Updgrade Office?

[Cuc Tu]

I was asked why we should upgrade to Office 2007.

I don't know, is there any good reason in a business environment?

We mostly use Outllook, Word, Excel, Access, and PowerPoint. We've also talked about SharePoint Server2007 and using that as a way to communicate on projects...

[123456]

Well, it's a good idea if you want full compatibility with .***x files

[jlreich]

I suggest you, or someone that uses office a lot, borrow a disk from someone and install it without activating it and give it a whirl. 2007 is very different from older versions, but many say it is better. I don't use office too much myself. Well, lots of using but not creating very often. I like it personally, but you may not.

[mjc]

The big question...what versions of Windows are you running?

[PrntRhd]

I agree with jlreich,

Different as in using a completely different "ribbon" interface.
Office 2007 has no File> menu options..you have to click the Office symbol itself and choose from there.
My understanding is the newest Office will give you the Classic Office menu choices once again, which means less retraining of your employees.

[Cuc Tu]

We'll probably stay on XP Pro until we are into the 3rd quarter, at least according to IT, then we'll talk about a new service agreement with MS.

I read about new features and most of them seem a bit trivial (SmartArt?). I really like the idea of searching email content in Outlook. The most significant feature seems to be integration with sharepeoint though.

Since Office2007 is already 3 years old, isn't it about time for MS to announce a new suite? The goofy ribbon and all just seems on par with the Vista generation.

Office 2010?

[Cuc Tu]

Oh yes, I can see the writing on the wall now. We'll probably have to wait as there will be no convincing IT now.

Here is an Office 2010 lineup:

Word
Access
PowerPoint
Publisher
Outlook
InfoPath
Excel
SharePoint Workspace
OneNote
Communicator
Visio
Project

http://www.microsoft.com/office/2010/en/default.aspx

[Cuc Tu]

I'm jumping up and down now...


1 Express your ideas more visuallyOffice 2010 opens up a world of design options to help you give life to your ideas. The new and improved picture formatting tools such as color saturation and artistic effects let you transform your document visuals into a work of art. Combined with a wide range of new pre-built Office themes and SmartArt® graphic layouts, Office 2010 gives you more ways to make your ideas stick.

2 Accomplish more when working togetherBrainstorm ideas, provide better version control, and meet deadlines faster when you work in groups. The co-authoring experience for Microsoft® Word 2010, Microsoft PowerPoint 2010, Microsoft® Excel Web App and Microsoft OneNote shared notebooks let you work on a file with several people at once - even from different locations.2

3 Enjoy the familiar Office experience from more locations and more devicesWith Office 2010, you can get things done more easily, from more locations and more devices. Using a smartphone or virtually any computer with an Internet connection, you can work when and where you want to work.3
Microsoft Office Web Apps
Extend your Office 2010 experience to the Web. Store your Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and OneNote files online and then access, view, edit, and share content through the web.

Microsoft Office Mobile 2010
Stay current and respond quickly using enhanced mobile versions of Office 2010 applications, specifically suited to your Windows Mobile-based smartphone.


4 Create powerful data insights and visualsTrack and highlight important trends with new data analysis and visualization features in Excel 2010. The new Sparklines feature delivers a clear and compact visual representation of your data with small charts within worksheet cells. Filter and segment your PivotTable data in multiple layers using Slicers to spend more time analyzing and less time formatting.

5 Deliver compelling presentationsCaptivate your audience with personalized videos in your presentation. Insert and customize videos directly in PowerPoint 2010—trim, add fades and effects, or bookmark key points in the video to call attention to selected scenes. Videos you insert are now embedded by default, relieving you from managing and sending additional video files.

6 Manage large volumes of e-mail with easeCompress your long e-mail threads into a few conversations that can be categorized, filed, ignored, or cleaned up. The new Quick Steps feature let you perform multi-command tasks, such as reply and delete an e-mail in a single click, saving you time and in-box space.

7 Store and track all your ideas and notes in one placeGet the ultimate digital notebook for tracking, organizing, and sharing your text, picture, video and audio notes with OneNote 2010. New features such as version tracking, automatic highlighting, and Linked Notes give you more control over your notes so you’re always on top of where your ideas came from and the latest changes when working in teams.4

8 Get your message out instantlyBroadcast your PowerPoint presentation to a remote audience, whether or not they have PowerPoint installed.5 The new Broadcast Slide Show feature allows you to share your presentation through a web browser quickly without additional set up.

9 Get things done faster and easierMicrosoft Office Backstage™ view replaces the traditional File menu to give you a centralized space for all of your file management tasks, such as the ability to save, share, print, and publish. The enhanced Ribbon across Office 2010 applications lets you access commands quickly and customize tabs to personalize the experience to your work style.

10 Access work across devices and platformsEnjoy the freedom of using Office 2010 from more locations on more devices. When you use Microsoft® Office 2010, you’re getting the familiar and intuitive Office experience across PCs, Smartphones, and Web browsers on the go.

