It would be great if MS offered software parity with the PC version. I'd love to see apps like MS Project and Visio on the Mac. Then I would have no problem shelling out money to purchase a "professional" version of Office. Those two apps are really important for project managers and information architects (usability experts). Running them on VPC is just painful.
Those two apps and exchange support would really kick up sales for both MS and Apple. It's those two programs that make Office so unique compared to other professional office suites.
something that bugs me is no mention on whether Office will be able to sync Apple's Address book or iCal with Entourage. You would think that would be a major feature. That was something I was really looking forward to in the next revision.
update: nevermind...didn't read the above posts carefully.
Word Note is just a crap cut down port of MS OneNote 2003, wich may have been taken form Circus Ponies Notebook
EVERYTHING M$ produces is stolen in one way or another...windows 3.1=mac os (mach 1984) win 2000 = os 8.?
office = claris works, IE = mosaic (a bit of a strech i know)
windows media player = quick time
all these have a common theme, all the m$ nock-offs SUCK in comparison to the original. so why do 9? % of people use the crummy copies, are there that many suckers in the world, or is bill gates realy ino voo-doo
It doesn't (address book integration). I asked a MS rep that would know.
This irks me to no end. How freaking tough would it be to hook into the system's address book? That way, Entourage becomes a more useful program by allowing its data to be used directly with iSync. Who at the MacBU thought about this and thought that it WOULDN'T be a good feature to implement?
And I could be totally hallucinating here, but I could SWEAR that I remember the MacBU stating when iSync and Address Book came out that they would take advantage of these Apple technologies.
This irks me to no end. How freaking tough would it be to hook into the system's address book? That way, Entourage becomes a more useful program by allowing its data to be used directly with iSync. Who at the MacBU thought about this and thought that it WOULDN'T be a good feature to implement?
And I could be totally hallucinating here, but I could SWEAR that I remember the MacBU stating when iSync and Address Book came out that they would take advantage of these Apple technologies.
Or maybe I'm just wishful thinking....
Damn Microsoft....
i wonder if it's possible to run LDAP service in OS X, then i guess you could tell Entourage (i don't know since i have never used it, but it should be an option there..) to look up names on local host.
I have default OS X e-mail app set up to look up addresses on my Domino server, so i don't think it would be hard to do in Entourage.
Sure, there's always something to complain about, but would it kill apple to make iSync more universal? I keep my appointments in lotus Notes, as this is what we use @ work, address book-same thing, but i also keep a copy of all my contacts in address book, as it offers bluetooth, sms messaging, and it's more convenient. Still wouldn't it be nice to iSync data from MOST popular applications? There are not that many, c'mon apple.
Sure, there's always something to complain about, but would it kill apple to make iSync more universal? I keep my appointments in lotus Notes, as this is what we use @ work, address book-same thing, but i also keep a copy of all my contacts in address book, as it offers bluetooth, sms messaging, and it's more convenient. Still wouldn't it be nice to iSync data from MOST popular applications? There are not that many, c'mon apple.
I know the DayLite Contact Manager can sync its contacts with the Address Book, so I would venture that the frameworks are already there, it's just that Microsoft and others aren't using them.
I know the DayLite Contact Manager can sync its contacts with the Address Book, so I would venture that the frameworks are already there, it's just that Microsoft and others aren't using them.
That's my understanding of how Address Book works. There is actually a system-level database that the Address Book application is merely a front-end for. Any program can access this database, which any other program can then access as well.
Of course, it's totally possible that Microsoft doesn't want to allow this simply because you're no longer locked into using ENTOURAGE as your PIM. If something better were to come along, you could simply start using that.
Still, it would be nice if Microsoft would serve its customers rather than itself all the time.
That being said, if it were at all possible for Apple to write an iSync plug-in that would access the Entourage database, I say go for it! It's got to be possible, since there is a Palm conduit available for Entourage. But what do I know.
What I want to know is, what are the upgrade options for owners of Office X? All I'm aware of is the "Technology Guarantee" for people who bought since Office 2004 was announced in January.
Upgrade pricing for users of Office v.X who purchased prior to the announcement of Office 2004 is the same as the upgrade pricing from Office 2001 to Office v.X.
I think the new Entourage looks great. I already use the program because of its metadata tagging abilities which Apple's programs just can't match. Project Center will be very helpful at my office, if I can get my boss to swing the $150 for it.
What I want to know is, what are the upgrade options for owners of Office X? All I'm aware of is the "Technology Guarantee" for people who bought since Office 2004 was announced in January.
Search at just about any Apple Authorized online reseller, you'll see the upgrade options. For example:
According to that MacMall link, we won't be seeing the pro version until late July. That explains the lack of info about VPC 7. I'm pretty sure that this is the original timeline they announced for VPC 7 though.
