There wasn't a need to make a proper point when there wasn't one to begin with. I might as well make a joke as that's what your comment basically was. Thanks for trying...
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 to Stop Supporting Office 2016 for Mac in October
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There wasn't a need to make a proper point when there wasn't one to begin with. I might as well make a joke as that's what your comment basically was. Thanks for trying...
I have Office 2011 too, and it works fine indeed… just be sure to never deinstall it to put it on another Mac, because it looks like the servers that validate the serial number are down (Office keeps saying "You are not connected to the Internet" which is obviously plain wrong)
Honestly, at home I might use 1 formula on an Excel sheet that doesn't work right in LibreOffice, and it is just to keep one cell the same as the tab name. This one spreadsheet is used only to split the cell phone bill so that the others in the group know what to reimburse me, since not everyone isn't is a Mac user. I'll survive just fine without Office, since I've been using LibreOffice on the other Mac and my wife's PC for a while, although I've been keep a lot of new internal documents for home in Pages, Numbers, and Key Note anyway.
Quicksilver867
macrumors 6502
Guarantee the Microsoft Autoupdate will still force itself upon me every time I open Office though.
This program used to annoy the heck out of me when I used Office 2011 for Mac.
I don’t believe there is an equivalent app for Microsoft 365? Several of the apps update via the Apple App Store, and (going from memory) the ones that don’t just show you a notification within the app that says “new features are ready to install”.
^^ certainly nothing as intrusive as that standalone updater program. Maybe that in itself is enough reason to move to a Microsoft 365 subscription! 😆
I do not see this stuff as antitrust at all. You are essentially saying Microsoft can't promote their own service as it makes other cloud storage competitors at a disadvantage?
Sometimes I think antitrust goes a bit too far. It is Microsoft's services, why shouldn't they be allowed to create a bundle of products?
oneMadRssn
macrumors 603
There is a difference between merely promoting something and bundling a monopoly product with another product. Bundling is not a bad concept, but it can be abused. Look at what Qualcomm is being investigated for - it's bundling in an abusive way. The textbook case of bad bundling is when you take take an existing fair-and-square monopoly, and bundle something else with in. So for example, if Co has a monopoly in A but also has product B, but the only way you can buy A is in an A+B bundle. That's incredibly unfair to competitors of B, and it's bad for consumers because if you let that go on eventually Co will have a monopoly in B as well. Then they can do the same with C, and so on and on.
Microsoft isn't quite there yet, but they're really rubbing up against that line with Office+OneDrive.
DaveSanDiego
macrumors member
technole
macrumors 6502a
O365 is a million times better than Office 2016 (or Office 2019 whatever is the one-time version now). Every little nick and cranny is updated every month, new things get added like Teams licenses to O365 making it's value better. Versus security or critical updates only on the one-time Office license.
MS Home-Use program is basically extending the "work" license to the home, like it never made sense on a customer level for someone or a company to buy an Office license at-work, and the same customer has to buy one when they go home at-night, yet only one real license-instance is ever being used at a time.
MS Home-Use program is basically extending the "work" license to the home, like it never made sense on a customer level for someone or a company to buy an Office license at-work, and the same customer has to buy one when they go home at-night, yet only one real license-instance is ever being used at a time.
Yeah but many people like to "own" their software, not have to pay a subscription to keep using it. Even though the one time license doesn't get updated nearly as often as 365, the trade offs aren't justifiable.
According to Microsoft, and tens of millions of customers worldwide - they are.
If I have a real choice, I’d prefer not to have a subscription. For example, some weather app on my iPhone, I don’t want to pay $1.99/month. But Microsoft 365 has a lot of functionality outside of being a word processor, and it makes life easier for me and my family. So I’ll give them $50/yr for rock-solid performance, monthly updates and security characteristics that comes from being one of the biggest software/cloud providers on the planet.
jamie0610
macrumors member
Office for mac 2019 fast shipping | eBay
Multi Language. Compatible for MacOS Sierra or later. •PowerPoint.
www.ebay.co.uk
Too good to be true at £7.85 but all great feedback!
Quicksilver867
macrumors 6502
Oop, yeah, got my Macs confused. I still have Office 2011 on my...2011 MacBook Pro, and it's the one that does that to me. Don't have 365 on any of 'em, thank goodness.
The family subscription is actually a great value. There is no license key. You activate the software with the email address of your Microsoft account (it does not have to be a hotmail/msn email address.) You and five other people get the apps plus 1TB each of OneDrive space. Updates are ongoing as long as your subscription is current. You can manage your installs and people who are part of the "family" at the MS account site. If you want to use a work email for the Microsoft account, it can't match an email that is already tied to a corporate license. I believe each user only can see the administrator's email address.