[Cuc Tu]

I think on one of those jumps, my heels actually clicked together.

[Paul Komski]

I personally think that the future of "collaboration" will be with cloud computing and as things stand Google has stolen that march on Microsoft.

[Cuc Tu]

Is that, Google Desktop?

Is this something that large corporations are considering?

I also thought I saw MS take the lead on this when the .NET framework came out. I was fully expecting we would all be running terminal machines by now and using web-based applications.

[Paul Komski]

Is that, Google Desktop?I don't know what Google Desktop is - at least I've never downloaded it. Edit: G. Desktop is a set of widgets/sidebar/search.

Google Documents (http://www.google.com/google-d-s/tour1.html) is what I was referring to. I use it to collaborate on spreadsheets and other documents with people all over Europe.

It's free and you just need to register and sign up to a Google/GMail account.

[saphalline]

If you have not gotten onboard with Office 2007 by now, I say skip it. Go with the full conversion to Win7 Pro, Server 2008 R2, Office 2010, and all the upcoming SharePoint cloud-like services that can be provided to laptops on-the-go. Doing the Terminal Services on thin clients thing is actually a more expensive buy-in if you already have a desktop infrastructure in place, so keep that one in mind. Besides, any desktop that can cruise with WinXP can use Win7 as a drop-in replacement. Not many upgrades required, unless you want XP Mode (2 GB RAM minimum for that).

Of course, the other option (maybe yes, maybe no for you) is going non-Windows. ;) Hey, Ubuntu 10.04 is only two months away. It can use CIFS shares just fine and the latest Open Office is 100% compatible with Office 2007 for the majority of the features. It could be an option to introduce some FOSS if the IT department is going to change things up anyway, right?

[Paul Komski]

Go with the full conversion to Win7 Pro, Server 2008 R2, Office 2010, and all the upcoming SharePoint cloud-like services that can be provided to laptops on-the-go.

Why? Why go on paying MS any more for software packages?

Google has led the way with its Search Engine and then with many other "free" innovations. They are free in the sense of not having to pay up front. Payment is done by targeted advertising and suchlike, whatever ones views on this are. Some say it is great some say it is an invasion of civil liberties. The other great freebie range of goods that so many now are tied up in is with all aspects of social networking.

We don't yet know how any of this will pan out. It keeps evolving all the time. But the concept of paying (by the end user directly paying any company - notably Microsoft) for software is wearing increasingly thin. This will become more and more apparent as more and more have access to broadband. Universal broadband would reshape everything.

[saphalline]

Why? Why go on paying MS any more for software packages?Considering that the second paragraph of my two paragraph post focused on non-M$ alternatives, this feels like an unwarranted attack.

My apologies for suggesting that anyone buy M$ products.

[Paul Komski]

Considering that the second paragraph of my two paragraph post focused on non-M$ alternatives, this feels like an unwarranted attack.

My apologies for suggesting that anyone buy M$ products.
I cant help other peoples' paranoia but no personal attack whatsoever was intended. I have a bee in my bonnet as to how MS has abused its position of dominance for far too long. The vast majority of ordinary users have no need for anything more than was originally contained in the Office 97 suite (and earlier for that matter).

The share point services and so on that require the latest upgrades are not necessary for most normal/ordinary users, particularly when Google docs and so forth are both functional and free.

Google too have become incredibly dominant but they have funded things indirectly - in sharp contradistinction to the Microsoft, the M$, way.

[saphalline]

Ok... I guess I will take that as some sort of weird apology. I mean, you did quote me directly. Is that really paranoia on my part?


From my perspective, I see that Windows and other M$ products can do things that no other software can. That makes it valid in my opinion. If not all of its features are redundant, then it is useful in some capacity. And there are quite a few unique features of M$ software. Not all of them are good, but many of them are. There are also uniquely good features of other software and platforms, but nothing comes close to being perfect. That is why we have (and need) so many of them. But of course, as you dig deeper into the abyss that is computing, you begin to understand why there can be no "one size fits all" in the computer world. It simply is not possible. So we must take what we can get. Compromises all around.

If you are able to get by without all the unique features offered by other software and platforms, then that is great! I am truly happy for you! Far fewer compromises for you to manage. But some of us are not quite so lucky. We have to live with far more compromises. Both usage models are perfectly valid. Or many usage models are perfectly valid, in the case of those of us who need to work with many different software and platforms. It is unfortunate that the bee in your bonnet prevents you from understanding this.

I will, however, venture a little way towards answering your question. Many businesses are unable to use Google Docs because of data privacy laws. Likewise, they are unable to use Open Office because of service agreements. Which means that the cost involved in transitioning away from using M$ software is greater than the net worth of the company. This is a common scenario that I have seen with my own eyes. The fact that alternative software is both functional and free does not even cover the tip of their iceberg of problems with FOSS. For them, there is no answer, and therefore, no question.

