your joking right? I hope your not callling that an actual office suite? That is more like a expanded preview/editor and i would say serious calculations and data entry would be almost impossible in iWork
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.
Google CEO Eric Schmidt Resigns From Apple Board of Directors
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
your joking right? I hope your not callling that an actual office suite? That is more like a expanded preview/editor and i would say serious calculations and data entry would be almost impossible in iWork
Missing the point here. iWork isn't a direct analog of Office, and it isn't meant to be. It doesn't have to be. The "i"-things work together to a degree nothing else does, and Office certainly doesn't.
Besides, who defines "legitimate"? Because it reads/writes Office files? More and more, the answer to that is, "who cares". When was the last time you needed to read a WordPerfect file, or a WordStar document? ( I miss WordStar...
)
haha, now i never said that! but i can say personally that open office and iwork will not work for my needs and i would suggest that i am not the only one that is the case.
I would say that iwork doesn't have the functionality of office. It is a basic word processor, basic spread sheet input and template based presentations. I would not leverage that full time to replace my microsoft products, if there was a better solution out there i would use it.
If you didn't buy it, you didn't test it. You might have tried it or played around with it, but you didn't test it.
Did you try it?
How do you have enough data to make that claim?
i had my work laptop stolen and i tried to use my wife's macbook to do my work and it just wasn't happening. OWA was ok, but i missed the native app. I run a business for my company and have to look at billing data that is over 32,000 lines long that needs to be sorted and created into pivot tables. I also have to review weekly reports on labor costs etc, and the products i have tried to use (open office, iWork) weren't straight forward enough nor did i have the time to learn it with my replacement workstation inbound in about 48 hours.
I wouldn't say i am stuck, but your right to each his own. I think that Office 2003 and 2007 is superior to any product out there, but that's just my opinion.
Well, to each their own. If you already own Office, and don't want to switch, don't. Sounds like you will be stuck in Office for a while. Sorry.
That's how Office stays in demand, of course. Through inertia and the pain of change.
NT (therefore XP, Vista and Windows 7) is an entirely different codebase from Win9x (Win95/98/ME).
Therefore your statement is proven to be wrong.
NTFS. Threading that works (the main point of the OSX 10.6 overhaul is that the threading model was so bad that Apple had to start over - Grand Central isn't an amazing innovation, it's just Apple moving from the dark ages to parity in threading systems). Clustering. Domains. Forests. Security (Windows has no "repair permissions" utility - the file system security model is much advanced over UNIX or HFS+).
NT had SMP support, multi-threading and protected addressing long before Apple.
Windows didn't get a majority share of the server market, and support for 256 CPU systems, by being a "poor copy" of something else.
And Unix variants had SMP support, multi-threading and protected addressing long before Microsoft. And UNIX is not a file system so your critique of UNIX filesystems had better include the entire boatload of filesystems that they support instead of the paltry few that Windows supports. And UNIX variants work on more much more processors and scales much better that NT ever did. And NT was not an entire rewrite of the operating system...they borrowed heavily from the OS/2 line which was more dated than 3.11 and they borrowed code from 3.11 and 95 for the UI in concurrent versions.
AND UNIX and it's variants have a greater market share in the server field than Microsoft.
P.S. what do you mean by Parity? I do no think it means what you think it means.../spanish accent
Pages is much better than Word 08. Word sucks pretty bad when it comes to layout (yes, if you want to do real layout you shouldn't be using either but Pages is miles better than Word). And the whole Excel vs Numbers thing only really tilts to Excel if you are using the Windows version of Excel. The Mac version is crippled.
This was all just a matter of time.
I'm sure the companies will continue to work closely with each other.
I'm sure the companies will continue to work closely with each other.
Good news...Eric Schmidt should have left along time ago...the two company's complete for the same customer...
Most tech workers in CA are non-exempt employees. The law was setup in CA to protect unfair work practices of companies like Google who making their exempt employees work overtime.
Most developers and technical people fall under CA's strict non-exempt jobs. The big exception are managers of two or more people. Under the laws, if you work more than 8 hours in a work day, you are entitled to pay time +half. Yes, that's right, it's not based on a 40 hours work week, it's based on working more than 8 hours in a day.
For more information check this out: http://www.workforcesoftware.com/resources/ca_laws.html
I had to work through all of this for my company which is based in the Valley. Being an out of state employee I'm excluded by these practices.
