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.
Office 2016 for Mac Now Available as One-Time $150 Purchase
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm sure they can negotiate as they are probably one of Amazon's top 100 customers of data consumption.
Honestly, if it wasn't for compatibility and the fact my updates are forced, I'd probably still be using Office 2003.
Yeah, but virtualisation isn't quite as good as binary. I prefer Office and similar suites to be in binary because stability is very important when you’re working on something which is very important and I don’t want to risk losing my work.Since Bootcamp, vmware fusion, and parallels were released
To Randian and unplugme71: Interesting, I hadn't thought about how Dropbox's pricing is impacted by their need to use a service, unlike Apple which hosts its own data centers (right?). I imagine that does give Apple a comfy price cushion vs. someone who has to engage Amazon. And, while Dropbox is probably a very big client, it seems like many of the Fortune 500 use Amazon servers (I could be wrong, but thought I'd seem something to this effect recently). So I don't know how flexible they really will be with someone like Dropbox.
Free Office suites on the market just cannot compete with the beast that is Microsoft Excel.
I'm quite surprised that so many people in this post think that those freewares can fully replace MS Office.
Now I understand why people here always say that "Brand X can do what the Apple X can do and it's much cheaper! Evil Apple!".
I'm quite surprised that so many people in this post think that those freewares can fully replace MS Office.
Now I understand why people here always say that "Brand X can do what the Apple X can do and it's much cheaper! Evil Apple!".
Dropbox gets wholesale pricing from Amazon, but it's constrained by the fact that Amazon is competing with Dropbox in the storage space. They don't want to give away the farm to Dropbox.
Ok... and it's still ambiguous
But it's all good. There is no such thing a free lunch as they say.Not necessarily, there are times when selling to a third party is cheaper than selling it directly yourself.
A GB might cost Dropbox 0.01 but to Amazon it might cost them 0.02. It all depends on the extra infrastructure Amazon uses and how it bills itself internally.
To elaborate, Dropbox might only need 5 employees to manage their service but Amazon need 5 employees, plus the 5 folks who manage the data center.
I'm sure Dropbox is big enough that losing them as a customer can greatly affect them. Lets say that Dropbox consumes 25 storage arrays each containing 1PB each. Each storage array is in the millions for cost. Losing them will put several million of equipment in standstill for a while. You don't want to piss them off so you'd most likely work out on cutting a fraction of a penny if needed.
You mean bare metal? Everything is binary (0,1)
And virtualization is actually very stable. More than half the world (data centers, businesses, etc) run virtualized.
For those waiting for this to show up in Microsoft's Home Use Program (HUP), their blog claims it will be available in early October.
https://blogs.office.com/2015/09/22/thenewoffice/ (see comments)
https://blogs.office.com/2015/09/22/thenewoffice/ (see comments)
Unfortunately, it's still 32-bit. Kind of stupid to me, considering the huge amount of dev resources in MS.
Still 32 bit, that's crazy for a memory consuming set of apps. If it were 64 bit I might consider buying it, now with 32 bit I think I go for an offer on the Pirate Bay (don't want to spend a penny on 32 bit software).
Yes, for the Windows versions this will be correct, but does this also account for OSX?
I did a little research, and it looks like you're right. According to this PCMag article from the 19th, it looks the Mac version is just 32-bit. Though, that was the beta, not the official release since it was officially released on the 22nd. I guess there's a chance that Microsoft might make it 64-bit.
Has anyone here tried to compare MS Office for Mac 2016 versus MS Office for Windows that runs on MS Windows 10 that runs on Parallel Desktop 11?
I know the latter is more expensive though.
Which one is faster and reliable?
I consider the interoperability. I wonder if one Word doc that you type on MS Office for Mac 2016 will be exactly the same on a Windows 10 PC. No funny change when the Word doc file is opened on PC?
Do you think it's worth to spend money for Parallels Desktop + MS Windows 8 then Upgrade to MS Windows 10 + MS Office for Windows 10, instead of paying for MS Office for Mac 2016?
I know the latter is more expensive though.
Which one is faster and reliable?
I consider the interoperability. I wonder if one Word doc that you type on MS Office for Mac 2016 will be exactly the same on a Windows 10 PC. No funny change when the Word doc file is opened on PC?
Do you think it's worth to spend money for Parallels Desktop + MS Windows 8 then Upgrade to MS Windows 10 + MS Office for Windows 10, instead of paying for MS Office for Mac 2016?
MTW, I don't think it's a stupid post at all. Do you trade your car in every fall for a brand new one because it'll be "newer/better"? Rent your appliances so you get the latest functionality whenever the latest models come out? For those of us that were not born with this "gotta have the latest and greatest" mentality, as long as what we buy works for us, there is zero reason to replace it. I myself just need to run the excel sheets I've amassed over time using Windows because I currently don't have the time to rewrite them all in Numbers. ( I finally dumped Windows a while back and have not regretted it one bit). So why on earth would I want to endlessly pay MS a monthly or annual fee? Once I can access/use my current sheets on my MBPR, I am done. The one time purchase is EXACTLY what I need. And it gives me time to dump their products altogether at some point.
As for missing functionality, I did not read where the 150 tier products are are missing any functionality. You just don't get OneNote, Outlook, Publisher, and Access. The products you do get, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint are the full products. Unless I am mistaken.
Craftydad - still new to Apple Life
I have both Windows and Mac versions (I'm a MSDN VS Enterprise subscriber, paid by my company.
).It's surely 32-bit and 64-bit on Windows. Installer checks the current OS type and picks up the correct binaries. On Mac, it's 32-bit all the way. Just check Activity Monitor with the "Kind" column enabled.
I have both Windows and Mac versions (I'm a MSDN VS Enterprise subscriber, paid by my company.
It's surely 32-bit and 64-bit on Windows. Installer checks the current OS type and picks up the correct binaries. On Mac, it's 32-bit all the way. Just check Activity Monitor with the "Kind" column enabled.
I guess they are worried that 5 people are still running Core Solo systems?
In earlier days, I assumed that they just had too much sloppy code in there that thought that ints and pointers were the same thing. But, now that they have a full portable 32-bit/64-bit code base (on Windows), I wonder what is holding them up?
But, I want more than just 64-bit code. I want the part of the code that talks to the network to be sandboxed and carefully hardened (strong ASLR, DEP, stack protection, everything that you get on Windows 7 with all the options (e.g. via EMET) turned on. Office is a Microsoft product, after all-- you would think they could utilize all of the existing security protections.
I'm still using my 2008 edition. I will consider buying the 2017 edition if it is (64-bits)+(security enhancements).