Old version of MS Office with Nehalem?

[ssammy]

I'm about to pick up an 8-core 2.26 Mac Pro and was wondering if my ancient Microsoft Office: mac v.X that I've been using with my ancient G5 will work on the new machine?

 

[Mac Husky]

Why shouldn´t it

 

[ssammy]

Intel compatability? I've been out of the new mac game for a long time and know that some software doesn't like the switch to Intel. So... no worries?

 

[iVoid]

Office 2004 works with my 2009 MacPro quad. Don' use it a lot, so there may be issues, but it installed, and word and Excel open and seem to work okay for general editing.

 

[$BPM$]

I'm also using Office 2004 on 09 2.26 octad. I use Entourage as my email client and Excel daily. No problems in a month's use.

 

[ssammy]

But was Office 2004 designed for the Intel chips? I read somewhere that Office v.X was working under Rosetta, but that post was years ago. Is Rosetta still a function of the Mac OS?

 

[nick9191]

Yes, most people still use Office 2004 because of the issues with 2008. And of course Office 2008 came out in... 2008, 2 years after the Intel switch, so obviously everyone was using office 2004 for 2 years on Intel Macs.

 

[iVoid]

Office 2004 is PPC code, but it works fine via Rosetta. It's hardly a major processor hog, especially on the new Negalem processors.

 

[Roy]

Appleworks 6.2.9

Well on the topics of what works, what about the last version of Appleworks 6.2.9. I still use it on my G4 tower and Tiger 10.4.11? I'm planning on getting a quad 2.66.

 

[iVoid]

Well on the topics of what works, what about the last version of Appleworks 6.2.9. I still use it on my G4 tower and Tiger 10.4.11? I'm planning on getting a quad 2.66.

Only app I've tried so far that doesn't work is Dreamweaver MX 2004. I don't do a lot of heavy duty web work right now (mostly small updates to testing pages), so I don't want to spend the money on the upgrade to CS4.


My core everyday apps are all working and Intel, so I'm happy.

 

[Abidubi]

I'm using MS office 2000 on my new system and it works exactly as fast as it did on my G5.

 

[frimple]

so uh... I don't think it's been asked why you're dropping $3k on a computer but can't fork over $150 for a new version of office? You could probably even get the upgrade.

 

[Roy]

so uh... I don't think it's been asked why you're dropping $3k on a computer but can't fork over $150 for a new version of office? You could probably even get the upgrade.

I don't see where he said he couldn't fork over $150 for an upgrade. The question was will the old Office work on the new system? A fair question from my standpoint. If he forks over 3K for a new system and then has to immediately fork over another 1K to upgrade all his programs, isn't that something that you would suspect someone would want to know. It's an additional cost associated with upgrading your system. If the programs work on the new system, then he can upgrade as money and need becomes available. Unless you are trying to suggest that he buy a cheaper machine and upgrade all his programs immediately whether or not he needs to immediately?

 

[cmaier]

so uh... I don't think it's been asked why you're dropping $3k on a computer but can't fork over $150 for a new version of office? You could probably even get the upgrade.

Office 2008 is horrendously buggy, doesn't work with scripts used in business environments, and hates Leopard (e.g.: Spaces, etc.)

I'm just sayin'

 

[frimple]

The question was will the old Office work on the new system? A fair question from my standpoint. If he forks over 3K for a new system and then has to immediately fork over another 1K to upgrade all his programs, isn't that something that you would suspect someone would want to know. It's an additional cost associated with upgrading your system. If the programs work on the new system, then he can upgrade as money and need becomes available. Unless you are trying to suggest that he buy a cheaper machine and upgrade all his programs immediately whether or not he needs to immediately?

I just want to know if he's wanting to avoid the upgrade due to the cost. If that is the case and knowing that a new computer purchase doesn't stop at the hardware maybe he should re-think his needs vs. wants.

Office 2008 is horrendously buggy, doesn't work with scripts used in business environments, and hates Leopard (e.g.: Spaces, etc.)

I'm just sayin'

Completely valid reasons not to upgrade, but I heard 2004 is pretty good and there's always the iWork product suite.

 

[Roy]

I just want to know if he's wanting to avoid the upgrade due to the cost. If that is the case and knowing that a new computer purchase doesn't stop at the hardware maybe he should re-think his needs vs. wants.

I see so much of this, on these Mac forums, posters trying to tell people they shouldn't buy a Mac Pro. "iMac is what you should get". Most people in America don't buy based upon "need". They buy based upon what they want. I have no "need" for a Mac Pro, but I'm going to buy one for my own personal satisfaction because I want one to replace my G4 tower I didn't need. I don't really "need" a computer, but I buy them. I don't need a Mac, when a Windows machine will fill a "need" (which I don't have).

So, I , like the original poster would like to know what software continues to work on the Intels from the PPC machines. I even hate it when I update, just my OS to a slighter higher level, and then unexpected to me, I've got to upgrade my software. I had assumed that I would have to upgrade all my software, and I was prepared for that, but now I'm beginning to find some unexpected surprises. So, I would like to hear more of these unexpected surprises and I can upgrade my software when I want to and not because I have to.