Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Office 2004 or 2008?
- Thread starter tsice19
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
2008. I found 2004 to be slow, and not Intel native. Though I can't say that 2008 is exactly great either. Ultimately the PC Office is the way to go.
I don't know if this helps, but I seriously just bought 2004 (like, a couple hours ago) because it was cheaper. That was my deciding factor, though 2008 would be nice because it doesn't have to run through an emulator.
Here's a little info I found:
http://blogs.pcmag.com/miller/2008/01/microsoft_office_2008_for_mac.php
Here's a little info I found:
http://blogs.pcmag.com/miller/2008/01/microsoft_office_2008_for_mac.php
There is usually resistance to change, and technology is no different
VBA is a big issue with Excel, but beyond that, technology marches on
If you are married to the old technology, you will eventually get left behind, no matter how much you think the older is better
The only return to the past I can think of right off hand was Coke -> New Coke -> back to Coke Classic which eventually became Coke again
I think both serve their purpose, but there will be fans of one over the other, and some will prefer the Apple products like Pages, etc.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
VBA is a big issue with Excel, but beyond that, technology marches on
If you are married to the old technology, you will eventually get left behind, no matter how much you think the older is better
The only return to the past I can think of right off hand was Coke -> New Coke -> back to Coke Classic which eventually became Coke again
I think both serve their purpose, but there will be fans of one over the other, and some will prefer the Apple products like Pages, etc.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
There is usually resistance to change, and technology is no different
VBA is a big issue with Excel, but beyond that, technology marches on
If you are married to the old technology, you will eventually get left behind, no matter how much you think the older is better
The only return to the past I can think of right off hand was Coke -> New Coke -> back to Coke Classic which eventually became Coke again
I think both serve their purpose, but there will be fans of one over the other, and some will prefer the Apple products like Pages, etc.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
they had a "new coke"? also, how do you always put that same thing on the bottom of your posts, is it like always in your clipboard or something? that would get so tedious for me.
I used Office 2004, Office 2008, and Office 2007 (Windows) - the best is definitely Office 2007 for Windows, especially the ribbon feature which is (not surprisingly) weak in OS X. On my MacBook, Windows + VMware fusion + Office 2007 is the best! Just wish I could save directly to the Mac desktop...
You can. In Office 2007, just make your virtual share (desktop) your default location.
I agree with the above. Neither Office 2004/2008 are very good choices. Office 2007 for Windows and iWork are better choices.
I tried TextEdit because I saw you can read/write .DOC and .DOCX formats but does a terrible job making the appearance of actual documents look the same.
I like Office:mac 2008 better than 2007 Office for Windows....
but I prefer Office 2003 over all word processors.
I really couldn't stand Office:mac 2004, so I would suggest going with 2008.
The only thing I use VMWare for is running the 2003 version of Office on Windows.
but I prefer Office 2003 over all word processors.
I really couldn't stand Office:mac 2004, so I would suggest going with 2008.
The only thing I use VMWare for is running the 2003 version of Office on Windows.
Excel 2008 has eliminated support for custom error bars on charts. Word 2008 has broken support for reference managers such as EndNote. Startup times for the Office 2008 apps (at least on my 2GHz Core 2 Duo mini) are hardly any better than for Office 2004 apps running under Rosetta.
Agreed. It seems they partially implemented it, but for all the wrong things. The ribbon items in Office 2008 are for things like cover pages and bibliographies, i.e. items that are usually set once per document, if at all, instead of the core functions that one changes as they are working on the document.
Office 2007 has live preview, the mini formatting bar, and document protection settings amongst many other features, not including advanced capabilities like macros.
Of course, if you need Access, Publisher, or Exchange you'll need the Windows version anyway. I used to use Entourage for my MSN and Hotmail accounts, but now you have to pay $19.99 a year to use Outlook or Entourage with Windows Live so I just sign-in to the webmail when I need to check them (they are not my primary e-mail accounts).
