Microsoft Office 2008 Delayed Until January 2008

[xUKHCx]

... in which case you would have used LaTeX for your thesis, anyway.

C'mon, all the cool engineering/science/math people use it...

Does that make me a wannabe then as i keep trying to get into LaTeX, I think the problem with me is that i try and get into it just before a major project when i need to spend my time writing rather than learning something new. However my last project was 250 pages long and had many many pictures, drawings, embedded excel files so not sure if LaTeX could handle it in a satisfactory way. (Chemical Engineering student BTW)

 

[kingofkolt]

bill gates doesn't care about mac people.

Haha, yes, because we all know he is personally responsible for this delay.

If I were Bill Gates, and you represented all "mac people," I certainly wouldn't be too concerned about mac people either.

 

[CalBoy]

Ah, I feel for you. I'm an Engineering major. Ten pages is the most I have ever written in my life, and I doubt I will ever get a masters degree because it really won't help me that much in the real world, as much as being professionally licensed will.

Don't feel sorry for me yet...say that when I go to law school!
As for your master's, go work for a company, and then see if they would be willing to pay for your education. More education will always help you advance and beat out others for promotions.

Anyhow, I think it's time to go and try a few free office apps

 

[notjustjay]

Does that make me a wannabe then as i keep trying to get into LaTeX, I think the problem with me is that i try and get into it just before a major project when i need to spend my time writing rather than learning something new. However my last project was 250 pages long and had many many pictures, drawings, embedded excel files so not sure if LaTeX could handle it in a satisfactory way. (Chemical Engineering student BTW)

Some would say that LaTeX would have been perfect for that task. It depends on what tools you're using to write it with, too (I use TeXShop on the Mac). I had a lot of diagrams when I wrote my thesis and I only had to export them as PDF files to get them into the thesis. It was a bit of a pain exporting all the figures into PDF but that was a one-time deal, and having it all in LaTeX saved me a lot of hassles when it came to pagination, formatting, figure headings, tables of contents and lists of figures, deciding whether to single- or double-space, etc. Best of all it handled my bibliography with aplomb. It was a bit of a learning curve, yes, but I actually ended up enjoying it much more than when I had it started with Word.

Part of what made it easier was that I could break out the chapters into separate TeX files and then used a parent document to include them. All the formatting was defined in the parent document so the chapter files were pure content. Made it much easier to see what I was doing, refer back and forth, and so on, without endless scrolling through one big Word document.

Actually, the final straw came when I had about 70 pages typed out in Word and for some reason the document got corrupted and refused to load (every time I tried to open the document, Word would immediately crash). I salvaged what I could from backups and decided this was a good time to learn LaTeX.

It's certainly not for everybody or for every situation, but it is very good at what it does and I thought it was well worth it for my thesis, and I would recommend it for anyone who is writing structured documents like academic papers, reports, theses, labs, especially if they contain lots of math. It helps if you have a programming mindset, because this is essentially what you're doing.

 

[ingenious]

I think Craig has heard the feedback loud and clear about Exchange support for Entourage being the #1 request and is working to do something about it. I read his blog and he seems to understand.

Anyone have the link to his blog? I'd be interested in reading it.


Anyway, yeah it's a bummer that it got delayed, but I feel the same way I did after they said Leopard would be delayed: It's better for it to be delayed than for us to have to deal with really buggy software. I'm glad to give the developers more time if it means I get a much better quality product in my hands.

 

[Frosty1]

figured it would be delayed, were talking about M$ here

 

[Virgil-TB2]

People shouldn't be so harsh on MS ... the quality of Office 2004 is a testimony to their dedication to the mac ... so give them a break!

As a writer, and as a long time user of Office on both platforms, I can tell you that this statement sounds like something out of Alice in Wonderland to me. Office on the Mac, especially MS Word, is a horrible program.

Office 2004 is a poorly designed, bug-filled POS in general and is far inferior both in stability and speed to Office on Windows (not that I would ever use Windows anymore). The current version of MS Office 2004 was buggy and bloated when released and has not been fixed in all the years it has been available.

