It may be a RAM issue. I have Beta 6 and 8 gigs of RAM, and the whole office suite just zips along.
I agree, 2GB of RAM is the bare minimum needed for the OS to really operate I think. Start running more than one app on top of that and it gets slow. The fact the Quad Core Mac Pro only has 3GB is stupid when the laptops and imacs have 4GB. Put at least 6 in the quad core, and 12GB in the 8 and 12 core. Minimum.
I still need to use Office on both Mac and PC, but that video was incredibly poor and made non-compelling arguments.
The best they can come up with is "well, it's faster", there's a nicer interface for reordering layers and there's a better read mode for Word"? THAT'S IT?? It had better be a lot more than that. I am looking forward to using Outlook on the Mac instead of Entourage. I'm hoping sync works better. In Word, I'm far less concerned about a fancy UI to reorder layers than I am with the fact that it's almost impossible to drop an image exactly where you want it. And that the built-in format defaults for such things as text boxes are absurd. And that while Styles was improved from previous versions, it's still convoluted and frequently does things you wouldn't expect.
The ribbon interface doesn't bother me (it did at first, but I got used to it) except that in Office 2007 for Windows, you can't add any functions to the toolbar. I used to add such things as crossout and lower caps formatting in Word and Excel and additional default borders in Excel.
hate to disappoint you but Outlook is as slow and clunky as entourage was, sync is slow. now there are some features you may like but it comes as such a high price in speed that i stopped using it and went back to mac mail.
I've just never heard of access being used except in legacy systems. I didn't think it was something MS was actively developing, but just keeping around for the sake of backwards compatibility.
Perhaps I've been working with MySQL and Oracle for too long Apologies if I offended you.
Well Access has been updated regularly. The newest version 2010, includes compatibility with SharePoint which is used by many local government organizations. It is quite the Windows-centric product with a lot of compatibility amongst the other Windows Office products.
The Mac is lacking in a quick desktop SQL database other than some quirky unknown applications that may be gone without notice tomorrow. Filemaker is not SQL. Access is a nice tool when used as a front end to MS SQL on a local network as it is really easy to build GUIs and output reports.
Sure, MySql and Oracle are great tools for performance database deployments however legacy or not, there is nothing quite as convenient for desktop DB applications as Access, especially not on a Mac as there is nothing comparable.
maybe my requirements aren't heavy enough, but I've switched to iWork for company use here and I don't care what M$ releases anymore. Ridiculous prices for horrible bloatware.
Open Office sucks. It's like going back to Office 97 or something. I love the ribbon bar of Office 2007 for Windows. I am probably going to get my wife to get the Academic version Office 2011...
Open Office sucks. It's like going back to Office 97 or something. I love the ribbon bar of Office 2007 for Windows. I am probably going to get my wife to get the Academic version Office 2011...
Correct, it's like a version of MS office without all the slow bloat and annoying new features and changes that get made just for the sake of change. If you haven't tried open office lately, definitely check it out. It's so much faster than it used to be. I agree it's not pretty. But it's just as functional and free.
Correct, it's like a version of MS office without all the slow bloat and annoying new features and changes that get made just for the sake of change. If you haven't tried open office lately, definitely check it out. It's so much faster than it used to be. I agree it's not pretty. But it's just as functional and free.
I have used it and hated it. Like going back in a time machine. I tried to make labels with it and got disgusted with it and quit. I downloaded the trial to Office 2008 and had them made in 10 minutes. Free does not always equal good.
I have used it and hated it. Like going back in a time machine. I tried to make labels with it and got disgusted with it and quit. I downloaded the trial to Office 2008 and had them made in 10 minutes. Free does not always equal good.
i thought you just said you loved the ribbon on windows? no ribbon on office 2008 for the mac. and the ribbon on 2011 isn't identical to office 2010 for win.
for some people open office doesn't 'do it'. if you work on across win, apple, linux distro, the OO is just fine (when text editor won't do lol).
i have the OEM copy and 8 gigs of ram on a mac pro and it is horribly slow with Outlook using exchange 2007.
i will install it on my imac which has a newer processor and see if it is any better...
YMMV, however, I have one of the new quad core i7 iMacs with 8 GB of RAM, and there is no slowness whatsoever. The whole suite just zips along. This was/is not the case with 2008, which is still sluggish on the iMac.
It also runs great on my 2009 MBP with 4 GB of RAM
I have used it and hated it. Like going back in a time machine. I tried to make labels with it and got disgusted with it and quit. I downloaded the trial to Office 2008 and had them made in 10 minutes. Free does not always equal good.
