already seen so-called "IT professionals" blaming Apple for all the limitations in Microsoft Entourage. I have also seen end users who were willing to buy a Mac for the first time but after using Entourage, these new Mac users also start blaming Apple for all the crippleware issues.
You are right of course but remember people often get virtualization and emulation mixed. What they mean obviously is ability to run Windows on a Mac ... the technicalities are not important to them.
It's called Outlook, with all its hooks into Exchange Server features that are not available on any other application. Not even Entourage for Macs. People can sit around thumbing their noses and saying stuff like "If the company chose a different server they wouldn't have these problems". But what's done is done. Crying over spilled milk does nothing to help Macs gain more acceptance in the workplace. If Macs are not compatible with the company's established applications, then it will be the Macs that get blamed for the problems. I have already seen so-called "IT professionals" blaming Apple for all the limitations in Microsoft Entourage. I have also seen end users who were willing to buy a Mac for the first time but after using Entourage, these new Mac users also start blaming Apple for all the crippleware issues.
This would seem to be being addressed in Snow Leopard though with Mail/Addressbook/iCal syncing with Exchange. Apple seem to have realised that Microsoft isn't going to do it with Entourage so they're doing it themselves.
I'm with vinea also over OpenOffice too. iWork DOES kick it's ass and the only time I use OpenOffice now is when someone sends me an ODF file. An open format like ODF is a very good idea but unfortunately the tools to use it so far have been extremely bad on the Mac. It's generally as unpleasant to work with as MS Office unlike iWork which I find a total joy, much like I enjoyed Lotus SmartSuite instead of Office97 back in the day.
I'm really looking forward to iWork '09 or '10. I think that's when Apple will really hit it's stride v Office and surpass it in almost all the areas that people still cling to Office for. I'm also hoping they do some kind of Framemaker style app. Apple's docs teams are still using Framemaker on Classic Mac OS - that's got to be an itch they'd want to scratch.
Is it just me or is there someone else that really doesn't give a hoot about ODF or OpenOffice? iWork kicks it's ass all over the place since OpenOffice is really in its heart just an Office wannabe.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
Among people for whom that sort of productivity is a regular part of their work flow, I suppose Keynote may be an asset. Personally, I've never used it, so I cannot comment on that.
For me personally, given how infrequently I need that sort of thing, I couldn't give a rat's a$$ about the differences between Keynote, PowerPoint, Impress, or (except for the need to be able to occasionally import others' work) even HyperCard.
OpenOffice.org has all the functionality I need in an office suite, including adequate compatibility with the sorts of MS Office documents I need to process on a daily basis. I've never needed to seek help to figure out how to use a feature in OpenOffice.org, and I don't have to pay for it unless I want to. Sold.
List of things MS has taken away from the Mac folk (presumably because the Mac team was incompetent because nobody would accept that it was done out of malevolence to the Mac platform).
Internet Explorer (this one actually helped Apple gain dominance with Safari on the Mac)
Media Player (this app was utter garbage)
VirtualPC (bought and dropped, thanks mofos)
Bungie (bought and dropped, years later a port house finally secured the right to port Halo to Mac)
A fast Office (the latest Office makes me wonder if MS is for real or if they're inviting people to switch to iWork)
I know I'm missing lots of things in this list...I think this list should probably twice as big as this one but these are just the things that came to my mind when I was writing this post.
Now they're hiring to bring new products? Fuck you MS...fuck you very much.
OpenOffice.org has all the functionality I need in an office suite, including adequate compatibility with the sorts of MS Office documents I need to process on a daily basis. I've never needed to seek help to figure out how to use a feature in OpenOffice.org, and I don't have to pay for it unless I want to. Sold.
My experience of OpenOffice is that it's slow, ugly and doesn't work very well as a Mac application - even worse than Microsoft Office in that regard.
On the other hand, iWork is the least buggy, has a better interface, fantastic layout tools, integrates well with the iLife apps and the OS. I happily paid for it (multiple times now I guess) because it saves me a lot more time than I'd waste on the free software alternative.
