backtop


Print 107 comment(s) - last by Just Tom.. on Mar 31 at 8:20 PM

Support for Office 2003 ends April 8 along with Windows XP

Microsoft has stepped up its efforts in recent months to kill off Windows XP for good, and those efforts are now extending to Office 2003. Office 2003 has been around for over a decade and Microsoft wants users to switch to Office 365.
 
Microsoft wrote in a blog post, "Office 2003 no longer meets the needs of the way we work, play and live today. For this reason, it is time to say farewell to Office 2003 and embrace the productivity solution of today – Office 365."
 

Microsoft wants users to ditch Office 2003

Many people have been using Office 2003 for years simply because it does all they need and it's paid for. Office 365 requires a subscription and you will need to continue paying to keep it active.
 
Microsoft says that support for Office 2003 will end on April 8.
 
We already knew that support for Windows XP would also end on April 8, and Microsoft has resorted to pop ups to tell XP users the end is here. Microsoft also offers a $100 discount to get XP users to upgrade to Windows 8. 

Source: Office





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

365 :(
By Ahnilated on 3/25/2014 9:14:26 AM , Rating: 5
I don't like the idea of using office 365 when it tries to put everything on the web. This just gives yet another avenue to being spied upon, no thanks.




RE: 365 :(
By Flunk on 3/25/2014 9:39:43 AM , Rating: 5
That's annoying, but I think the specter of paying $99.99 a year FOREVER is the one that gets me.


RE: 365 :(
By Yorgos on 3/25/2014 10:11:04 AM , Rating: 2
instead we all can give $99.99 to the The Document Foundation(libreOffice) once and pay nothing for the rest of our lives.
And that's the way the open-source cookie crumbles :D


RE: 365 :(
By jardows on 3/25/2014 11:00:17 AM , Rating: 5
And you get a product that is inferior in every way. Mind you, not terribly inferior, but still inferior. I have used Open/Libre Office at home for years, and just in the last three years started using MS Office again at work. I am amazed at the functionality I have been missing at home. MS Office just works better. It does word processing better, spreadsheets better, presentations better, simple database MUCH better, etc.

For the average person who wants to just write letters, homework assignments, and keep track of their checkbook, the OSS products work fine. When you want to do real work, spending the money on MS Office is money well spent. I won't comment on the functionality of the subscription based offering, but the locally installed version of MS Office is certainly superior to the OSS products.


RE: 365 :(
By lagomorpha on 3/25/2014 11:54:34 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I have used Open/Libre Office at home for years, and just in the last three years started using MS Office again at work.


Have you continued using Libre Office at home? Some big improvements were made in 2013.


RE: 365 :(
By jardows on 3/25/2014 1:59:54 PM , Rating: 2
I primarily use OpenOffice at home. Something about the whole "Libre" thing that annoys me, though I have used it some. Anyway, for the vast majority of things I do at home, it is great, and probably more than I need. But I have tried to replicate some of the similar things we do at work in OpenOffice, and it just won't do it.

One thing I really miss about MS Office at home is the pressing tab to autocomplete a cell in the spreadsheet. Maybe there is a setting for that, but I haven't found it yet.


RE: 365 :(
By althaz on 3/25/2014 8:05:13 PM , Rating: 2
IMO LibreOffice is way better than OpenOffice - but still quite shit compared to even seven-year-old Office 2007.


RE: 365 :(
By Darnell021 on 3/27/2014 11:24:18 AM , Rating: 2
OpenOffice is a joke. All the developers working on OpenOffice back when Oracle purchased Sun jumped ship to start The Document Foundation which represents LibreOffice.


RE: 365 :(
By dgingerich on 3/26/2014 3:38:15 PM , Rating: 2
I tried that program once to write a resume. It supposedly saved to MS Office format. When I sent it to someone, thankfully just a recruiter and not directly to an employer, the formatting came out horribly and the person couldn't read it. I ended up having to take LibreOffice, save it to Rich Text format, then open it in OpenOffice as a MS Office file, and save it as a Rich Text format, and then change the extension to .doc so MS Office would open it as an Office 97 format file. It was either that or buy MS Office and redo the entire document. I'm not going through that again. I'm not trying and free office program again. They not only can't seem to get the MS Office formats right, but can't even get the supposedly standard Rich Test Format right.

Office 365 isn't a bad deal at all, considering what you get. Sure, you pay $99/year (if you watch for coupons and specials, you can by like me and pay $80/year,) but you always get the most updated version. So, when Office 2015 comes out, you can upgrade to it without spending any extra.