The good news is that right now, this week, is the absolute *best* time in the last 10 years or so to introduce a full-fledged native replacement for Office on the Mac. Leopard is coming out in October and Apple is releasing new hardware across the board just previous to the new OS. If we are lucky, Apple has a revision of the Word Processor that uses ODF and can take on MS Word, and a spreadsheet that can do the same for Excel.

It will take MS the better part of 2008 to even *start* to ship applications that take advantage of Leopard, and all the applications they have now are years old, coded for the wrong processor, and full of bugs.

Now is the perfect time, (finally!) to give MS Office for Mac the gentle stab in the guts that it has been asking for all these years. That's what I am hoping for anyway.

 

[Virgil-TB2]

Haha, thanks for the laugh.

To familiarize yourself and better educate yourself regarding Apple's history of product delays and such, I suggest you follow Aiden Shaw's advice and look up Copland, Rhapsody and the like. Good reading.

Probably someone has already pointed this out but this comment and the identical one above it are misleading IMO.

The facts are true, but I find the intended comparison to MS's delays disingenuous and mostly irrelevant.

In the first place, these articles refer to a different "Apple Computer," almost a decade ago, under different leadership. Hardly reflective of the company we call Apple today.

Secondly, *all* companies have delays on their products, what we are talking about here really is the degree, how often they do it, and whether or not it's a part of the company culture.

So yes, during a period of massive company upheaval and the most serious financial downturn in it's entire history, Apple *did* kind of lost it's way and slip on delivering a new OS. Yes, this new OS was essentially "vapourware" in the same way that MS's new software offerings traditionally are. So what?

Simply because Apple had a (brief) period in it's lifetime where it replicated all the worst aspects of Microsoft's development habits, we are supposed to damn them for all eternity? We are supposed to throw up our hands and make out like Apple and Microsoft are essentially doing the same thing here? I don't think so.

Both previous to that time, and in the period since then, Apple has a very good track record for releases. Especially with the "new" Apple, they have scarcely missed a release date. OS-X, iLife and iWork are all on track and always have been AFAIK. Leopard's delay was the first such significant delay in a long time.

So while the information about Copeland is true, I think it's really quite over the top to try to use these facts to maintain that there is some kind of equivalency between the many shipping delays of MS's bug-ridden software and the (mostly) high-quality, (mostly) delivered on time Apple software.

Compare this to MS's constant, never-ending failures and delays and you have a *real* picture of what's happening.

 

[Virgil-TB2]

... Vista was a fresh rewrite (I'd like to see Apple try that one!)

Absolutely not true. You have no idea what you are talking about here.

... and they STILL managed to have incredible backwards compatibility, something Apple never could pull off.

Okay, now it's obvious you are smoking something here.
Put it in the ashtray and *think* a bit before you spew next time.

... MS products are constantly under attack from hackers, something Apple has never had to deal with because of their low marketshare, ...

Okay, so this marketshare jazz has been disproven how many times now?

... they also wanted to greatly enhance security which has resulted in a remarkably stable and secure environment. Coming up on a year with no major exploits. An incredible feat of software engineering.

Eh?

Well, "Incredible" is actually a word that comes up a lot with Vista, (but probably not in the way you mean it.)

 

[Virgil-TB2]

Thanks for nothing, Microsoft. As far as I know, this is the *last* major app that hasn't gone universal, and frankly, Microsoft should have the most experience with coding Intel software. I can't believe this, but I guess I should have seen it coming.

I'd like to use NeoOffice out of principle, but I can't. Excel's not there yet. Weird syntax, too slow, and doesn't support my plug-ins. So I guess I'm stuck with Office v.X until January, but its good enough I suppose.

I agree.

I don't see how anyone can argue that the delays in Mac Office are anything but political ones. All the information they needed has been available for years and it's not like they didn't have the staff or the years(!) of development time. Compare this to the achievements of the people that make Parallels for instance, and in a much shorter time frame and with a much more technically challenging product.

I hate MS Word and have tried many alternatives over the years, but none come very close, which is kind of odd when you consider how bad MS Office for Mac is. AbiWord is great, but development is glacial and it still doesn't handle anything larger than a page or two without dying the death of a thousand processor cycles. NeoOffice is java-based, with a non-standard interface only a GIMP (user) could love. All the others have similar glitches or problems.

