MSFT: Lion Features Coming to Office "In Months, Not Days"

[FloatingBones]

Office is kind of needed for college. Yes you can get around it with Open office but you run into a lot of the little problems of trying to get things to work. It is more or less the standard in school.

I can't really see how this dogmatic requirement can survive in the long run. Between Open Office, iWork, Google Docs, Chromebook laptops, iPads, Android Tablets, etc., there are far too many diverse solutions to require that students submit their work with a Microsoft format. Those approaches may have made perfect sense in the 1990s and early 2000s, but no more.

In theory yes but Office has a lot of tools in it that right to the fact make not able to live in a sand box.
For example the Macros are a a great example of that fact. Have that in the program requires the program not live in a sand box and is a huge part of the power of the program.
Have the ablity to link multiple files together and access data from other files in one document or excel sheet also hurts that. Then of course you have things like Access which is a data base program which again can not be trapped in a sand box.

You raise some excellent questions here. The iOS-style firewalling has proven invaluable on those machines, and Apple has indicated that they will move to similar firewalling in the Lion framework. Keeping the flexibility of contained sub-documents while maintaining firewall separation between apps will be a huge challenge.

Lastly I would not be surprised in the least if Apple software they put in the store breaks the rules of the MAS but since the dev is Apple the same rules do not apply to them. Correct that it is a fact Apple software breaks the rules of the App store. I have to look no father than Lion to prove that but I am willing to bet good money that several of Apples Apps break the rules.

If MS had requested some latitude with the MAS rules, they would have had the best chance of getting some exceptions. I'm certain that Apple worked very hard to get the MS apps into the MAS. I'm betting that this year's back-to-school program was crafted to help encourage MS to get into the MAS as soon as possible. MS won't get any of those back-to-school gift cards unless their apps are in the MAS.

This is all connected: every college student computer that doesn't have MS Office will accelerate a relaxation of the requirement that MS Office be used for submitting papers in classes. There will be a tipping point where such dogmatic requirements will be viewed as absurd -- further accelerating the flight from MS Office.

 

[FloatingBones]

Your guess is probably wrong then, considering Apple's history of secrecy even with other big vendors and partners.

Given Apple's very special relationship with MS in the past, it's probably right. Only one company ever bailed out Apple.

Apple just doesn't discuss this stuff. Since your whole premise is based on this, might want to review your conclusions a bit.

Someone else in this discussion has already noted your habit of skipping over points and jumping to conclusions. Did you notice: you completely skipped over my point of Microsoft's 1997 bailout of the Apple corporation. You seem to think that Apple wouldn't have a special relationship with Microsoft and the division that spearheaded that bailout; you need to discuss why you think that.

Unfortunately for both Apple and Microsoft, Apple announced the rules of the MAS too late for them to be taken into consideration for Office 2011.

Even if Microsoft received the same notice of all other companies, why can't they adopt their software?

Are you claiming that we must now wait until 2014 (or maybe 2015) for a MAS-compliant version of Microsoft's software?

Are we going to get none of the iCloud sync and backup features that will be pervasive in the next 12 months? Do you really think that Microsoft can afford to ignore those features for another 3 to 4 years!?!

I think they can. The MAS is mostly a spec of dust and quite irrelevant right now. It's just not gaining the traction the iOS App Store did (thanks to being the only source of software for iOS).

Do you have any numbers that support your assessment?

How has the MAS tracked compared to the iOS App Store in its first six months?

Remember: you need to reconcile Microsoft's 1997 bailout of Apple with your opinion that Apple doesn't have a special relationship with that company. Skipping over that point and jumping to conclusions is a No Pass.

 

[KnightWRX]

Do you have any numbers that support your assessment?

How has the MAS tracked compared to the iOS App Store in its first six months?

Yes, I don't have numbers. That backs up my claim. Apple doesn't release numbers when they don't have the success they expected. Case in point : Apple TV. How many Apple TVs were sold last quarter ? Last year ? There's just no numbers released during earning calls.