Um... but MS doesn't care about total sales per computer, they care about total sales. And if they make 2 times as much sales per computer on each Mac as on each PC, that's a very small drop in the bucket considering that the software they write, they write once and sell as many times as they can. So $100 per PC is worth a tiny bit more than $200 per Mac. TINY bit.
Do you have a point?
The previous poster stated that Microsoft made more on Mac sales than on PC sales. You confirmed that.
If this is true, simple math will show that the greater the number of Macs, the greater Microsoft's total revenues. So increasing Mac sales would be good for Microsoft.
Am I the only one that sees this as a way better alternative to Apple and Microsoft competing with each other? It's nice to see Microsoft taking Apple seriously, wanting to work with them. it would be nicer if Apple finally dropped the jabs (even in good fun) and did the same, respecting one of their biggest partners despite the history that led them both to where they are now.
Hello, I'm the 1990s, I'm dead. Please move on without me.
They gave 'em iTunes and Safari - not a bad swap for Orifice 2008
Much better idea: hyper-active and jittery programmers won't like delays cause by bloated code, may actually work to cure these ills.
Judging by Office 2004 (which I use) and Office 2008 (about which I've heard bad things concerning operational speed), they must have been giving the Mac Business Unit at M$ free doses of seconal or animal tranquilizers in order for them to tolerate the lack of speed.
Years ago Microsoft bought out VirtualPC from Connectix and killed it. Why they have or haven't done a Intel version, who knows? Then again, when Microsoft buys a company we know their history.
Actually, you could say Apple killed VirtualPC. Since Apple went Intel, VirtualPC became obsolete. As well products like Bootcamp, Parallels, Crossfire, Cider, etc. made it obsolete.
Comments
Native ODF 1.2 full compatibility/compliance.
Microsoft realizes ODF is here to stay and that OpenOffice 3.0 Cocoa is a viable threat to their Mac Business Unit.
I expect to see iWork offer something to truly keep it worth using and also compliment using OpenOffice 3.x.
Is it just me or is there someone else that really doesn't give a hoot about ODF or OpenOffice? iWork kicks it's ass all over the place since OpenOffice is really in its heart just an Office wannabe.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
No. The problem is a total of 3 people will bother to download, install, and use IE for Mac if ever they do develop and release it.
True dat.
Years ago Microsoft bought out VirtualPC from Connectix and killed it. Why they have or haven't done a Intel version, who knows? Then again, when Microsoft buys a company we know their history.
They'd probably make more money making Virtual Mac for the PC
Seriously they'd never come close to VMWare.
No. The problem is a total of 3 people will bother to download, install, and use IE for Mac if ever they do develop and release it.
It would be useful if it remained just as bad and they released it for the Mac. Then I could test web sites in it on the Mac to find what it can't handle correctly without having to run VMWare. It would save me tons of time.
Years ago Microsoft bought out VirtualPC from Connectix and killed it. Why they have or haven't done a Intel version, who knows? Then again, when Microsoft buys a company we know their history.
The didn't kill it, they continued to produce it. They didn't really updated it for the G5 and the Intel switch made it sort redundant. VPC for the Mac was emulation software that emulated x86 hardware on the PPC hardware. If they do a version for Intel, it would be virtualization software.
MS also took the expertise and tech and continues to produce VirtualPC and VirtualServer for Windows host machines. You can run these one you Mac (assuming you boot into Windows)
Is it just me or is there someone else that really doesn't give a hoot about ODF or OpenOffice? iWork kicks it's ass all over the place since OpenOffice is really in its heart just an Office wannabe.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
I agree and you can open almost any file from Office on a Mac these days and that was one useful thing about Open Office a few years ago I now no longer need it for.
Meanwhile although I have used all Apple Pro apps for business these last few years I am finding more and more the iLife and now the iWorks apps are doing stuff I am totally amazed at.
I also think Apple would be wise to include iWorks with Macs for free as they do iLife and also upgrade both at a lower price instead of having to pay full price each upgrade. These suits could be crucial to continuing growth of Macs.