Also, if your company does things right with their MS licensing, employees can get Office Home Use, which means they can spend $20 to get MS Office at home. (I've known too many employers who just wouldn't set up the proper MS licensing scheme with Software Assurance, which comes with the Home Use Program for free, and wound up paying a ton more than they had to for software when it came time to update to the new one. Many accountants don't seem to realize that Software Assurance is a money saver every time, unless you aren't planning on being in business in five years.)


RE: 365 :(
By Yorgos on 3/25/2014 12:38:07 PM , Rating: 2
Well you get a certain amount of functionality for 0 $, which is huge considering the $ someone has to pay. Again 0 $.

On the other hand if we all contribute once a fair amount of money then the free/opensource s/w will get better and better. I won't instantly match the features of MS office but it will catch up within a year or so.

To predict the results of our contributions is easy, it depends on us, if we can live a little bit longer with the current features/version.


RE: 365 :(
By jardows on 3/25/2014 2:14:09 PM , Rating: 5
Not arguing against the value of Open/Libre Office. But in a business environment, time is money. If I need the functionality and integration of MS Office now, I cannot wait an indefinite period of time hoping that the open source alternative will have it. If I can do the same thing, but it takes longer to set up my spreadsheet/database/WP application in the open source version, the additional cost of MS Office will become negligible.

Predicting the results of contributing to an OSS project is not easy. LibreOffice is a fork from OpenOffice. When will there be a major fork of LibreOffice, dividing the development community once again, and slowing implementation of new features? How can we be certain that the features may people find attractive about MS Office are even on the schedule from the OSS project managers? Being a user and not a programmer, I am at the mercy of those who do program.

There are companies that spend tremendous amounts of money for support contracts that are never used, just to have the assurance that *if* something goes wrong, there is a trained professional who will help fix things quickly. This is how companies like RedHat and Canonical make money. With MS Office, the support if bundled with the upfront cost of the product, or with the subscription for 365.

The value proposition is one to be considered, and a blanket recommendation to switch to an OSS alternative will likely not work for the majority of people who make a living using MS Office.


RE: 365 :(
By phatboye on 3/26/2014 1:45:38 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
How can we be certain that the features may people find attractive about MS Office are even on the schedule from the OSS project managers? Being a user and not a programmer, I am at the mercy of those who do program.
The same can be said about MS's products since you do not work for MS what is to say that you are not at the mercy of MS i.e. should they decide to force you into a subscription based model?

So long as you do not own the source code you will be at someones mercy at least with OSS i can change the code myself or hire a programmer to add in any desired feature that I may want. With MS you can only do as you are told.


RE: 365 :(
By Samus on 3/25/2014 11:54:27 PM , Rating: 2
You do get 5 simultenous installs and privilage to use the newest versions of all Office products as they come out.

Case in point, Office 2013 Professional (identical app bundle as Office 365) is $300 and only allows a single install (although you can illegally activate it 3 times on 3 separate PC's if you were so inclined.) It will also be replaced with a newer version in 3 years, by which time you would have spent what it initially cost on Office 365, which gave you 5 legal, floating licenses.

Office 365 doesn't make sense for someone with a single PC, but it makes sense for, say, somebody with 2 PC's, a laptop, and a tablet.


RE: 365 :(
By corduroygt on 3/26/2014 12:37:58 PM , Rating: 2
You can use Office 2013 forever, most people are still on 2007 because it does the job and THERE IS NO NEED TO UPGRADE.


RE: 365 :(
By jd3 on 3/25/2014 7:40:36 PM , Rating: 2
I get the idea that some people don't really understand what Office 365 does. Maybe you do but a lot of people don't. When you pay for an office 365 you actually get the local installs for your computers, Mac or PC? You do not need to save anything online. Yes, they want you to save it to the web, but you certainly do not have to.


RE: 365 :(
By Motoman on 3/25/2014 10:01:48 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Office 2003 no longer meets the needs of the way we work, play and live today.>

Bullsh1t. That's the stupidest thing ever uttered by anyone. Or at least, right up there.

365 does f%ck all that helps me in any way, shape, or form...and if we're going to be honest with ourselves, there's nothing that Office 2003 does that Office 95 didn't do that 99.999% of all consumers need.

Realistically, the versions of WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 that ran on Windows 3.11 did everything that 99.999% of all consumers ever need to do. And if you want to assert that that isn't the case, just stop - because you're lying.