Apple doesn't release numbers for stuff that isn't a big success, that's how they work. Since they haven't released the MAS numbers, I thus base my opinion of the MAS's success on this little tidbit.

Remember: you need to reconcile Microsoft's 1997 bailout of Apple with your opinion that Apple doesn't have a special relationship with that company. Skipping over that point and jumping to conclusions is a No Pass.

So wait, your whole premise is "Microsoft bailed out Apple in 1997", something that is for 1 patently false (Microsoft's money given to Apple at the time was a spec of dust in the grand scheme of things) and 2 pure conjecture as it says nothing of their relationship with the software division right now.

No, you made the claim Microsoft knew ahead of time, you need to back up your assertion. It's not up to me to prove a negative here (you can't prove a negative), it's up to you to back up your claim.

I don't need to reconcile anything, you need to back up your claims here. Until you do, Microsoft found out the rules at the same time we all did, which was way too late in the development cycle for Office 2011 to adjust. Same for Lion really.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

I can't really see how this dogmatic requirement can survive in the long run. Between Open Office, iWork, Google Docs, Chromebook laptops, iPads, Android Tablets, etc., there are far too many diverse solutions to require that students submit their work with a Microsoft format. Those approaches may have made perfect sense in the 1990s and early 2000s, but no more.

Yeah again those just do not play nice and all work great between different products. A group project I worked on we were jumping threw hoops because one group member was working on Open Office and it just did not play nice with Office. It just had so many little problems that it would not translate well over to office. Power point was a huge pain in the rear and we had to have power point working. End up we built a lot of stuff in office and copy pasted a fair among of his stuff.

You raise some excellent questions here. The iOS-style firewalling has proven invaluable on those machines, and Apple has indicated that they will move to similar firewalling in the Lion framework. Keeping the flexibility of contained sub-documents while maintaining firewall separation between apps will be a huge challenge.

It can work for some things but it starts adding a lot of extra bulk to a program and bloat in running things when direct file access would work better. Plus like I said Macros are going to need to be allowed to break out of the sand box and they are user written. I have seen some amazing office machros written and can tell you that they required to break out of the sand box.

If MS had requested some latitude with the MAS rules, they would have had the best chance of getting some exceptions. I'm certain that Apple worked very hard to get the MS apps into the MAS. I'm betting that this year's back-to-school program was crafted to help encourage MS to get into the MAS as soon as possible. MS won't get any of those back-to-school gift cards unless their apps are in the MAS.

LOL that is funny. Apple allowing MS latitude on the rules. Sorry Apple has case after case were they do not do that for any company so not going to happen here.

This is all connected: every college student computer that doesn't have MS Office will accelerate a relaxation of the requirement that MS Office be used for submitting papers in classes. There will be a tipping point where such dogmatic requirements will be viewed as absurd -- further accelerating the flight from MS Office.

Umm yeah not going to happen. MS has way to many deals with colleges that allow for the software to be on the schools computers and then supply to the students for a cheap price.

It is one of those piece of software that is standard. Business world Office is the default standard and the students should learned how to use it while in college.

 

[FloatingBones]

Yes, I don't have numbers. That backs up my claim.

Your lack of data means you have backed up your claim?!? It may not be possible for us to have a rational discusion on this topic.

Apple doesn't release numbers for stuff that isn't a big success, that's how they work.

This is just a re-statement of your earlier conjecture -- the tail wagging the dog.

So wait, your whole premise is "Microsoft bailed out Apple in 1997", something that is for 1 patently false (Microsoft's money given to Apple at the time was a spec of dust in the grand scheme of things) and 2 pure conjecture as it says nothing of their relationship with the software division right now.

Well, their stock did go up 40% that day. It was far more than the money; it was a 5-year commitment from MS to continue to develop and release new versions of MS Office for the Mac platform. Jobs's declarations about burying the hatchet with MS at the WWDC were legendary. His work on brokering this deal helped solidify his leadership in his return to Apple.

