It was fair statement, if not a little inaccurate. A 7% delta isn't really enough to nitpick many vs. most, is it?
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.
Microsoft Office to Become 'Microsoft 365' in Biggest Brand Overhaul in More Than 30 Years
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It was fair statement, if not a little inaccurate. A 7% delta isn't really enough to nitpick many vs. most, is it?
Probably means that they will no longer offer an option to buy MS Office outright but only offer a subscription option where your computer always has to be online.
Seeing as how many people travel for work and do work on planes, including MSFT employees, that is 100% not going to happen.
Odd choice, it's like Apple renaming iPhone to Apple Phone. Yeah, if it were introduced today they probably would call it Apple Phone instead, but iPhone is already a very valuable and established brand with many years of reputation.
Looks like there won’t be a future one time purchase version of Office.
The PC term (instead of elder support) is to refer to them as non-digital natives.
lolz
Even with the subscription there is no requirement that you be online. You only need to login every few weeks.Probably means that they will no longer offer an option to buy MS Office outright but only offer a subscription option where your computer always has to be online.
There are plenty of photo editing apps that don't require subscriptions if that's what's bothering you. However, sub-models for PS are brilliant and make it very affordable.
I have no problem with change in principle. And I understand the push to rebrand.
But Microsoft can call it whatever they like, most people will still call it Office. Because it’s less syllables, plain and simple. (And I won’t touch on the pain they might have in translation for other markets.)
The executives who green-lit this change just to leave their stamp on something obviously weren’t thinking clearly.
But Microsoft can call it whatever they like, most people will still call it Office. Because it’s less syllables, plain and simple. (And I won’t touch on the pain they might have in translation for other markets.)
The executives who green-lit this change just to leave their stamp on something obviously weren’t thinking clearly.
Did we already come to the part where we give each other insults veildly disguised as unconstructive criticisms?
Well, I think I'll pass. I'll give the topic one more shot, though.
- In a corporate setting, frequent insignificant updates to a product used in a workflow is not a positive thing.
- In a mature product, frequent insignificant updates is not a positive thing.
Office is a mature product since at least 10 years. Compared to what is already in it, no amount of developer investment is going to produce a new killer feature. It still must be maintained and minor features can still be invented/added. This takes developer effort. But in no way does this mean there is real customer need for frequent updates.
It will be tweaked, renamed, get a colour overhaul, have its toolbar inserted/rearranged/moved/removed and what-not. It will not however have a major new function announced. And that's all fine. The software is there, it does its thing to a high degree of satisfaction.
Office is mainly used in a corporate setting since even more years. Microsoft has been fairly successful in widening the audience to privateers too. Most of them use a small subset of the capabilities and are not willing to pay the full price. They still are important to MS as a marketing platform and a lock-in mechanism, but they are not the intended bulk users.
In a corporate setting, you do not tweak your set-up bi-weekly. You lock down users machines, prevent auto-updates from rolling out, set and manage standard settings and so on. Because what you need more than anything is stability. You want 100's of users to be their most productive every day, and most of the time that means their tools should stay exactly the same as they were the day before. Updates are evaluated on their merits to your organisation and they are rolled out in a controlled fashion in order to make sure noting breaks, and that value is realized to people and organisation.
Yes, a non-corporate user who is paying for software monthly might feel that updates, really any update, is a reassuring proof. They pay monthly and they get something new every month. Yeay! I am a winner!
By all means, Microsoft! Tap into that pile of easy money.
But. People seem to confuse agile development methods with marketing and development funding.
Unless you are a publishing security updates, or you are fighting to be the first to release the next flappy birds onto a store, the release cycle of an agile development method is of little use to the world.
Absolutely, do short sprints when you develop in uncharted territory. Release internally and discover where you got and do another sprint in the right direction.
But this is not (immediately monetizable) value to customers, especially not in a mature, corporate setting product. The right approach is to do your market research, develop the most valuable features, make them production ready and only then release.
And here is where at least some people on here see risks. Mash up scrum, subscription funding and marketing, you might end up with software with less substance. To fit your marketing and prevent churn in your volatile monthly funding, you will be forced to release frequent minor updates. Bells and whistles that are not fully functioning and are not building product value. The main purpose of these minors updates is then churn-preventing and the product starts to fall apart.