Amen, You are correct!
Well, I'm sure things like Open Office, iWork, NeoOffice, work fine for some folks. Unfortunately for me (and millions of others), I would never take the chance of sending a file that does not open properly or that is formatted wrong to a client..
Like it or not most of the corporate world operates in the Office ecosystem . I'm sure the alternatives are fine for personal use or for a small group that doesn't have interact with anyone besides themselves, but not for anyone serious with doing interactive business.
YMMV, however, I have one of the new quad core i7 iMacs with 8 GB of RAM, and there is no slowness whatsoever. The whole suite just zips along. This was/is not the case with 2008, which is still sluggish on the iMac.
It also runs great on my 2009 MBP with 4 GB of RAM
I would venture a guess that 2GB of RAM (previous poster's spec) is insufficient not only for Office, but for many a great deal of other applications. I use Aperture a lot and usually have Mail and Safari in the background. Looking at Activity Monitor, I can see that those 3 programs plus Mac OS X itself pretty much chew up 2GB. Throw in Office and you've exceeded what's available in terms of physical memory.
The other important note is that Office 2008 included legacy code that requires the Rosetta layer to translate PPC to Intel. There's a slight performance hit there. Microsoft has now said that Office 2011 will only run on Intel, which means that all of the legacy code has been stripped out, so it's no wonder that it will run faster on Intel hardware as opposed to Office 2008, provided that you have sufficient memory available.
I would venture a guess that 2GB of RAM (previous poster's spec) is insufficient not only for Office, but for many a great deal of other applications. I use Aperture a lot and usually have Mail and Safari in the background. Looking at Activity Monitor, I can see that those 3 programs plus Mac OS X itself pretty much chew up 2GB. Throw in Office and you've exceeded what's available in terms of physical memory.
The other important note is that Office 2008 included legacy code that requires the Rosetta layer to translate PPC to Intel. There's a slight performance hit there. Microsoft has now said that Office 2011 will only run on Intel, which means that all of the legacy code has been stripped out, so it's no wonder that it will run faster on Intel hardware as opposed to Office 2008, provided that you have sufficient memory available.
i just installed it on my imac, which is newer than my work mac pro, and i will say that it seems a bit 'snappier' than 2008 regarding word, excel, pp. But it took 2 hours to sync outlook at the office on a fast lan. will sync from home and see how long it takes. outlook at the office was not snappy at all. it does have some neat features but was so sluggish that i stopped using it. will give it a try here at home with better processor and see if i can stomach using it.
maybe my requirements aren't heavy enough, but I've switched to iWork for company use here and I don't care what M$ releases anymore. Ridiculous prices for horrible bloatware.
It's MS now not M$, didn't you get the memo? Apple passed them in MC and we all agreed not to use $ anymore since MS is on the way down the tubes. Otherwise, totally agree with you
i just installed it on my imac, which is newer than my work mac pro, and i will say that it seems a bit 'snappier' than 2008 regarding word, excel, pp. But it took 2 hours to sync outlook at the office on a fast lan. will sync from home and see how long it takes. outlook at the office was not snappy at all. it does have some neat features but was so sluggish that i stopped using it. will give it a try here at home with better processor and see if i can stomach using it.
something is definitely wrong then, as it shouldn't take that long to sync at all. I was reading somewhere that Outlook does not support 2003 Server, so that may be an issue.
Well, I'm sure things like Open Office, iWork, NeoOffice, work fine for some folks. Unfortunately for me (and millions of others), I would never take the chance of sending a file that does not open properly or that is formatted wrong to a client..
Like it or not most of the corporate world operates in the Office ecosystem . I'm sure the alternatives are fine for personal use or for a small group that doesn't have interact with anyone besides themselves, but not for anyone serious with doing interactive business.
Keep a copy of this post and check back in a decade. I suspect MS Office will be another memory as well written, intuitive, collaborative web apps that are totally cloud based replace it. They won't be MS IMHO.
Comments
It may be a RAM issue. I have Beta 6 and 8 gigs of RAM, and the whole office suite just zips along.
I agree, 2GB of RAM is the bare minimum needed for the OS to really operate I think. Start running more than one app on top of that and it gets slow. The fact the Quad Core Mac Pro only has 3GB is stupid when the laptops and imacs have 4GB. Put at least 6 in the quad core, and 12GB in the 8 and 12 core. Minimum.
