That was, of course, until my users started getting Office 2007 docx and xlsx files emailed to them by researchers, foundations, and other business entities that they couldn't open in Office 2004, or that the Open XML Converter wouldn't convert properly because it spent almost all of 2008 in Beta with significant bugs - which was almost 14 months or more since Office 2007 hit the market. Of course, for the VBA scripts our researchers were using in Excel, they could always convert them to AppleScript, which no Windows user would be able to access. You're right, there wasn't a gun pointed at my head at all, just general incompetence from Microsoft.
too little too late,
If we weren't getting exchange in apple mail, this would never have happened.
I wont be using it.
Well, it is still missing parts of the Office Suite for Windows Professional.
Access (the database program)
Project (for project managers)
Visio (for charting people)
InfoPath
Publisher (web publishing?)
I am not even sure what InfoPath does and could be wrong about Publisher.
I would like to have a database program on my Mac. I could use MySQL (which I use at work), but I imagine less technically-oriented people might want something like Access.
I strongly believe there would be NO Outlook on Mac if Apple had not built in Exchange support in SL.
Which means that releasing Office 2008 and this new "Business Edition" without VBA support wasn't a hard decision at all. It was a business decision. Whatever the MBU says about "hard choices," is nothing but sugar coating the facts that the Microsoft really doesn't give a damn about feature and service parity between the Mac and Windows versions of Office because they don't have to. We're talking about one of the richest companies in the world - with enough resources, Microsoft could easily support an internal configuration that would support feature parity between Mac and Windows Office, and it could have brought on sufficient developer and coder resources to keep VBA in Office 2008 and still have it out the door in a reasonable amount of time. Especially since they knew of the Intel switch on Apple's side as early as 2006, and likely late 2005. I don't discount Apple's role in this either - at least some of the blame goes to Apple for playing things so close to the chest that few major software platforms had Universal products ready when the Mac lineup went entirely Intel.Unfortunately, the Mac BU was limited to what specification they could get from the Windows office team. They are completely different groups. As I recall from what the Mac BU and Nadine was telling us, it was out of their hands since the format was not finalized as of yet.
Ah, Microsoft is really "Microshaft". It's amazing, they have tried for years to keep Macs out of the business/enterprise sector. Now that Apple has designed Snow Leopard to have full Exchange support without ANY version of MS Office installed, Microsoft is now seeing a lost $$$ opportunity and NOW that are giving in and making a business version of the Mac Office suite. They are not gonna get my money, I will stick with Snow Leopard without any additional software. MS=FAIL.
Wow - this just made my day. That would be, awesome - I loved WordPerfect, at least until they really dropped the ball with the 6.0 and later releases.I am sure there are many people that would rather use WordPerfect than Word.
so what stopped apple from designing and implementing their own "real" office suite? i don't see a lack of effort on apple's part as a shafting on microsofts part. They didn't have to even support the OS at all.
M$ doesn't have to support Apple at all, but they will never opt out of Office for Mac. What they will do, however, is support OS X just enough to convince people that Office on Macs is a waste of time, and that if they really want all the great features they need to move over to Windows. This is how monopolies behave.so what stopped apple from designing and implementing their own "real" office suite? i don't see a lack of effort on apple's part as a shafting on microsofts part. They didn't have to even support the OS at all.
so what stopped apple from designing and implementing their own "real" office suite? i don't see a lack of effort on apple's part as a shafting on microsofts part. They didn't have to even support the OS at all.
M$ doesn't have to support Apple at all, but they will never opt out of Office for Mac. What they will do, however, is support OS X just enough to convince people that Office on Macs is a waste of time, and that if they really want all the great features they need to move over to Windows. This is how monopolies behave.
As to why Apple can't release an Office competitor, I'd posit two reasons: 1) Microsoft will never give up complete licensing to all of Office's features, regardless of whether or not it releases enough file format information to make compatible files, and 2) Microsoft has almost 30 years of a head start on Apple with regard to market penetration and program development. iWork is really nice for what it is, but it's not Office - although we've just about given up PowerPoint for Keynote at our organization.
I agree. If Apple can make world-class photo, music, and video editing software, surely they can make a decent office suite. Crying about Microsoft "shafting" Mac users is absurd, when Apple has plenty of resources and programmers at their disposal. Is it somehow Microsoft's fault that Pages and Numbers are inferior to their Microsoft counterparts? And what about looking at things the other way around - why is it that iTunes for Windows is a complete piece of ****, while the Mac version is very good?
What R U, some MS fan and Macintosh hater?
And as you pointed out, Keynote is far superior to PowerPoint, so it's not like Apple can't surpass Microsoft Office. They're just late arriving on the scene.
I think you've just explained the theory of business competition, in which case, the fault is both Microsoft and Apple's - but for different reasons. And yeah, iTunes on Windows is amazingly joyless, but then again, Apple wants you to buy a Mac.surely with Apple and their superior staff, they should be able to catch up on only 30 years head startThe point is, apple has made no effort in this space and we are faulting microsoft for not fully supporting a competing OS with their product? See quote below about OS native products on other OS's. To date, i can only think of iTunes and its not exactly a dream.
And don't buy SL either if you don't want to give MS money. After all, they had to license Exchange support for both iPhone and SL. Unfortunately I won't be able to use SL's Exchange support because it is limited to Exchange 2007; we (and most other companies) still run an earlier version. So I (and many others in the same boat) will have no choice but Office:mac.Do you own an iPhone? If so you just paid Microsoft money. Apple license exchange support and they pay a pretty penny.
I am sure there are many people that would rather use WordPerfect than Word.
I think you've just explained the theory of business competition, in which case, the fault is both Microsoft and Apple's - but for different reasons. And yeah, iTunes on Windows is amazingly joyless, but then again, Apple wants you to buy a Mac.![]()
And don't buy SL either if you don't want to give MS money. After all, they had to license Exchange support for both iPhone and SL. Unfortunately I won't be able to use SL's Exchange support because it is limited to Exchange 2007; we (and most other companies) still run an earlier version. So I (and many others in the same boat) will have no choice but Office:mac.