Keeping the user base on the latest version has huge advantages and free apps with low cost updates are the only way to ensure that. I don't say this as I object to the very low costs but because many others simply don't upgrade. One of MS's mistakes (just one mentioned here folks) has been almost encouraging users to stay with old versions of everything due to high cost of updating. Ultimately making an anchor around their own necks.
The didn't kill it, they continued to produce it. They didn't really updated it for the G5 and the Intel switch made it sort redundant. VPC for the Mac was emulation software that emulated x86 hardware on the PPC hardware. If they do a version for Intel, it would be virtualization software.
MS also took the expertise and tech and continues to produce VirtualPC and VirtualServer for Windows host machines. You can run these one you Mac (assuming you boot into Windows)
You are right of course but remember people often get virtualization and emulation mixed. What they mean obviously is ability to run Windows on a Mac ... the technicalities are not important to them.
Actually, Microsoft probably could make more money on the Mac than Windows, if they actually started porting more of their games and software to the Mac. Alot of sales of Halo 2, Halo 3, etc. could be made on the Mac. They probably make more money on MS-Office for the Mac than MS-Office for the PC, not in total sales, but per computer.
Um... but MS doesn't care about total sales per computer, they care about total sales. And if they make 2 times as much sales per computer on each Mac as on each PC, that's a very small drop in the bucket considering that the software they write, they write once and sell as many times as they can. So $100 per PC is worth a tiny bit more than $200 per Mac. TINY bit.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
It's called Outlook, with all its hooks into Exchange Server features that are not available on any other application. Not even Entourage for Macs. People can sit around thumbing their noses and saying stuff like "If the company chose a different server they wouldn't have these problems". But what's done is done. Crying over spilled milk does nothing to help Macs gain more acceptance in the workplace. If Macs are not compatible with the company's established applications, then it will be the Macs that get blamed for the problems. I have already seen so-called "IT professionals" blaming Apple for all the limitations in Microsoft Entourage. I have also seen end users who were willing to buy a Mac for the first time but after using Entourage, these new Mac users also start blaming Apple for all the crippleware issues.
So no one is going to rip me a new asshole over 'Publisher for the Mac'? (Post #8)
What's happened to this forum?
OK, you have your new asshole, I'll have a new arsehole for 'IE8 for the Mac'.
OK, you have your new asshole, I'll have a new arsehole for 'IE8 for the Mac'.
ohhh - what the heck, while I'm at it.
<rrriiiippp>
There's your one ....
Anyone else ?
You are right of course but remember people often get virtualization and emulation mixed. What they mean obviously is ability to run Windows on a Mac ... the technicalities are not important to them.
About VPC7 for the Mac;
http://www.macworld.com/article/4179...irtualpc7.html
and from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Virtual_PC
One could always use VirtualBox, as I do for Intel Macs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VirtualBox
It's called Outlook, with all its hooks into Exchange Server features that are not available on any other application. Not even Entourage for Macs. People can sit around thumbing their noses and saying stuff like "If the company chose a different server they wouldn't have these problems". But what's done is done. Crying over spilled milk does nothing to help Macs gain more acceptance in the workplace. If Macs are not compatible with the company's established applications, then it will be the Macs that get blamed for the problems. I have already seen so-called "IT professionals" blaming Apple for all the limitations in Microsoft Entourage. I have also seen end users who were willing to buy a Mac for the first time but after using Entourage, these new Mac users also start blaming Apple for all the crippleware issues.
This would seem to be being addressed in Snow Leopard though with Mail/Addressbook/iCal syncing with Exchange. Apple seem to have realised that Microsoft isn't going to do it with Entourage so they're doing it themselves.
I'm with vinea also over OpenOffice too. iWork DOES kick it's ass and the only time I use OpenOffice now is when someone sends me an ODF file. An open format like ODF is a very good idea but unfortunately the tools to use it so far have been extremely bad on the Mac. It's generally as unpleasant to work with as MS Office unlike iWork which I find a total joy, much like I enjoyed Lotus SmartSuite instead of Office97 back in the day.