I still need to use Office on both Mac and PC, but that video was incredibly poor and made non-compelling arguments.
The best they can come up with is "well, it's faster", there's a nicer interface for reordering layers and there's a better read mode for Word"? THAT'S IT?? It had better be a lot more than that. I am looking forward to using Outlook on the Mac instead of Entourage. I'm hoping sync works better. In Word, I'm far less concerned about a fancy UI to reorder layers than I am with the fact that it's almost impossible to drop an image exactly where you want it. And that the built-in format defaults for such things as text boxes are absurd. And that while Styles was improved from previous versions, it's still convoluted and frequently does things you wouldn't expect.
The ribbon interface doesn't bother me (it did at first, but I got used to it) except that in Office 2007 for Windows, you can't add any functions to the toolbar. I used to add such things as crossout and lower caps formatting in Word and Excel and additional default borders in Excel.
hate to disappoint you but Outlook is as slow and clunky as entourage was, sync is slow. now there are some features you may like but it comes as such a high price in speed that i stopped using it and went back to mac mail.
It may be a RAM issue. I have Beta 6 and 8 gigs of RAM, and the whole office suite just zips along.
i have the OEM copy and 8 gigs of ram on a mac pro and it is horribly slow with Outlook using exchange 2007.
i will install it on my imac which has a newer processor and see if it is any better...
No thanks...I love Pages!
other than outlook 2011 (i was so hoping it would be well done) i have no interest in Office or apple's 'office' products. i like open office....
I've just never heard of access being used except in legacy systems. I didn't think it was something MS was actively developing, but just keeping around for the sake of backwards compatibility.
Perhaps I've been working with MySQL and Oracle for too long
Well Access has been updated regularly. The newest version 2010, includes compatibility with SharePoint which is used by many local government organizations. It is quite the Windows-centric product with a lot of compatibility amongst the other Windows Office products.
The Mac is lacking in a quick desktop SQL database other than some quirky unknown applications that may be gone without notice tomorrow. Filemaker is not SQL. Access is a nice tool when used as a front end to MS SQL on a local network as it is really easy to build GUIs and output reports.
Sure, MySql and Oracle are great tools for performance database deployments however legacy or not, there is nothing quite as convenient for desktop DB applications as Access, especially not on a Mac as there is nothing comparable.
http://www.openoffice.org/
It's free, and just as good.
Forget MS Office people, use OpenOffice!
http://www.openoffice.org/
It's free, and just as good.
Open Office sucks. It's like going back to Office 97 or something. I love the ribbon bar of Office 2007 for Windows. I am probably going to get my wife to get the Academic version Office 2011...
Open Office sucks. It's like going back to Office 97 or something. I love the ribbon bar of Office 2007 for Windows. I am probably going to get my wife to get the Academic version Office 2011...
Correct, it's like a version of MS office without all the slow bloat and annoying new features and changes that get made just for the sake of change. If you haven't tried open office lately, definitely check it out. It's so much faster than it used to be. I agree it's not pretty. But it's just as functional and free.
Correct, it's like a version of MS office without all the slow bloat and annoying new features and changes that get made just for the sake of change. If you haven't tried open office lately, definitely check it out. It's so much faster than it used to be. I agree it's not pretty. But it's just as functional and free.
I have used it and hated it. Like going back in a time machine. I tried to make labels with it and got disgusted with it and quit. I downloaded the trial to Office 2008 and had them made in 10 minutes. Free does not always equal good.
I have used it and hated it. Like going back in a time machine. I tried to make labels with it and got disgusted with it and quit. I downloaded the trial to Office 2008 and had them made in 10 minutes. Free does not always equal good.
i thought you just said you loved the ribbon on windows? no ribbon on office 2008 for the mac. and the ribbon on 2011 isn't identical to office 2010 for win.
for some people open office doesn't 'do it'. if you work on across win, apple, linux distro, the OO is just fine (when text editor won't do lol).
It may be a RAM issue. I have Beta 6 and 8 gigs of RAM, and the whole office suite just zips along.
wot ??? 8GB to run Office ? this is crazy !
i have the OEM copy and 8 gigs of ram on a mac pro and it is horribly slow with Outlook using exchange 2007.
i will install it on my imac which has a newer processor and see if it is any better...
YMMV, however, I have one of the new quad core i7 iMacs with 8 GB of RAM, and there is no slowness whatsoever. The whole suite just zips along. This was/is not the case with 2008, which is still sluggish on the iMac.