Well, Office as a flappy birds clone can only go so far. At some point, the developer can no longer attract interest by releasing new levels and the customer base moves on. Leaving a smoking pile of abandonware behind.
I kind of would like that not to happen to at least some of the software I use.
Don't do SW subscriptions, switched to Libre Office years back and never had any issue. MS Office has been subscription based for years. For those that need Office best bet is purchase an OEM license for buttons.
Q-6
Q-6
Funny, I’m sure that second comment accusing everyone of piracy will make them much less angry.
I originally consistently bought the new versions of Office, but stopped at Office 97, as it did everything I wanted, but mainly because the next version started moving menus around to “help” me, so I considered it more of a downgrade. I have resumed buying in the last decade because of the OS and processor changes obsoleting the old versions. I personally hate those constant updates you promote, especially when the programs already work well, and would prefer if they just did occasional maintenance to keep the programs functioning with the new OSes. I also despise it when the program defaults to saving in the cloud. When a program already functions well, I just want it to be maintained, not reimagined every year so I have to figure out which tabbed menu they chose this year to hide the function I need.
LOL nobody with any sense pays MS retail for the Office package or Windows for that matter. Many large companies offer their employees OEM licenses for around $10, or you can easily find an online provider who will sell the same for around $15-$20.
Think the most I've personally paid is $15 and that was for the full Office package. I dropped MS Office years ago as I didn't care for the bloat and getting locked out after an update with a valid license totally ticked me off. Naturally MS was cock all use...
Switched to Libre Office and never looked back. It can look dated equally it has plenty of power to support the vast majority of standalone demanding workflows.
Q-6
Well, on that basis (and the fact you're using the most basic version of office), the amount you spent would have given you more than 8 years of 365 which includes a ton more functionality, and the versions you highlighted were over 8 years, so you wouldn't have paid much more, if anything.
Sorry, but you are complaining about nothing here. Think of it as spreading your costs.
I also want to add that not paying doesn't remove any functionality. In fact, Office is available free as an online tool and you can achieve all the necessary basic functions of Word, Excel and PowerPoint at zero cost.
I'm not deliberately setting out to defend Microsoft, but the facts are what they are.... 🤷🏻♂️
I didn't acuse everyone of piracy. Please don't put words in my mouth. I said Office is one of the most pirated software packages made, and if you believe for one second everyone on this forum is some sort of saint, you are sadly wrong.
Even I pirated Office as a kid! I got my first legal version at University with the educational schemes and then I was given an MSDN license in my employment at HP as part of a program they offered, and then most of my companies have offered home user schemes to allow for cheaper versions of Office. But most of us have pirated software. Especially as kids.
Additionally, the fact that you have chosen not to move on from a quarter century old software package says it all. I also find it amusing that you feel Microsoft should maintain Office 97! It's a bit like asking why Apple won't maintain your Apple II, and asking why you're not getting Apple DOS / BASIC updates.
Subscriptions are not for all and you are not Microsofts market and that's just, well tough for you.
I'm very happy you found something that suits your better.
In my opinion, nothing beats Excel for power users and most analysts who work on spreadsheets would say exactly the same. (Although I want to add, most analysts probably wouldn't use Excel at all. More likely python, or SQL queries directly at the source)...
It's good to know that you find much easier to manage...
The commitment for paying subscription fees might be relatively more expensive in the long run than a one-time purchase, so basically this will enable you to have more cash flow.
Agreed, Excel is the standout application in MS Office, with some very powerful plugins for some specific use cases. That said Libre Office can easily hold its own; I'm a senior QA/QC in the oil & gas industry. Client's expectations are high to say the very least.
I've run comparisons between MS Office and Libre Office with very complex spreadsheets that produce graphs/charts. Net result, zero difference as math is math with multiple 100K entries...
MS left me high & dry over technical issue on their behalf. Excuses are of no use to me in the field with a demanding client. Presentations I aways do in Keynote and if need to present on a PC, just convert.
Q-6
Web project or excel both will yield excellent result as long the person have the proficiency.
I would assume that "Microsoft 365" will include an option to pay a monthly subscription fee for Windows and Office and Game Pass and other MS software products.
It does not have to always be online for O365 now. It works no different than iCloud.Probably means that they will no longer offer an option to buy MS Office outright but only offer a subscription option where your computer always has to be online.