Just like Microsoft.


RE: 365 :(
By w8gaming on 3/25/2014 10:15:04 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft realizes that you cannot keep a stable revenue stream if you sell software which is paid once and can then be used forever, especially when the feature set has long since be completed and nothing much can now be added. But considering how many people and companies have been keeping and using the older version of Office for such a long time, the new subscription pricing of $99 is too high. Some companies have been using Office 2003 for more than 10 years, and the cost per year turns out to be a lot less than $99 per year, and Microsoft never get any additional revenue out of them in the past 10 years. Current price will force such companies to pay more, or simply force them to seriously considering moving away from Microsoft. MS should really lower their subscription price instead of trying a money grab here.


RE: 365 :(
By NellyFromMA on 3/27/2014 1:52:11 PM , Rating: 2
You're comparing always having one feature-set to always having the latest.


RE: 365 :(
By CSMR on 3/26/2014 5:50:00 AM , Rating: 2
These are the features that I use of Office 2010

All apps: Multi-author editing online
All apps: equations
All apps: save as PDF
New app: onenote
Excel: new charts

Does that mean I am in the top 0.00000001% of users?


RE: 365 :(
By Motoman on 3/28/2014 12:11:30 PM , Rating: 2
Without a doubt.


RE: 365 :(
By CSMR on 3/26/2014 5:53:30 AM , Rating: 2
Office 2013 (and the future versions you get via 365) gives you the option of putting files on the web. It also gives you the option of saving them locally. It just gives you a new option. Crazy that anandtech users are complaining about that.


By sparkuss on 3/25/2014 9:55:43 AM , Rating: 3
how much more support does it really need?

I still have 2003 on my Win7 primary PC, primarily for Excel. It does everything I need and I can't stand the ribbon or the pastel colors of 2007 onward.

As long as the rest of my system is maintained for security I don't see any need to not keep 2003.




By lagomorpha on 3/25/2014 10:14:08 AM , Rating: 5
Excel 2003 is very slow, only supports 65536 rows, and won't do everything I need with conditional formatting and macros.

Your needs must be very modest if you're satisfied with 2003.


By Accidic on 3/25/2014 10:33:41 AM , Rating: 2
Not sure what you're considering slow. I have 2003 and 2010. I use 2010 when I have no choice (IE, need a boatload of rows or columns) and 2003 any other time. The ribbon is garbage. Outside of a couple nice quirks in 2010 (which I do begrudgingly like), the rest is typically a headache. Generally speaking I can get more done for what I need to be doing at work in less time with 2003 with less headache and without the urge to repeatedly slam my head and fingers in a door for fun.

Sorry but no, IMO there has not been a good release of Office since 2003 and frankly if I'm going to get drug into janky headaches, I'd much rather just use OpenOffice. It's what I switched my wife's laptop to rather than buy a new license of Office and as they progress I find very little incentive to even consider purchasing another Office product. Granted YMMV.


By chripuck on 3/25/2014 10:56:22 AM , Rating: 4
I would never, I repeat, NEVER, go back to 2003 from 2010. I develop Office applications literally on a daily basis. I build 30+ Excel models a year for clients around the globe. The charting, the conditional formatting, the expanded functions, the increased rows, powerpivot are far improved in 2007+. Open a 30 mb Excel 2003 file and a 30 mb Excel 2010 formatted file and 2010 WILL open it faster. Calculations are faster due to multi-core support.

I could go on and on, but the short version is this; you're clearly not using Excel to it's full potential. Not even close.

I'll add this to: I actually agree with you on every other facet of the Office suite, but Excel is the one clear cut improvement over 2003 and it's not even remotely up for debate.


By Accidic on 3/25/2014 11:05:38 AM , Rating: 2
I would argue that you're merely using it differently. I've been accused of a lot of things, but not using excel to it's full potential has never even remotely been one of them. We have a few people who look at things much like you and sing the praises of the all holy 2010. Yet ironically I tend to weave circles around them and accomplish far more in less time than they do.

That said, I will certainly and wholeheartedly give you that large files open quicker in 2010. Unfortunately for the ways in which we use it, they also crash far more frequently as well.


By w8gaming on 3/25/2014 10:18:01 PM , Rating: 3
That kind of usage makes you different from the norm actually. Most people would not have needed such features and should be happy with Office 2003.


By byundt on 3/25/2014 11:38:34 AM , Rating: 2
I'll grant you the fact that Excel 2007 and later support over a million rows, and conditional formatting has been improved.