Looks like Office 2004 will support long document names (yay!) and brings back the good old Scrapbook from the early Mac OS, but this time as a more functional Office suite tool.
It also appears that Microsoft is actually responding to the Keynote challenge by building in much more impressive graphics and transitions as part of PowerPoint 2004 ? though I'm sure they won't be fully compatible with Windows PowerPoint 2003. Score one for Apple. :-)
All in all, it looks like a nice upgrade. Particularly since I can get it for the $150 student price. If Entourage 2004 is as good as it appears to be, I'd almost be willing to pay that much for Entourage alone.
I was afraid that this might be the generation where Windows Office finally one upped the Mac version of Office and began to pull away in terms of functionality and flexibility. Aside from the lack of XML support and IRM support (which I can't say I'll miss), it looks like Office 2004 keeps the Apple-specific release of the suite technologically ahead of its dominant Windows cousin.
Microsoft may do a lot of scandalously lousy things, but it's still home to some of the best Mac programmers around.
Looks like Office 2004 will support long document names (yay!) and brings back the good old Scrapbook from the early Mac OS, but this time as a more functional Office suite tool.
It also appears that Microsoft is actually responding to the Keynote challenge by building in much more impressive graphics and transitions as part of PowerPoint 2004 ? though I'm sure they won't be fully compatible with Windows PowerPoint 2003. Score one for Apple. :-)
Excellent. These are all features I'll be sure to use. What I'm hoping for in PowerPoint is some way to drag and drop the order of transitions, rather than having to use those annoying up-and-down buttons.
Where did you read about long document names though? I've been looking for some sort of official/reputable rumour site word on this and haven't seen anything.
Has anyone seen any word on the basic speed of the new Office? I guess MS would not actually say anything about this - even if they fixed it - because it would mean admitting that the initial port to OS X was a bit stinky - as it was.
Where did you read about long document names though? I've been looking for some sort of official/reputable rumour site word on this and haven't seen anything.
I read the weblogs of several Microsoft developers. Unfortunately, I don't have the address here at work.
Also, Exchange support through Entourage is reportedly much better.
I read the weblogs of several Microsoft developers. Unfortunately, I don't have the address here at work.
I didn't know these were out there. If you have a chance to post the link when you get home, it would be most appreciated; I'd quite like to take a look at these.
Comments
Those two apps and exchange support would really kick up sales for both MS and Apple. It's those two programs that make Office so unique compared to other professional office suites.
well, in my opinion anyway.
update: nevermind...didn't read the above posts carefully.
Originally posted by Alpha Mac
Word Note is just a crap cut down port of MS OneNote 2003, wich may have been taken form Circus Ponies Notebook
EVERYTHING M$ produces is stolen in one way or another...windows 3.1=mac os (mach 1984) win 2000 = os 8.?
office = claris works, IE = mosaic (a bit of a strech i know)
windows media player = quick time
all these have a common theme, all the m$ nock-offs SUCK in comparison to the original. so why do 9? % of people use the crummy copies, are there that many suckers in the world, or is bill gates realy ino voo-doo
Originally posted by Outsider
It doesn't (address book integration). I asked a MS rep that would know.
This irks me to no end. How freaking tough would it be to hook into the system's address book? That way, Entourage becomes a more useful program by allowing its data to be used directly with iSync. Who at the MacBU thought about this and thought that it WOULDN'T be a good feature to implement?
And I could be totally hallucinating here, but I could SWEAR that I remember the MacBU stating when iSync and Address Book came out that they would take advantage of these Apple technologies.
Or maybe I'm just wishful thinking....
Damn Microsoft....
Originally posted by highfalutintodd
This irks me to no end. How freaking tough would it be to hook into the system's address book? That way, Entourage becomes a more useful program by allowing its data to be used directly with iSync. Who at the MacBU thought about this and thought that it WOULDN'T be a good feature to implement?
And I could be totally hallucinating here, but I could SWEAR that I remember the MacBU stating when iSync and Address Book came out that they would take advantage of these Apple technologies.
Or maybe I'm just wishful thinking....
Damn Microsoft....
i wonder if it's possible to run LDAP service in OS X, then i guess you could tell Entourage (i don't know since i have never used it, but it should be an option there..) to look up names on local host.
I have default OS X e-mail app set up to look up addresses on my Domino server, so i don't think it would be hard to do in Entourage.
Originally posted by piwozniak
Sure, there's always something to complain about, but would it kill apple to make iSync more universal? I keep my appointments in lotus Notes, as this is what we use @ work, address book-same thing, but i also keep a copy of all my contacts in address book, as it offers bluetooth, sms messaging, and it's more convenient. Still wouldn't it be nice to iSync data from MOST popular applications? There are not that many, c'mon apple.
I know the DayLite Contact Manager can sync its contacts with the Address Book, so I would venture that the frameworks are already there, it's just that Microsoft and others aren't using them.