Finally, to all the people who say iWork is an acceptable alternative I really have to laugh. Unless your needs are very limited, it is not even close to being an alternative.
I do have it, because I like Pages for quick publications and Keynote for presentations that I AM PRESENTING (I can't send a Keynote file to someone else, not even all Mac users have it), but as a word processor or spreadsheet the applications are not only incomplete, but a pain to use... and incorporate none of the advanced time saving features of Office. Every company has to give and take; incorporate the best features of competitors. There are some neat, useful, and original things about iWork that I like, but I would like those AND the essential features included in Office in iWork.
iWork applications rely heavily on the menu system, which means hunting and digging for unknown commands (something MS is moving away from in Windows and Office), and basic things like a WYSIWYG font window, nonetheless WYSIWYG font MENU are missing. A pop-up opens to simply change the color, one should be able to change amongst simple colors in a pop-down menu or ribbon-like interface. Numbers is missing too many features, and is way too slow.
I'm an Apple fan, and an on-again, off-again Mac user, but I really like some of the things MS is doing. Apple has advantages and well-implemented features in hardware and software, but so do its competitors. Vista, which I use about 25% of the time at home, while initially buggy and sometimes slow, has surprised me and exceeded my expectations. Sure it is not that big of a step from XP feature-wise, but has been incredibly stable (which I cannot say about Mac OS X, especially Safari, but the OS itself too) and malware free (one of the main reasons I went back to Mac was worry-free computing, and so far so good, but with Mac security exploits in the news I am more concerned, especially in regards to Apple's lax attitude towards security features and fixes). I like that there are no menus by default and that all options are in plain sight on the toolbar, I like UAC--nothing gets past it and it only takes a sec here and there to clear, I like that I never need to worry about compatibility. I am a fan of subscription music (in addition to limited purchases) and have NO options on the Mac, in fact that makes up the majority of my time in Windows at home. WM protected content plays.
MS Surface looks excellent- I hope they can find a way to market it.
I just wish that Apple would take some of the positive things MS is doing and combine them with their own.
IMHO:
iPod> Zune (except subscription option)
iPhone>>>> WMobile (This is Apple's best product and will carry it light-years farther that the iPod)
Safari< IE 7
iWork< Office (except Keynote)
Apple TV> MS Offerings (but Apple needs subscription and/or forced ad-based options in addition to the current $2 episodes, as well as more recorded and some live content (sports), to ever even touch cable; I think a great appeal to Apple TV is the possibility of a great back catalog of older content (TV shows, movies, and perhaps even commercials)
Anyway, end of rant. Continue with discussion of the OP's question.
I would go with office 2008 because it uses the open source file formats .xdoc instead of .doc and .xxls instead of .xls. These are eventually going to become the standard whether we like it or not, so you might as well invest in the future.
Actually, I'm pretty sure that the .docx, .xlsx etc. file formats are proprietary Microsoft standards. AFAIK OpenDocument is the open document file format most people refer to.
Personally I'm sticking with Office 2004 - no compelling reason to upgrade to 2008 and, from what I read, too many unfixed bugs for now.
Personally I'm sticking with Office 2004 - no compelling reason to upgrade to 2008 and, from what I read, too many unfixed bugs for now.
Speed Tests.
http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.24/24.03/Office2008Benchmark/
Google the rest, there's loads. I looked into this when I was considering the same thing. Basically if you've got an Intel Mac then upgrade, and if you've got a PowerPC Mac don't. But even then, the speed gains are marginal so you really want to look at the feature set between the two.
AppleMatt
http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.24/24.03/Office2008Benchmark/
Google the rest, there's loads. I looked into this when I was considering the same thing. Basically if you've got an Intel Mac then upgrade, and if you've got a PowerPC Mac don't. But even then, the speed gains are marginal so you really want to look at the feature set between the two.
AppleMatt