It also runs great on my 2009 MBP with 4 GB of RAM
wot ??? 8GB to run Office ? this is crazy !
I never said you needed 8 GB of RAM, I just said what my system at work had.
the Beta runs great on my 2009 MBP at home, which as a dual core processor and 4 GB of RAM.
I have used it and hated it. Like going back in a time machine. I tried to make labels with it and got disgusted with it and quit. I downloaded the trial to Office 2008 and had them made in 10 minutes. Free does not always equal good.
Amen, You are correct!
Well, I'm sure things like Open Office, iWork, NeoOffice, work fine for some folks. Unfortunately for me (and millions of others), I would never take the chance of sending a file that does not open properly or that is formatted wrong to a client..
Like it or not most of the corporate world operates in the Office ecosystem . I'm sure the alternatives are fine for personal use or for a small group that doesn't have interact with anyone besides themselves, but not for anyone serious with doing interactive business.
YMMV, however, I have one of the new quad core i7 iMacs with 8 GB of RAM, and there is no slowness whatsoever. The whole suite just zips along. This was/is not the case with 2008, which is still sluggish on the iMac.
It also runs great on my 2009 MBP with 4 GB of RAM
I would venture a guess that 2GB of RAM (previous poster's spec) is insufficient not only for Office, but for many a great deal of other applications. I use Aperture a lot and usually have Mail and Safari in the background. Looking at Activity Monitor, I can see that those 3 programs plus Mac OS X itself pretty much chew up 2GB. Throw in Office and you've exceeded what's available in terms of physical memory.
The other important note is that Office 2008 included legacy code that requires the Rosetta layer to translate PPC to Intel. There's a slight performance hit there. Microsoft has now said that Office 2011 will only run on Intel, which means that all of the legacy code has been stripped out, so it's no wonder that it will run faster on Intel hardware as opposed to Office 2008, provided that you have sufficient memory available.
I would venture a guess that 2GB of RAM (previous poster's spec) is insufficient not only for Office, but for many a great deal of other applications. I use Aperture a lot and usually have Mail and Safari in the background. Looking at Activity Monitor, I can see that those 3 programs plus Mac OS X itself pretty much chew up 2GB. Throw in Office and you've exceeded what's available in terms of physical memory.
The other important note is that Office 2008 included legacy code that requires the Rosetta layer to translate PPC to Intel. There's a slight performance hit there. Microsoft has now said that Office 2011 will only run on Intel, which means that all of the legacy code has been stripped out, so it's no wonder that it will run faster on Intel hardware as opposed to Office 2008, provided that you have sufficient memory available.
i just installed it on my imac, which is newer than my work mac pro, and i will say that it seems a bit 'snappier' than 2008 regarding word, excel, pp. But it took 2 hours to sync outlook at the office on a fast lan. will sync from home and see how long it takes. outlook at the office was not snappy at all. it does have some neat features but was so sluggish that i stopped using it. will give it a try here at home with better processor and see if i can stomach using it.
maybe my requirements aren't heavy enough, but I've switched to iWork for company use here and I don't care what M$ releases anymore. Ridiculous prices for horrible bloatware.
It's MS now not M$, didn't you get the memo? Apple passed them in MC and we all agreed not to use $ anymore since MS is on the way down the tubes.
i just installed it on my imac, which is newer than my work mac pro, and i will say that it seems a bit 'snappier' than 2008 regarding word, excel, pp. But it took 2 hours to sync outlook at the office on a fast lan. will sync from home and see how long it takes. outlook at the office was not snappy at all. it does have some neat features but was so sluggish that i stopped using it. will give it a try here at home with better processor and see if i can stomach using it.
something is definitely wrong then, as it shouldn't take that long to sync at all. I was reading somewhere that Outlook does not support 2003 Server, so that may be an issue.
Amen, You are correct!
Well, I'm sure things like Open Office, iWork, NeoOffice, work fine for some folks. Unfortunately for me (and millions of others), I would never take the chance of sending a file that does not open properly or that is formatted wrong to a client..
Like it or not most of the corporate world operates in the Office ecosystem . I'm sure the alternatives are fine for personal use or for a small group that doesn't have interact with anyone besides themselves, but not for anyone serious with doing interactive business.
Keep a copy of this post and check back in a decade. I suspect MS Office will be another memory as well written, intuitive, collaborative web apps that are totally cloud based replace it. They won't be MS IMHO.