If you are still using Office v.X however, Office 2004 is a better choice. It's basically a bug-fix for the original Office v.X which is why Office 2004 should really be called "Office 2002."

 

[Virgil-TB2]

Just out of curiosity, how do you handle writes from multiple users? Microsoft Access didn't really handle that well last time I checked. If that isn't a problem, you probably shouldn't touch the databases, but if it is, that would be a case for migrating to a "proper" database. SQL server won't give you platform independence and it costs money. Oracle is painful to configure (at least from what I've heard) and it costs money. However, MySQL or (even better) PostgreSQL should suit your needs just fine, with regards to multiple write-access and scalability.

Access has its strengths when it comes to making fairly nice GUI interfaces reasonably fast, but platform independence, transaction safety, and scalability is the price you pay.

IMO the best choice for conversion of most Access DB's is FileMaker. The "serious" Database guys on Windows don't use Access that much anymore, and those that do are, as you say, more concerned with the UI than advanced database "miracles."

FileMaker has the best layout tools around and makes Access look like a geeky retarded cousin. It also (now) has all the "serious" things that any database requires like tight integration with SQL and all the back-end stuff.

To the original poster, I would say that as long as the databases in question are fairly non-complex, a FileMaker conversion would not be that hard at all. The tricky parts are the integration with non-standard, non-open (i.e. - Microsoft) programs and servers. If it's a database that has to interface with some proprietary Exchange doo-hicky or whatever, then you are better off just dropping it when converting and starting from scratch. If it's anything at all standard or simple (employee records, invoices, product catalogues etc.), it can usually be easily re-made in FileMaker in very little time at all.

FileMaker reads and writes so many formats, that the data is pretty much never a problem, it's just the layout of the database itself and the reports that are going to take you any time. This is often a good thing as it gives you a reason to re-examine all of your business logic and procedures. Often you find out that you only need one database instead of three and that half the layouts and reports are useless and out of date. All in all a good exercise once you get through it.

 

[tristan]

Thanks for the reply. Yes, I guess I will have to "upgrade" to Office 2004 now... I was hoping to skip it and move directly to 2008 obviously.

BTW does anyone know whether 2004 locks multiple instances? I have two macs, both with Office v.X, and somehow it is able to scan the network and ensure that only one instance is running at a time. This leads to very frustrating situations as you can imagine - think about one computer waking up from sleep with an open document that I worked all night on.

EDIT: FYI I found the fix, so its no longer a problem on v.X. Still curious if the issue exists for 2004.

 

[askripko]

Can't wait for MS Office 2008 release, i LOVE Apple, but i have to admit that Bill's Office is best-of-the-best, nice job, no doubt...

 

[Frisco]

Okay let me summarize the truth in this thread:

1) Vista was a total rewrite and something Apple could never do. Totally false!

2) Office 2004 for Mac is a good or decent program. It sucks big time. Office for Mac will alway suck.

I am sure Jobs knows this and has some plans to change this. What that may be we can only speculate.

But please the posts that bothered me the most were the one claiming Vista/Office 2007 is a total rewrite and the ones claiming Office 2004 is a good suite. It sucks! Intel or not!

 

[nsbio]

Word rant

It is funny how even the best word processing program sucks in reality. Word does suck, but there is nothing better than it, with the exception of some niche programs for niche individuals.

It is funny how such a basic task - word processing that works - still requires you to deal with bugs and inconveniences, sluggishness etc. Mellel almost makes it as a word processor. Tried it... nice interface and useability... but no tracking changes .... - another trialware goes into the trash and the despised Word is launched yet again (reluctantly). What is the point of all this gigabytes with gigahertz and blue teeth when even the most basic computing tasks are still painful???

Anyway, that was just a vent after my computer threw a kernel panic out of nowhere, but I feel better after venting.

 

[AidenShaw]

Probably someone has already pointed this out but this comment and the identical one above it are misleading IMO.

The facts are true, but I find the intended comparison to MS's delays disingenuous and mostly irrelevant.