You're right I just looked it up: http://www.dir.ca.gov/IWC/IWCArticle4.pdf
I was just assuming that California law was the same as most of the other states...I should have done my research before commenting, sorry. I program in PA one of the worst states to be a programmer.
Ok. I said that from what I have heard about Google having called it an "OS" is really stretching the term and that it is basically a browser that runs web apps backed by a kernel and some other features. I guess there is still more to be revealed as of yet also. But anyway.
Ok. I said that from what I have heard about Google having called it an "OS" is really stretching the term and that it is basically a browser that runs web apps backed by a kernel and some other features. I guess there is still more to be revealed as of yet also. But anyway.
It's not stretching the term at all...an operating system is:
An interface between hardware and user; an OS is responsible for the management and coordination of activities and the sharing of the resources of the computer. The operating system acts as a host for computing applications that are run on the machine. As a host, one of the purposes of an operating system is to handle the details of the operation of the hardware. This relieves application programs from having to manage these details and makes it easier to write applications.
And the applications are web based...so what?
I am not some programmer or OS expert. Like I said, that is what I have heard from several media sources when Google announced it. Don't kill the messenger.
When it was announced people were saying how it was basically just the Chrome web browser, and how traditional OSs like Windows and OS X are history and this is the future, and so on and so on. I'm not saying who is right or wrong. But, I do know that Google hasn't exactly revealed much as of now anyway.
KítscheñÇinqµe
macrumors regular
KítscheñÇinqµe
macrumors regular
and often 'bone' a bunch of people who have learned history, but can't get out of the way...
KítscheñÇinqµe
macrumors regular
Microsoft isn't going anywhere - if anything they are more powerful than ever.
Firstly, it is in this decade that they have suddenly learned how to manipulate their own public image. The greatest trick they pulled was getting the world to think they were a bunch of dumb old dinosaurs.
Secondly, despite an awful product they still retain 95% OS market share. Try selling a mainstream PC without Microsoft - 30 years since the birth of the PC it still ain't happening!
Thirdly, they are up to their old tricks but this time they are smarter. The recent Yahoo takover - genius. 'Try to buy' then call it off yet silently invade like a virus from the inside out. 3 years from now Yahoo will be Microsoft and no regulators, no anti-trust measures, no one in the mass public eye will even know by then Bing will be at 30% search share and that's when Google are in trouble. Google are already losing the asian search war...
Fourthly, there is no alternative to Microsoft Windows in the entire world. Chrome is bottom end - it will be niche and techy, OSX is high end - superior, elegant and expensive. Microsoft will still own 3% through to 93% market share.
Make no mistake - Microsoft is going nowhere - EVER! - and there is not a dam thing anyone is going to be able to do about it.
Any company that EVER starts to make a mid-market mainstream OS that starts to become successful will get bought - immediately.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it is Google that will collapse in the next decade under the relentless stealth attacks from Microsoft, and more than likely will probably end up under the ownership of Microsoft anyway. They are a dam smart company and dangerous as ever.
It is key to understand that Microsoft acts exactly like 'The Thing' in John Carpenters 1980's movie. Very few of their key strategic moves are visible on the surface.
Firstly, it is in this decade that they have suddenly learned how to manipulate their own public image. The greatest trick they pulled was getting the world to think they were a bunch of dumb old dinosaurs.
Secondly, despite an awful product they still retain 95% OS market share. Try selling a mainstream PC without Microsoft - 30 years since the birth of the PC it still ain't happening!
Thirdly, they are up to their old tricks but this time they are smarter. The recent Yahoo takover - genius. 'Try to buy' then call it off yet silently invade like a virus from the inside out. 3 years from now Yahoo will be Microsoft and no regulators, no anti-trust measures, no one in the mass public eye will even know by then Bing will be at 30% search share and that's when Google are in trouble. Google are already losing the asian search war...
Fourthly, there is no alternative to Microsoft Windows in the entire world. Chrome is bottom end - it will be niche and techy, OSX is high end - superior, elegant and expensive. Microsoft will still own 3% through to 93% market share.
Make no mistake - Microsoft is going nowhere - EVER! - and there is not a dam thing anyone is going to be able to do about it.
Any company that EVER starts to make a mid-market mainstream OS that starts to become successful will get bought - immediately.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it is Google that will collapse in the next decade under the relentless stealth attacks from Microsoft, and more than likely will probably end up under the ownership of Microsoft anyway. They are a dam smart company and dangerous as ever.
It is key to understand that Microsoft acts exactly like 'The Thing' in John Carpenters 1980's movie. Very few of their key strategic moves are visible on the surface.