No, you made the claim Microsoft knew ahead of time, you need to back up your assertion. It's not up to me to prove a negative here (you can't prove a negative), it's up to you to back up your claim.

Actually, you are the one who made a conjecture and failed to back it up:

Apple just doesn't discuss this stuff [with other companies].

You have failed to tell us how exactly you know this.

I don't need to reconcile anything

Fine. We should just believe you when you say that Apple just doesn't discuss deals privately with other companies. We'll take your blanket statement on faith.

 

[KnightWRX]

Fine. We should just believe you when you say that Apple just doesn't discuss deals privately with other companies. We'll take your blanket statement on faith.

Fine. We should just believe you when you say that Microsoft knew ahead of time of the MAS rules when nobody else did. We'll take your blanket statement on faith.

No seriously, you didn't just...

At least have the decency of not being a pot calling a kettle black.

Again, until we have proof that Microsoft knew ahead of time, why not assume they learned of it the same way other Apple registered developers did ? That is the safe bet...

Now, again, provide citation to backup your claim, or all you've claimed here is pure bunked.

 

[FloatingBones]

Fine. We should just believe you when you say that Microsoft knew ahead of time of the MAS rules when nobody else did. We'll take your blanket statement on faith.

You characterized the strategic 1997 investment by Microsoft as "just a spec" in the history of Apple. Do you realize that doesn't quite ring true? Their stock did go up 40% the day of the announcement. It was far more than the money; it was a 5-year commitment from MS to continue to develop and release new versions of MS Office for the Mac platform. Jobs's declarations about burying the hatchet with MS at the WWDC were legendary. His work on brokering this deal helped solidify his leadership in his return to Apple.

Where do you rank this investment and agreement with Microsoft as important events in the history of Apple?

Again, until we have proof that Microsoft knew ahead of time, why not assume they learned of it the same way other Apple registered developers did ?

In all honesty, we will never know one way or the other. We just don't think you have a lot of credibility if you view the 1997 MS agreement and investment as "just a speck of dust" in the history of Apple. It was a significant agreement.

The far more important question: are you thinking that Microsoft will wait until 2014 (or maybe 2015) to provide any upgrade to MS Office on the Mac? Will we have to wait until then to Microsoft to add cloud backup and synchronization to Office? If MS waits that long, their product will be severely handicapped against the rest of the marketplace.

 

[KnightWRX]

You characterized the strategic 1997 investment by Microsoft as "just a spec" in the history of Apple. Do you realize that doesn't quite ring true? Their stock did go up 40% the day of the announcement. It was far more than the money; it was a 5-year commitment from MS to continue to develop and release new versions of MS Office for the Mac platform. Jobs's declarations about burying the hatchet with MS at the WWDC were legendary. His work on brokering this deal helped solidify his leadership in his return to Apple.

Where do you rank this investment and agreement with Microsoft as important events in the history of Apple?

What does any of that have to do with the MAS introduction ? Again, there's no proof that Microsoft knew ahead of time, no proof of Apple giving a heads up to developers for the MAS beyond the same heads up every registered developer got under NDA

There's really nothing to argue here. Unless you have proof of anything, we have to go on the basis that Microsoft learned about it the same way every other registered Mac developer did. The 1997 Agreement does not overrule Apple's culture of secrecy that is so well known.

In all honesty, we will never know one way or the other. We just don't think you have a lot of credibility if you view the 1997 MS agreement and investment as "just a speck of dust" in the history of Apple. It was a significant agreement.

My credibility is as good as yours. Again, read about that agreement, it was not as important as people make it out to be. Apple's recovery did not edge on that agreement at all.

The far more important question: are you thinking that Microsoft will wait until 2014 (or maybe 2015) to provide any upgrade to MS Office on the Mac? Will we have to wait until then to Microsoft to add cloud backup and synchronization to Office? If MS waits that long, their product will be severely handicapped against the rest of the marketplace.