Originally posted by Frank777
I know the DayLite Contact Manager can sync its contacts with the Address Book, so I would venture that the frameworks are already there, it's just that Microsoft and others aren't using them.
That's my understanding of how Address Book works. There is actually a system-level database that the Address Book application is merely a front-end for. Any program can access this database, which any other program can then access as well.
Of course, it's totally possible that Microsoft doesn't want to allow this simply because you're no longer locked into using ENTOURAGE as your PIM. If something better were to come along, you could simply start using that.
Still, it would be nice if Microsoft would serve its customers rather than itself all the time.
That being said, if it were at all possible for Apple to write an iSync plug-in that would access the Entourage database, I say go for it! It's got to be possible, since there is a Palm conduit available for Entourage. But what do I know.
Production to start April 14; street date expected to be in third week in May.
Pre-orders accepted starting today (Tuesday)
Pricing same as for Office v. X: $399 for Standard Edition
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/05/office/
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/8363866.htm
What I want to know is, what are the upgrade options for owners of Office X? All I'm aware of is the "Technology Guarantee" for people who bought since Office 2004 was announced in January.
Originally posted by a_greer
office = claris works
Microsoft Office predated ClarisWorks 1.0 by a several years. In 1991, Microsoft was on its second or third Mac edition of Office.
I think the new Entourage looks great. I already use the program because of its metadata tagging abilities which Apple's programs just can't match. Project Center will be very helpful at my office, if I can get my boss to swing the $150 for it.
Originally posted by CaseCom
Office 2004 to arrive in stores next month
Production to start April 14; street date expected to be in third week in May.
Pre-orders accepted starting today (Tuesday)
Pricing same as for Office v. X: $399 for Standard Edition
http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2004/04/05/office/
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald...ss/8363866.htm
What I want to know is, what are the upgrade options for owners of Office X? All I'm aware of is the "Technology Guarantee" for people who bought since Office 2004 was announced in January.
Search at just about any Apple Authorized online reseller, you'll see the upgrade options. For example:
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/promo...p?p=office_mac
Office 2004 Std. Upgrade: $219
Office 2004 Pro Upgrade: $295
Originally posted by MCQ
Search at just about any Apple Authorized online reseller, you'll see the upgrade options. For example:
http://www.macmall.com/macmall/promo...p?p=office_mac
Office 2004 Std. Upgrade: $219
Office 2004 Pro Upgrade: $295
According to that MacMall link, we won't be seeing the pro version until late July. That explains the lack of info about VPC 7. I'm pretty sure that this is the original timeline they announced for VPC 7 though.
It also appears that Microsoft is actually responding to the Keynote challenge by building in much more impressive graphics and transitions as part of PowerPoint 2004 ? though I'm sure they won't be fully compatible with Windows PowerPoint 2003. Score one for Apple. :-)
All in all, it looks like a nice upgrade. Particularly since I can get it for the $150 student price. If Entourage 2004 is as good as it appears to be, I'd almost be willing to pay that much for Entourage alone.
I was afraid that this might be the generation where Windows Office finally one upped the Mac version of Office and began to pull away in terms of functionality and flexibility. Aside from the lack of XML support and IRM support (which I can't say I'll miss), it looks like Office 2004 keeps the Apple-specific release of the suite technologically ahead of its dominant Windows cousin.
Microsoft may do a lot of scandalously lousy things, but it's still home to some of the best Mac programmers around.
Originally posted by Kirkland
Looks like Office 2004 will support long document names (yay!) and brings back the good old Scrapbook from the early Mac OS, but this time as a more functional Office suite tool.
It also appears that Microsoft is actually responding to the Keynote challenge by building in much more impressive graphics and transitions as part of PowerPoint 2004 ? though I'm sure they won't be fully compatible with Windows PowerPoint 2003. Score one for Apple. :-)
Excellent. These are all features I'll be sure to use. What I'm hoping for in PowerPoint is some way to drag and drop the order of transitions, rather than having to use those annoying up-and-down buttons.
Where did you read about long document names though? I've been looking for some sort of official/reputable rumour site word on this and haven't seen anything.
and i have not found any evidence of long file name support
Originally posted by mpls244
I went from Word 5.1 to Office 98 (I bought Word 6, but never used it, it was so damn slow on my Centris).
I still use word 5.1.
Originally posted by Gabid
Where did you read about long document names though? I've been looking for some sort of official/reputable rumour site word on this and haven't seen anything.
I read the weblogs of several Microsoft developers. Unfortunately, I don't have the address here at work.
Also, Exchange support through Entourage is reportedly much better.
Kirk
Originally posted by Kirkland
I read the weblogs of several Microsoft developers. Unfortunately, I don't have the address here at work.
I didn't know these were out there. If you have a chance to post the link when you get home, it would be most appreciated; I'd quite like to take a look at these.