The reply was to a post that said

Originally Posted by p0intblank
Apple has had delays, but none near the magnitude of Microsoft.​

The Pink/Copland/Rhapsody links are certainly relevant to an open-ended comment like that. "Apple has had no significant slips" is pure BS, and must be corrected.

In fact, I suspect that not a few here would say that Apple should set ship dates according to product quality metrics, not according to SteveNote dates. Just scan these forums for "I'm waiting for 10.5.1" and similar posts.

These things go in cycles - in two years time it might be that Microsoft has been hitting deadlines and Apple has been missing every date (it won't be until November that we'll know if Apple hits the October promise for 10.5 - and whether its quality says that they should have slipped again).

Vista slipped big. OSX 10.5 has slipped (but not yet shipped). Copland suffered the infinite slip - cancellation. Rhapsody didn't have such a huge slip - but lots of people thought that OSX 10.0 should have been called a "public beta".

Anyone who tries to make a big stink about a particular slip will be wearing egg on the face soon enough.

 

[xnu]

I am really looking forward to the latest bloatware, because my business is dependent on the latest microsuck products. Well at least one product microsuck office, maybe Apple could finally update their suite to be competitive. You would think in year 2007 we would at least have some choice of a simple word processing program or spreadsheet, shouldn't be that difficult. Yeah, yeah opensource, neooffice, openoffice, whatever, only that certain things only work with Word, Word sucks, it is too complicated an crashes way to much, same with excel, which I am reliant on. Oh well, looking forward to paying for the upgrade for options I don't need just to stay compatible, hoping Apple will again wow me with something.

 

[maccompaq]

I am really looking forward to the latest bloatware, because my business is dependent on the latest microsuck products. Well at least one product microsuck office, maybe Apple could finally update their suite to be competitive. You would think in year 2007 we would at least have some choice of a simple word processing program or spreadsheet, shouldn't be that difficult. Yeah, yeah opensource, neooffice, openoffice, whatever, only that certain things only work with Word, Word sucks, it is too complicated an crashes way to much, same with excel, which I am reliant on. Oh well, looking forward to paying for the upgrade for options I don't need just to stay compatible, hoping Apple will again wow me with something.

I use MSWord, Excel, OpenOffice, NeoOffice, and they all work for me. I only use perhaps 5% of their functions. There are times when I cannot get one of these programs to do what I want, because I cannot find the function, so I have to revert to Microsoft Works or Appleworks. Thank God for powerful simple solutions.

 

[GSMiller]

I wasn't planning on upgrading from 2004 anyway (at least not soon).

 

[pimentoLoaf]

I read somewhere that it was supposed to look like Office 07 under Vista, but early testing had Mac-folk getting really angry for reasons unknown why would be people get upset it's only an interface that looks really neat under Vista shouldn't it be the same on the Mac?

 

[goosnarrggh]

I just heard from a friend, who works at MS, that the main reason for the delay is Clippy the Paper Clip is being totally revamped with support for core image.

Thankfully, Clippit (along with all of the animated Office Assistants) have been permanently put out to pasture.

 

[aafuss1]

I wasn't planning on upgrading from 2004 anyway (at least not soon).

I'm still using v.X (and 2003 on a PC).

Microsoft Works has a portfolio feature that works like the OS 9 Scrapbook (very handy-Apple should add something similar to their suite )

 

[Kawasaki]

A delay from MS....who would have guessed?

 

[kingofkolt]

A delay from MS....who would have guessed?

It is quite strange really. So unlike them, and it really offsets all that good publicity they got from delivering Vista ahead of schedule.

 

[aznsclboi]

*confused*

Okay... I use Office 2004, and I don't think it runs slow at all, I have a MacBook Pro 2.16 c2duo... it runs great, I do my work, it's stable and reliable, and well... I don't see what the fuss is.

I have iWork installed, but I can't seem to do the same spreadsheet work on Numbers that I need to do, that Excel seems to do well. Pages and Keynote are cool, but I still open Word more often then Pages. Sadly, I'm using iWork as a Open Office XML converter.

Maybe I'm confused, but why does everyone dislike Microsoft?