That never stopped them before. They might not wait, if Office didn't have such a stranglehold on the industry through sheer stagnation. It does though, and stagnation is very alive.

 

[FloatingBones]

Yeah again those just do not play nice and all work great between different products. A group project I worked on we were jumping threw hoops because one group member was working on Open Office and it just did not play nice with Office. It just had so many little problems that it would not translate well over to office. Power point was a huge pain in the rear and we had to have power point working. End up we built a lot of stuff in office and copy pasted a fair among of his stuff.

You are right; collaboration with different tools is a bear. In this discussion, I was thinking more about the mechanisms for students to submit papers for classes. I don't think it's appropriate to require any specific vendor's text-processing format for papers. Requiring all papers to be submitted as PDF documents would avoid many problems.

It can work for some things but it starts adding a lot of extra bulk to a program and bloat in running things when direct file access would work better. Plus like I said Macros are going to need to be allowed to break out of the sand box and they are user written. I have seen some amazing office machros written and can tell you that they required to break out of the sand box.

I'm sure you agree with the significant value of sandboxing applications for the reliability of PCs.

I don't think sandboxing and direct access are mutually exclusive. I haven't done any research to see what Apple has to say about that issue.

LOL that is funny.

You disagree that Apple has -- and will -- work hard to get MS apps into the MAS????

Umm yeah not going to happen. MS has way to many deals with colleges that allow for the software to be on the schools computers and then supply to the students for a cheap price.

15 years ago, I might have believed you. The PC ruled college campuses, and MS Office was the de facto standard. Nobody would have predicted then that over 10% of computers sold today in the US would instead be apple machines, and that many campuses have over twice that percentage. While the iWork components are available there, no parts of MS Office are available for the iPad (and this is the only computer for many undergrads).

It is one of those piece of software that is standard. Business world Office is the default standard and the students should learned how to use it while in college.

It has been the standard, but it is not even available on a vast number of computers today: Chromium laptops, iPads, Android Tablet Machines, etc.

Microsoft Office training should be available for anyone who wants to be trained in using that software.

 

[FloatingBones]

What does any of that have to do with the MAS introduction ?

The 1997 investment in Apple by Microsoft and commitment to support the Apple platform for five years is a testimony to the crucial importance of the Office Suite on the Mac -- for both Apple and Microsoft.

Your comment that this was "just a spec of dust" in the history of Apple is incorrect. It was a major event in the relationship between the two companies. It was a crucial decision for Apple and a brilliant speech by Jobs at the WWDC. It was one of the crucial events to the revival of Apple and its fantastic success today.

Again, there's no proof that Microsoft knew ahead of time, no proof of Apple giving a heads up to developers for the MAS beyond the same heads up every registered developer got under NDA

There's no proof that they did NOT know either.

If you think that MS is treated the same as some random Joe who forked over $100 to get his developer's license, you're free to think that -- just as you're free to think that MS's 1997 investment and long-term agreements with Apple were "just a speck of dust".

My credibility is as good as yours.

Incorrect. Compared to me, your credibility is just a speck of dust.

That never stopped them before. They might not wait, if Office didn't have such a stranglehold on the industry through sheer stagnation. It does though, and stagnation is very alive.

Between Open Office, iWork, Google Docs (and the whole Google Apps suite), Chromium Laptops, Android Tablets, The RIM Playbook, Android Tablets, Apple's iPad, there are tremendous challenges to Microsoft's "standard". About 75% of the third-party software I use has released updates for Lion, and more updates will be coming from those agile and talented companies.

You are right: if Microsoft wishes to continue in their old ways, nobody will stop them from doing that. They are welcome to wait until 2014 or 2015 for the next release of MS Office. They will do that at their own peril. They will miss the boat for Apple's backup, synchronization, and collaboration methods between their Lion and iOS 5 machines.

Their market share could shrink like a speck of dust.

 

[mutantteenager]

Make the paperclip 64bit native, and the world is a better place!