I'm really looking forward to iWork '09 or '10. I think that's when Apple will really hit it's stride v Office and surpass it in almost all the areas that people still cling to Office for. I'm also hoping they do some kind of Framemaker style app. Apple's docs teams are still using Framemaker on Classic Mac OS - that's got to be an itch they'd want to scratch.
Is it just me or is there someone else that really doesn't give a hoot about ODF or OpenOffice? iWork kicks it's ass all over the place since OpenOffice is really in its heart just an Office wannabe.
It's called Keynote. THAT's what makes iWork worth using a gazillion times over OpenOffice.
Among people for whom that sort of productivity is a regular part of their work flow, I suppose Keynote may be an asset. Personally, I've never used it, so I cannot comment on that.
For me personally, given how infrequently I need that sort of thing, I couldn't give a rat's a$$ about the differences between Keynote, PowerPoint, Impress, or (except for the need to be able to occasionally import others' work) even HyperCard.
OpenOffice.org has all the functionality I need in an office suite, including adequate compatibility with the sorts of MS Office documents I need to process on a daily basis. I've never needed to seek help to figure out how to use a feature in OpenOffice.org, and I don't have to pay for it unless I want to. Sold.
Internet Explorer (this one actually helped Apple gain dominance with Safari on the Mac)
Media Player (this app was utter garbage)
VirtualPC (bought and dropped, thanks mofos)
Bungie (bought and dropped, years later a port house finally secured the right to port Halo to Mac)
A fast Office (the latest Office makes me wonder if MS is for real or if they're inviting people to switch to iWork)
I know I'm missing lots of things in this list...I think this list should probably twice as big as this one but these are just the things that came to my mind when I was writing this post.
Now they're hiring to bring new products? Fuck you MS...fuck you very much.
OpenOffice.org has all the functionality I need in an office suite, including adequate compatibility with the sorts of MS Office documents I need to process on a daily basis. I've never needed to seek help to figure out how to use a feature in OpenOffice.org, and I don't have to pay for it unless I want to. Sold.
My experience of OpenOffice is that it's slow, ugly and doesn't work very well as a Mac application - even worse than Microsoft Office in that regard.
On the other hand, iWork is the least buggy, has a better interface, fantastic layout tools, integrates well with the iLife apps and the OS. I happily paid for it (multiple times now I guess) because it saves me a lot more time than I'd waste on the free software alternative.
Um... but MS doesn't care about total sales per computer, they care about total sales. And if they make 2 times as much sales per computer on each Mac as on each PC, that's a very small drop in the bucket considering that the software they write, they write once and sell as many times as they can. So $100 per PC is worth a tiny bit more than $200 per Mac. TINY bit.
Do you have a point?
The previous poster stated that Microsoft made more on Mac sales than on PC sales. You confirmed that.
If this is true, simple math will show that the greater the number of Macs, the greater Microsoft's total revenues. So increasing Mac sales would be good for Microsoft.
Am I the only one that sees this as a way better alternative to Apple and Microsoft competing with each other? It's nice to see Microsoft taking Apple seriously, wanting to work with them. it would be nicer if Apple finally dropped the jabs (even in good fun) and did the same, respecting one of their biggest partners despite the history that led them both to where they are now.
Hello, I'm the 1990s, I'm dead. Please move on without me.
They gave 'em iTunes and Safari - not a bad swap for Orifice 2008
Judging by Office 2004 (which I use) and Office 2008 (about which I've heard bad things concerning operational speed), they must have been giving the Mac Business Unit at M$ free doses of seconal or animal tranquilizers in order for them to tolerate the lack of speed.
Years ago Microsoft bought out VirtualPC from Connectix and killed it. Why they have or haven't done a Intel version, who knows? Then again, when Microsoft buys a company we know their history.
Actually, you could say Apple killed VirtualPC. Since Apple went Intel, VirtualPC became obsolete. As well products like Bootcamp, Parallels, Crossfire, Cider, etc. made it obsolete.