gluben wrote: »
I work in a local council in the UK and Office is installed right across the board for about 1,000 employees.
There is no way that we would move to another program like Google Docs or OpenOffice. Our IT department would allow it, probably for security reasons, but also because the majority of staff aren't computer savvy enough to know their way around other programs. We only just finished moving to Windows 7 and Office 2010 and that was challenging enough for them!
I would have to disagree with this because customers do not have to upgrade. The basic pdf specification will continue to be supported with any new version of Acrobat. When they introduce new features it is up to the developers if they want to use features that are not part of the open source specification. The vast majority of documents that are shared publicly are fully compatible with the baseline specification. Any advanced features are generally reserved for internal company or government purposes where Acrobat is a standard application. Acrobat Pro is included in Adobe CC but Adobe recognized that unlike the other apps in CC, Acrobat Pro is primarily a business tool as opposed to a creative tool. I think Adobe will continue to upgrade the Acrobat version that is sold independently without a subscription, unlike CS6 which is EOL even though they still sell it.
You are correct, my mistake. I think Acrobat reader 9 and 10 are also considered up to date and supported though. If there was a vulnerability found in those versions, Adobe would patch them.
No; all Apple employees are obviously banned from using any apps other than those made by Apple. So clearly, their accounting is up the creek, which is why they make so little profit. How could they possibly dare to use software made by a potential competitor? Apple are such fools for making a spreadsheet programme that is so inferior to Excel; why do they even bother? I mean, can you imagine Apple using Numbers for anything? Unimaginable! I hear you can only create spreadsheets with a maximum of two cells (for Revenue and Profit)!
Yes. I strongly believe that a subscription model is the wrong way to go for Adobe. Is it a fatal flaw? I don't know. But how can you possibly charge a regular fee, knowing full well that the software is not going to follow a smooth path of progression?
I predict that the people who use it for the first year will think they're getting a good deal, due to the lower initial cost. Then, as the years go by, there will be more and more resentment as they realise that they're paying more and more for less and less, like drug addicts getting their fix. So people start to cancel their subs; then, Adobe starts to lose money, so it has to put the price up for the fewer subscribers, then more leave, etc. Another company makes a competing programme that is buy once and everyone flocks to it. Adobe goes out of business. Same scenario for Microsoft Office.
snova wrote: »
I tend to agree with this. Most IT departments have a standard install set (or images) on all machines. Regardless if and how often the tools will get used by each specific employee. This allows various departments to compose documents in a format that they know everyone can read. How often someone is required to compose depends on their role. Which is a "don't care" form an IT point of view. For most IT departments, I think it would create too much headache to try to determine who actually needs Office composition tools vs Read-Only tools to save some dollars here to justify custom installs.
Google already reads my email. Why would I want them to read my spreadsheets and letters too? No thanks. It is either keep with MS Office for me or Apple's programs.
Hilarious! You're happy for Google to read your emails but not your spreadsheets? It's like saying to Satan that you're happy for him to gently hold red hot pokers against your eyes, but tickling your feet? That's a big no no.
solipsismx wrote: »
Thanks for providing a source but you're discounting the role of non-traditional "PCs". Marketshare could also mean they can sell 91 Windows licenses out of a 100 desktop PC sales but there are only 1,000 PCs being sold per week and 10,000,000 post-PC devices then that market is effectively useless to them.
"Worldwide PC shipments totaled 76.3 million units in the first quarter of 2013 (1Q13), down -13.9% compared to the same quarter in 2012 and worse than the forecast decline of -7.7%, according to the International Data Corporation (IDC) Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker. The extent of the year-on-year contraction marked the worst quarter since IDC began tracking the PC market quarterly in 1994. The results also marked the fourth consecutive quarter of year-on-year shipment declines."
http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS24065413 (2013, quoted segment above)
Their new CEO looks like he's well aware that MS needs to shift their focus. I suspect MS will eventually settle on enterprise and backend services like IBM, a still very successful company.
sflocal wrote: »
I refuse to subscribe to Office365. I shouldn't have to pay for the "privilege" to continuously use it.
gman5541 wrote: »
Nonsense. Office is iniquitous. Even if you're not using all of Office or none at all, you're using a suite that touts a degree of Office File Compatibility.
If the FCC thinks your site is 'directed to children under 13' or that you know people under 13 are using your site, you basically have to do all the COPPA stuff.
charlituna wrote: »
Everything is on Macs went to other offices that use macs so we just use iWork.
Here is an interesting article regarding Google apps for education:
I can't wait until I can run Office on the Xbox One and access the File Explorer from my gamepad. It's Microsoft's secret weapon against the Sony PS4. /s
drew0020 wrote: »
This is another embarrassing article from Daniel. It's be coming par for the course from apple nsider these days. I know it's an Apple fanboy site but I'd like to think of myself (and others) as intelligent and unbiased Apple fans. At my company which is >20,000 we use Office (go figure) and it is a necessity if you are doing any form of serious financial analysis.
With due respect, you didn't specify a single feature, benefit, function or capability of Acrobat over Preview. I'm not saying there's no advantage, but I am saying that you haven't specified what the advantage may be.
EDIT: I see you elaborated later. Never mind.