 

[jonnysods]

I updated to Lion Wednesday, Office isn't that bad. Not as bad as I thought it would be.

Any patch from MS is welcome to me though!

 

[yojitani]

I wonder if this update will ever actually materialize.

 

[Steve's Barber]

I wonder if this update will ever actually materialize.

MS might just wait for a grand do-over and incorporate all the Lion crap in a full Office 2012 release. (Which of course means it will be 2013 before we really see it ). To their credit... we've gotten 3 updates since 2011 was introduced. Not bad for MS on the mac platform.


But what do I know... I still don't understand why Microsoft even develops for the mac at all. Glad they are though because I wouldn't be using OSX unless it had Office.

 

[Lee90]

Wow! No kidding?
New Office for MAC? Fantastic news! It's like a Christmas present for me! Thanks!

 

[divinox]

Given Apple's very special relationship with MS in the past, it's probably right. Only one company ever bailed out Apple.



Someone else in this discussion has already noted your habit of skipping over points and jumping to conclusions. Did you notice: you completely skipped over my point of Microsoft's 1997 bailout of the Apple corporation. You seem to think that Apple wouldn't have a special relationship with Microsoft and the division that spearheaded that bailout; you need to discuss why you think that.



Even if Microsoft received the same notice of all other companies, why can't they adopt their software?

Are you claiming that we must now wait until 2014 (or maybe 2015) for a MAS-compliant version of Microsoft's software?

Are we going to get none of the iCloud sync and backup features that will be pervasive in the next 12 months? Do you really think that Microsoft can afford to ignore those features for another 3 to 4 years!?!



Do you have any numbers that support your assessment?

How has the MAS tracked compared to the iOS App Store in its first six months?

Remember: you need to reconcile Microsoft's 1997 bailout of Apple with your opinion that Apple doesn't have a special relationship with that company. Skipping over that point and jumping to conclusions is a No Pass.

Because changes far in to development projects costs millions, whereas they cost pennies early in. Apple needs Office more than Office needs Apple. Likely, Apple failed to provide a timely roadmap (and/or imposed restrictions that would need a) massive rewrites b) reduced functionality), in turn leaving MSFT with little choice than to release as planned (despite Lion specific functionality).

Also, one must remember that MSFT does not only cater to Lion, but older OS's too. Should they sacrifice functionality for the majority of the installed base, just to be on Apples edge of development? Personally, i think not.

p.s.

Office is already integrated with MSFTs Skydrive. Second, afaik you can always sync your documents folder in iOS. Whats your point, really?

----------

Yeah again those just do not play nice and all work great between different products. A group project I worked on we were jumping threw hoops because one group member was working on Open Office and it just did not play nice with Office. It just had so many little problems that it would not translate well over to office. Power point was a huge pain in the rear and we had to have power point working. End up we built a lot of stuff in office and copy pasted a fair among of his stuff.



It can work for some things but it starts adding a lot of extra bulk to a program and bloat in running things when direct file access would work better. Plus like I said Macros are going to need to be allowed to break out of the sand box and they are user written. I have seen some amazing office machros written and can tell you that they required to break out of the sand box.




LOL that is funny. Apple allowing MS latitude on the rules. Sorry Apple has case after case were they do not do that for any company so not going to happen here.


Umm yeah not going to happen. MS has way to many deals with colleges that allow for the software to be on the schools computers and then supply to the students for a cheap price.

It is one of those piece of software that is standard. Business world Office is the default standard and the students should learned how to use it while in college.

Boldtyped QFT. Office is the de facto standard. Are there other programs that could do the trick? Yes, but certainly not without hassle. Same goes for parts of the Adobe suite. Its just the way it is. As long as these companies play nice, and get their rents from the industry, rather than students and schools, i see no real issue. For a business, the license cost is nothing, really.

----------

Fine. We should just believe you when you say that Microsoft knew ahead of time of the MAS rules when nobody else did. We'll take your blanket statement on faith.

No seriously, you didn't just...

At least have the decency of not being a pot calling a kettle black.

