Office 2007

[SueEllen]

Currently using Office 2007 (previous was 2003, then 2000/XP then 97 before that).

Sure, there was a learning curve to 2007 from 2003, but look at this this way...if I went out tomorrow and bought an Aston Martin, even though I know how to drive, I'd have to learn how to drive the AM wouldn't I ?

I don't see what the fuss is all about.

Mrs BGG isn't an IT geek, but even she got to grips with 2007 and the ribbon bar.

It's only a word processor, for goodness' sake.

Ive tried Open Office once.

A Client wanted it installed on all their PC's, to save a few £££.

2 weeks later, we got a panicked call from the Client saying,"My documents are all gone".

Sure enough, on 10 PC's, Open Office had trashed every document. We checked for viruses and nothing came up. We were gobsmacked. I think that's when I decided there are 2 routes you can take.

1. The "El Cheapo" route, which if it goes wrong, you have no support, and no hope of litigation.

2. The "MS Route", which costs money up front, but is supported and used by plenty of others.

So, should I buy the "Open Source" Aston Martin made in India next week, or shall I buy a real one ?

I take it you've bothered to read the disclaimer that MS puts on all their products? If so you would realise that you can't sue them like you can't sue Sun Microsystems.

Oh this may be useful for future reference - http://www.support-central.org/openoffice/index.jsp

BTW if you used Open Source products you would notice there is a lack of Indian names involved in the production of them.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

.......
Sure, there was a learning curve to 2007 from 2003, but look at this this way...if I went out tomorrow and bought an Aston Martin, even though I know how to drive, I'd have to learn how to drive the AM wouldn't I ?

I don't see what the fuss is all about.

The analogy here would be Aston deciding that round wheels are overrated and that the steering wheel would be better placed on the passenger side floor for no good reason.


......

1. The "El Cheapo" route, which if it goes wrong, you have no support, and no hope of litigation.

2. The "MS Route", which costs money up front, but is supported and used by plenty of others.

So, should I buy the "Open Source" Aston Martin made in India next week, or shall I buy a real one ?

I've always had much more joy finding help from friendly fellow users on open source software than microsoft - in spite of it's large user base, the support base seems to have a lot of "why do you want to do that?" or "what's all the fuss about" types rather than people who actually want to help IMHO.

The idea that the fact you could engage in litigation against Microsoft is an advantage is hilarious - who do you think is going to win that battle?

[Board Game Geek]

The analogy here would be Aston deciding that round wheels are overrated and that the steering wheel would be better placed on the passenger side floor for no good reason.

That's not a like-for-like comparison though is it ?

Just because many folks liked and got used to Office 2000-Office 2003 menu layout, shouldn't mean that the menu layout is somehow sacrosanct from further innovation.

If you stifle innovation, because of a few "whingers" who cannot be bothered to learn new ideas and concepts, you may as well just give them a pen and paper, because they are never going to be happy regardless of what you do.

Thankfully, there is only a small minority of people in this cadre, and some do at least try to change their ways. Some will resist for the sheer bloody-mindedness of it however. Untermensch.

As for litigation...I apologise for the use of the wrong word in this context.

What I did mean was, if you buy a product from an estalished retailer and developer, there are channels to use if you need to make a complaint. There is action you can take. Ultimately, you can return the product.

With Open Source, who exactly can you ring up and complain to ? There are no established channels for grievances, apart from possibly some forum somewhere. Whoopee do.

[NickFitz]

With Open Source, who exactly can you ring up and complain to ? There are no established channels for grievances, apart from possibly some forum somewhere. Whoopee do.

I'd be more interested in channels to solutions rather than channels for bitching and whining. I'm more likely to get things done by actively seeking solutions rather than moaning about how hard life is.

YMMV

[Spacecadet]

I'd be more interested in channels to solutions rather than channels for bitching and whining. I'm more likely to get things done by actively seeking solutions rather than moaning about how hard life is.

YMMV

and this thread has been what exactly?

[NickFitz]

and this thread has been what exactly?

[Peoplesoft bloke]

I think we're at a crossroads in the future of software - in fact, it seems to me that the real dinosaurs are the people who still want to use the old model of paying well over the odds for software made by some mega corporation that has more interest in shareholder returns than functionality.

I don't think businesses are going to be dictated to by their software suppliers in future in the way they have been in the past. It's ironic in a way, because my plan A depends on the dinosaur model.

I may be wrong, but considering how many schools and educational institutions are going Open Source, the explosion in open source in the US and the fact we seem to get everything that happens there over here, I reckon Open Source has a major future. Microsoft won't go bust, but they aren't going to be able to charge hundreds a seat for office for much longer.

[Cowboy Bob]

Currently using Office 2007 (previous was 2003, then 2000/XP then 97 before that).

Why? Name one useful feature (i.e. that you use everyday) that Office 2007 has that 97 doesn't. Think about it. Office costs approximately £400 retail and £300 upgrade (that's RRP - you may get it cheaper). So that's 400 + (300 * 3) = £1300 you've spent on Office software - or more specifically £900 on feature upgrades you very rarely, if ever, use.

(BTW - I do use Office 2004 for Mac as that was the current version when I got my Mac, but I don't see why I'd ever need to upgrade to the latest. And I don't remember using any features that weren't in 97 on Windows)

[TimberWolf]

Think about it. Office costs approximately £400 retail and £300 upgrade (that's RRP - you may get it cheaper).

[snaw]

Just because many folks liked and got used to Office 2000-Office 2003 menu layout, shouldn't mean that the menu layout is somehow sacrosanct from further innovation.

If you stifle innovation, because of a few "whingers" who cannot be bothered to learn new ideas and concepts, you may as well just give them a pen and paper, because they are never going to be happy regardless of what you do.

A few whingers - I've hardly met anyone who likes it. I'm not averse to change in the slightest, in fact it's the best things about my area of IT - it's constantly changing. This is one of the reasons I dislike microsoft - they stifle innovation with their monopolistic practices.

And this change isn't some revolutionary change, it's almost change for change sake - so they can shift some more software under the guise of 'innovation'. They've shifted a few menu's about, I've had time to get used to it and you know what - I don't see any real improvment, while the learning process has been a complete pain in the arse and stifiled my productivity (If I had any that is).

In fact, I'd say it's complete pish and one of the most pointless changes I've seen in 19 years of being in IT.