Hmmm, I'm in a somewhat unusual position here. I have a Microsoft 365 Personal subscription, which I use on two machines as well as my iPhone. One of my machines however is a 2011 Macbook Pro, which I can't update past macOS Sierra 10.12.6, because I've had to disable the graphics card and solely use the integrated graphics (thanks Apple, for your quality engineering on the MBPs all these years 🙄). Anyway, because I'm on Sierra 10.12.6, the latest Word/Excel version I can install from my 365 subscription is 2016 (16.16.20). Does this mean that I can't use my Office subscription on one of my machines?
Obviously, I appreciate it's not necessarily Microsoft's fault that I'm Office 2016 because I'm on macOS Sierra, but still...
Obviously, I appreciate it's not necessarily Microsoft's fault that I'm Office 2016 because I'm on macOS Sierra, but still...
technole
macrumors 6502a
No one owns Adobe professional software nowadays, and they are still raking it in.
DeepIn2U
macrumors G5
Get an Outlook.com account.
You can create content within and edit but the Excel component is VERY limited and you cannot just place your traditional Excel Add-Ons therein.
Ask your employer if they have a Employee O365 license offer for personal account.
Also I would NOT be surprised if Microsoft includes a full 365 day license for Microsoft 365 (it's no longer just Office 365) with the Microsoft Duo smartphone. Anyone remember DropBox 200GB (?, I maybe wrong on the size offered) when you registered a Samsung Galaxy phone? IF this is the case, trust me I'll be registering on every Microsoft Duo at BestBuy kiosk device when it launches 😉 Those DropBox registrations worked wonders for 2yrs, yet was a pain to spend such time downloading my content before it expired lol.
I'm not all for it. Leasing often makes less sense for the buyer than buying.
Corporations do everything in their power to give people as little for their money as possible. Some of the tactics can be quite shady.
Unfortunately, the entire world is set up to benefit the people who live in privilege. They run the show and we get whatever we can.
Billie Holiday: "Rich relations give, crust of bread and such. You can help yourself; just don't take too much."
Part of the lease mentality is the idea that people can stop being able to use programs just because corporations have decided they're no longer cool. DRM in video games (and software serialization on the Lisa, a form of DRM) pioneered this problem.
This works in several ways:
1) Companies don't bother to offer backward compatibility in the OS.
2) Companies break backward compatibility via hardware.
3) Companies intentionally remove/block functionality needed to keep the software running.
4) Companies go after people trying to work around the problem, to keep the software usable.
I am very resistant to the attitude that things you own should stop working whenever corporations decide it's convenient for them. It's ridiculous, really. It's like a bank repossessing your home whenever its executives want to. Is that how we really want to live? Eminent domain is bad enough.
Some of the consequences for consumers via the leasing/disposable software mentality:
• Functionality is lost
• Efficiency is impeded
• Nostalgia is blunted (especially sharing fuller experiences with younger generations)
The claim, for instance, that "upgrades" always mean added features and not feature removal is frequently exposed by reality. An example is how one needs Office X in order to import data from Word 5.1. Later versions of Office stripped that functionality, leaving people with Word 5.1 files totally in a lurch. That may be fine and dandy for some executive but it's not for a lot of people. I had to use a file-sharing site to get Office X back so I could get important faculty data from old floppies. This was an old person who can't be expected to be trendy and constantly chase the update train, to keep their data in the loop. Companies want us all to be mice in the wheels, spinning in their "weekly Flash player update" cycle.
Last edited:
chucker23n1
macrumors G3
Well, I mean, sure, if you can find me a bunch of software engineers who voluntarily keep old software updated for free?
(You might be surprised to find that offering backward compatibility doesn't pay the rent. Turns out the landlord doesn't want to be paid in good will.)
Voluntarily? One of the things that helped to make Windows dominant was Microsoft's emphasis on backward compatibility.
As MS has tried to be more Apple-like, that has been changing. Not only has Apple been a role model for MS in terms of this, the state of competition (duopoly pretty much, with Linux and macOS combining to form two forks — desktop and server) has been such that it feels it can get away with less backward compatibility. Companies only give you what they are forced to give you in return for the pieces of your life you sell them. So, when competition is low, quality for one's money is low.
Volunteer software maintainers are just one part of the issue. And, it's abundantly clear that many companies take active measures to block those volunteers from having success. That's one of the effects of DRM and one of the effects of the copyright system (a system that has been abusively extended to an absurd length).
Darth Tulhu
macrumors 68020
I agree that there are drawbacks, particularly with "software leasing".
But I believe that we still have a choice, as there are plenty of open source software out there. Yes, it may take more work, but such is life.
I neither object to the walled garden, nor the emancipation from it.
I am still using the Catalina and running the office mac 2016 on it , it is working good , and i dont want to upgrade to the latest macOS, because the macbook is from year 2017, it is a little old and i bought a Office mac 2016 from keyingo.com, the Office 2016 has been working good for many years !