Microsoft Releases Office for Mac Security and Performance Updates

[killerrobot]

MS AutoUpdate wasn't finding that there was an update to apply.
So I opened Word (as per monoskier's suggestion on page one of opening Excel) and checked for updates there and voila. Ran it, closed Word and FF and no problems with the installation under Lion (10.7.1).

 

[ScottNWDW]

had no issues installing the update. Only took a few moments actually.
2011 MacBook Pro 13' with Lion

 

[-LikesMac-]

Yep.

had no issues installing the update. Only took a few moments actually.
2011 MacBook Pro 13' with Lion

No issue here either.

 

[till213]

You obviously fail to see that maybe Apple doesn't update those programs because there isn't a need for any updates in those OS's.

As far as iOS 3.x goes: there would be several terrible security needs to fix that OS! It is absolutely irresponsible to use any iDevice with that OS!

Mind you, I am talking about devices, specifically iPhone 3G which is stuck on iOS 3.x, which were still being actively sold by Apple up to 1.5 years ago - one point 5 years only!

As for Final Cut, you also need to look at the fact it was rewritten from scratch and backwards compatibility can't always be guaranteed

Okay, agreed, supporting an older Final Cut Pro with security issues isn't a big deal if Apple doesn't.

However I took this as an example to illustrate where Apple is apparently heading: away from the professional market into the "mass market" where short lifecycles is even desired (from a sales person's perspective)!

Also the "iToys" thing is innacurate. The last several IT jobs I applied to with big name companies all wanted mac certifications. They can't be that much of a toy.

Please note my specifically placed little remark in brackets which makes the difference: (has become)

 

[till213]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_5 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8L1 Safari/6533.18.5)

Why can't Microsoft ever release a product that isn't full of security holes?

Well, they can't - just as any other software company can't (that includes Apple - just in case)!

But in contrast to Apple Microsoft has improved a lot in the last few years in security fixed reaction time. And they invested a LOT into security whereas Apple just seems to have started (with Lion they just about reachted the point where other OSs, including Windows XP, where years ago! Keyword: "Address Space randomisation").

Admittedly: Apple has some nice security ideas with "sandboxing" which makes it harder to exploit holes in applications.

But ever wondered why not even Safari is "sandboxed" in Lion yet? Or QuickTime? Or "Preview"?

Think about it real hard (for about 3 seconds)...!


And the fact that Microsoft is still supporting a product - on a non-Microsoft platform, that is! - which is several years old speaks for them, IMHO!

This is exactly why I jumped ship from Windows to OSX.

Yeah Apple have updates, but nowhere as frequent or serious as Microsofts poor poor software security problems. it doesn't seem like a day goes by that Microsoft aren't peddling a security flaw fix or three.

I agree very much with you in your statement that APple is nowhere as frequently updating their software.

That is mainly because simply "they don't" (see iOS 3.x) after a very short time, and secondly because "they won't".

Now ever heard of the LDAP password disaster in Lion? That is a MAJOR *****-UP. The worst security hole (and the most stupid one) I have EVER heard of! Made by Apple! Not tested by Apple! And guess what: STILL NOT FIXED AFTER WEEKS!

Now this clearly shows Apple non-committment to enterprise users (that's not you, obviously)!

And I am not even starting to list all the QuickTime and Safari security issues Apple fixed (very late usually, see the corrupted certificate issue Apple just fixed AFTER WEEKS only - when all other browsers had it fixed since long time!


Now, fanboi, come again and tell me about "security & Apple"!


Cheers (from a Mac developer)

 

[goosnarrggh]

I never said they were immune, I simply stated that Apple obviously hasn't found anything that needed updating.

And I already gave a counterexample: The hacked certificate signing authority which triggered security update 2011-005 almost certainly affects OS X 10.5. And yet, Apple has chosen not to issue an update.

It's not because OS X 10.5 isn't vulnerable. It's because Apple doesn't have any commercial interest in continuing to support that product line.

In all probability, Apple doesn't spend any time at all investigating to find out whether or not any newly discovered vulnerabilities affect OS X 10.5 or older, and even if they knew for certain that a new vulnerability does affect OS X 10.5 or older, they wouldn't bother announcing it, releasing a fix for it, or issuing advice for how to work around it.

As for iOS... well, we already know for certain that iOS 3.x is vulnerable to the invalid PDF exploit, which made the original iteration of jailbreakme.com work. This is a known certainty. Anybody still running iOS 3 (which includes every iOS device which didn't meet Apple's requirements for iOS 4.x) is open to attack, which basically means that everybody running iOS 3.x should never browse the web on their device ever again.

 

[MacSince1990]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 1.0 like Windows NT) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A5313e Safari/7534.48.3)

See, this is Mocrosft's problem... Why on earth are they still pushing updates for a 2004 product? Apple isn't still updating 10.3, are they? Perhaps MS could innovate more if they refocused some of their talent...

Why wouldn't they? I still use 2004. It's a superior product to 2008 and 2011, the same way that 2003 on the PC is far better than 2007 and 2010... Word took a seriously wrong turn after 2003/4 and became serious bloatware... not to mention clunky and irritating to use.

Hell. My favorite version of Office is still Mac 2001.

This is actually one of the thing Microsoft does very well... supporting its software. They have a much larger market share than Apple, so what they support affects far more people than Apple.

Windows XP SP3 is still very much supported, and it should be; millions of people use it.

Small fixes for Office aren't a big deal.. it doesn't take much time. And remember, this is their Macintosh department doing the patching and the work, not the rest of Microsoft.

 

[Photofolio]

It seems there is an issue with user names with a space in the path. I confirm I have the problem on my MBP (with a space in my login name) but not on my iMac (without any space in the login name)

 

[peterb81]

It seems there is an issue with user names with a space in the path. I confirm I have the problem on my MBP (with a space in my login name) but not on my iMac (without any space in the login name)

This worked for me, created a temporary account with no space in the name and installed the 14.1.3 update without a problem

 

[roadbloc]

Nice to see Microsoft still supporting products from 2004 that don't even work on new macs. I'd like to see Apple support Snow Leopard for a while longer than they usually support their products.