[Paul Komski]

If I quote Shakespeare does that mean I attack him? Do I have to apologise for others misunderstanding when no hurt nor attack was intended? Paranoia may have been too strong - for that I apologise.

It is unfortunate that the bee in your bonnet prevents you from understanding this.
That's more like an "attack" or a snipe but I will disrgard it even though it might imply senility on my part. Lets just drop this sniping - it is unproductive.

The general point that is worth making is that both computing and use of the internet is constantly evolving and no-one really knows what is just round the corner. "Cloud computing" is becoming more and more possible because of fast internet access. In effect every PC can become like a terminal on an old mainframe. Using Google's own servers may well involve security aspects but there is nothing to stop any company setting up a secure server and allowing its clients or its staff to access and use applications running on it as thin clients.

Broadband has already revolutionised telephony and conferencing via VOIP and it will continue to affect computing in ways that we probably haven't even yet invisaged.

Microsoft have, in many ways, being playing catch-up with a lot of things that are internet aware in their very nature. They would never have achieved their browsing dominance without unfair practices and it remains to be seen if the software giant will be able to keep abreast of the "cloud" and a lot of other stuff.

[saphalline]

If I quote Shakespeare does that mean I attack him?If you quote him and make a disparaging remark on that quote, then yes, in my opinion, you have attacked him.

In the initial case here, I felt attacked because you made a disparaging remark of my (apparently incorrect) support of M$ products when the very next paragraph of mine centered on non-M$ alternatives. I had already given support to the "other side", so to speak, so why focus on my supportive comments of M$? Logically, it was unnecessary. Therefore, I felt attacked.

Do I have to apologise for others misunderstanding when no hurt nor attack was intended?Umm... yes! That is, if you are intending to be polite. We call this interpersonal communication. Or if you are a government representative, we call this diplomacy. Misunderstandings are quite common in the world. I do not blame you or myself for any misunderstandings that occur, but I do expect us to resolve them.

So far, I still do not understand what you were originally trying to point out, and you have not yet apologised for it. I would say that it is unresolved.

Paranoia may have been too strong - for that I apologise.I accept your apology for the paranoia remark.

That's more like an "attack" or a snipe but I will disrgard it even though it might imply senility on my part.I apologise for that remark. I admit it had emotional underpinnings. And a small bit of confusion. (As I have said, I am still confused as to what you were originally trying to point out.)

but there is nothing to stop any company setting up a secure server and allowing its clients or its staff to access and use applications running on it as thin clients.I would say that there are a great many things stopping many companies from being able to adopt this model of computing. The primary barrier for most is cost. This extends from both hardware and expertise. Most small and medium businesses do not have a dedicated IT department, much less one that is capable of implementing such high-profile projects. And these are high-profile projects no matter what you think because they involve contracts and networking and hardware and administration, etc. It is simply too much for SMB's to handle on their own, even if they could afford it in-house. Which means they have to hire from outside the company, which costs even more up-front - and possibly in the long run, too, depending on how efficiently they handle their cloud migration and contracts. These are merely a couple of reasons off the top of my head why many companies are blocked from moving to cloud computing.

They would never have achieved their browsing dominance without unfair practicesThis is true. However, I fail to see how this invalidates the existence of their software. Windows continues to have unique features that no other operating system has. The same can be said for other M$ software. Taking the logical progression of these facts, in order for non-M$ software to fulfill all the needs of all users, one of two things would need to happen: (1) all users would have shift their usage models away from using M$'s unique features, or (2) these unique features would have to be replicated in non-M$ software. This appears to be reasonable and valid to me. Am I wrong?

[Paul Komski]

There is much truth in the saying that "less is often more".

[Cuc Tu]

We (my company) does a lot of B2B and military contracts. We hire many consultants and need a common platform from which to operate, not to mention contract requirements and all of the other 3rd party Windows-based software that we need to function.

For our mobile products, we were considering a new OS, moving from WindRiver to either a Linux base or WindowsCE. I fought for Linux, but WindowsCE won due to its support, popularity, ease of finding engineering resources familiar with the platform.

I think it will be another computing generation before any real errosion of M$ takes place, at least in the commercial industry.

For home use, I'll still have to run a Windows PC, just to be able to function with my business contacts, but I'll certainly take advantage of any FOSS that I can.

I really appreciate the discussion here and the advices. I can use all differing POVs in relevant contexts. For example, I have close ties to a large retailer that feels quite negatively towards M$ and they have worked for years trying to get Open Office or some other software to handle their inventory and accounting needs. They've started to dump Windows and have gone Linux and apparently have bit the bullet and hired consultants to build a custom Web-based accounting platform.

Thanks again.

[Paul Komski]

and hired consultants to build a custom Web-based accounting platformIMHO that is a very sensible way to go. There are some free applications out there, but not "tailor-made" of course. They typically have a MySQL server running the backend and a well designed PHP based HTML page for the front end and which can run from a number of clients - and as cross platform as one desires.