Again, until we have proof that Microsoft knew ahead of time, why not assume they learned of it the same way other Apple registered developers did ? That is the safe bet...

Now, again, provide citation to backup your claim, or all you've claimed here is pure bunked.

Even if they did know prior to others, what is to say that they knew soon enough? Frankly, I'm hardly going out on a limb stating that Apple certainly knew more about Microsofts roadmap than MSFT knew of Apples. Further, theres no reason to believe that Microsoft would've made their product worse, just because. Hell, all it means is that they now have to spend extra resources to add functionality that "should've been there in first place". Why would they want to do that? Its simple really: Apple fumbled the ball on this one. Maybe for the better, overall - as far as Lion is concerned - but i find it unlikely that MSFT is to blame - as far as Office is concerned.

----------

You characterized the strategic 1997 investment by Microsoft as "just a spec" in the history of Apple. Do you realize that doesn't quite ring true? Their stock did go up 40% the day of the announcement. It was far more than the money; it was a 5-year commitment from MS to continue to develop and release new versions of MS Office for the Mac platform. Jobs's declarations about burying the hatchet with MS at the WWDC were legendary. His work on brokering this deal helped solidify his leadership in his return to Apple.

Where do you rank this investment and agreement with Microsoft as important events in the history of Apple?



In all honesty, we will never know one way or the other. We just don't think you have a lot of credibility if you view the 1997 MS agreement and investment as "just a speck of dust" in the history of Apple. It was a significant agreement.

The far more important question: are you thinking that Microsoft will wait until 2014 (or maybe 2015) to provide any upgrade to MS Office on the Mac? Will we have to wait until then to Microsoft to add cloud backup and synchronization to Office? If MS waits that long, their product will be severely handicapped against the rest of the marketplace.

Skydrive is already there, right? The documents folder already syncs across iCloud, correct? That said, no, MSFT will not wait until next major release. Who knows what else Apple will have broken/changed by then.

----------

You are right; collaboration with different tools is a bear. In this discussion, I was thinking more about the mechanisms for students to submit papers for classes. I don't think it's appropriate to require any specific vendor's text-processing format for papers. Requiring all papers to be submitted as PDF documents would avoid many problems.



I'm sure you agree with the significant value of sandboxing applications for the reliability of PCs.

I don't think sandboxing and direct access are mutually exclusive. I haven't done any research to see what Apple has to say about that issue.



You disagree that Apple has -- and will -- work hard to get MS apps into the MAS????



15 years ago, I might have believed you. The PC ruled college campuses, and MS Office was the de facto standard. Nobody would have predicted then that over 10% of computers sold today in the US would instead be apple machines, and that many campuses have over twice that percentage. While the iWork components are available there, no parts of MS Office are available for the iPad (and this is the only computer for many undergrads).



It has been the standard, but it is not even available on a vast number of computers today: Chromium laptops, iPads, Android Tablet Machines, etc.

Microsoft Office training should be available for anyone who wants to be trained in using that software.

bric-a-brac: i usually force all my students to submit in PDF. Its god awful to manage a ****-ton of .whatever. That said, i'm sure >90% use Office and that the rest basically use OO. Yet to see any indication of anyone using Papers. Have seen some (very few) students make use of GDocs and LaTex though.

That said, Apple having a higher market share today doesn't mean that Office' share is smaller. After all, we're in a thread about Office for Mac, are we not?

----------

MS might just wait for a grand do-over and incorporate all the Lion crap in a full Office 2012 release. (Which of course means it will be 2013 before we really see it ). To their credit... we've gotten 3 updates since 2011 was introduced. Not bad for MS on the mac platform.


But what do I know... I still don't understand why Microsoft even develops for the mac at all. Glad they are though because I wouldn't be using OSX unless it had Office.

Why? a) its good money b) it helps them reinforce office as de facto standard.

 

[Sky Blue]

14.2 is out with Full screen (not for Outlook though) and other improvements.

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2685940