I beg to differ, however, regarding the speed of Excel 2003 and its macro support. I just benchmarked my most calculation intensive workbook (lots of VBA code and iterative calculations) on a computer that has Excel 2003 through 2013 installed. Results are as follows:
Excel 2003 1.71 seconds
Excel 2007 3.09
Excel 2010 2.78
Excel 2013 1.65

The VBA macro language has been kept up to date with the big grid, new objects and properties, but there haven't been any improvements under the hood since Excel 2003. Documentation of VBA was far better for Excel 2003 than for subsequent versions, as content has been removed from the later versions.

If VBA won't do what you need with macros, your needs must be somewhat arcane.


By Dr of crap on 3/25/2014 12:46:02 PM , Rating: 2
Your last line says it all.
There are a vast amount of users that ONLY need what Office 2003 provides. WHY upgrade? What possible support is needed to keep it running on a PC that has Win 7 and is working fine? It might go another 10 years.

Might seem wrong to you.

Just like you might not drive a pickup, but its the vehicle of choice for a vast majority of America.


Fixed it for You, Microsoft
By DaveLessnau on 3/25/2014 10:56:36 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
"Office 2003 no longer meets the needs of the way we WANT TO MILK YOU FOR MONEY. For this reason, it is time to say farewell to Office 2003 and embrace the INCOME STREAMING solution of today – Office 365."


We weren't born yesterday, you know.




NO
By p05esto on 3/25/2014 10:10:11 AM , Rating: 3
I'm a web designer of 17 years and I use a desktop 90% of the day and a 27" monitor. I also use Office 2003 since it's paid for and does everything I need.

I've never had to need to work with Office apps on a phone or tablet. On occasion I've opened a Office doc on my phone from an email, but that's about it.

Microsoft: stop trying to predict the future and stop forcing your core user base onto devices we don't care about and will not actually use. Sure I have smart phone and tablets as well, but they are more toys and for content consumption.

ps. I hate all software as a service, software subscriptions... I'll use Office 2003 for YEARS yet as there's no reason to switch for me. Won't be using Win8 anytime soon either, lol.




365 Is a massive POS
By Motoman on 3/25/2014 10:17:07 AM , Rating: 3
The company I work for recently forced us all to move to 365. It is a catastrophic POS.

It's constantly talking back and forth to the 365 server...Outlook frequently becomes all but unusable on my cellular wifi service. The amount of phoning home is constantly causing Outlook to freeze up and die.

And the other day, the 365 install on my laptop just stopped working. No reason. Nothing changed on the machine. All the programs just stopped running. No error messages, nothing. A little research on the MS forums reveals that their standard response is "uninstall and reinstall." Yay.

The Office 2007 I was using before was infinitely better in every way. No functionality-killing ribbon, and no availability-killing phoning home constantly.

I literally have no choice but to continue to use it though, because the 365 server won't support Outlook 2007. Or maybe even 2010.

I can not overstate how important it is for NO ONE to ever use 365.




They won't force users out of Office 2003...
By jnemesh on 3/25/2014 11:51:27 AM , Rating: 1
If they attempt to, they will only drive users away from MS completely! My Dad, for one, HATES the new interfaces. He was turned off by the "ribbons" and stuck with 2003...and still uses it to this day. It does everything he needs it to while running his construction business. I know that if MS attempts to cripple it, he won't move to Office 365 or Office 2013, he will go to LibreOffice or something similar.

In fact, about the ONLY software tying him to MS right now at all is Photoshop. If (when) Adobe comes out with a native Linux version, he is GONE from Windows, permanently.




By DT_Reader on 3/25/2014 12:58:15 PM , Rating: 2
You dad has no reason to stop using Office 2003. Period. Don't let Microsoft scare him. XP, yes, get him off that. But Office 2003 will run on Windows 7 and possibly Windows 8 (I don't know for sure, but I don't see why not unless Microsoft is purposely crippling it).


Dear Microsoft
By Fidget on 3/26/2014 9:17:02 AM , Rating: 3
Take your subscription based software and shove it up your ass.

Sincerely,
Fidget




No thank you Microsoft
By ipay on 3/27/2014 2:00:48 PM , Rating: 3
Windows 8 in any form or iteration is a fail.

Get your act right with Windows 9 in 2015 and good luck.

Also, past versions of Office are still perfectly usable. I'm still using Office 2007. There is no need to upgrade.

If I want to create documents online, I'll use Google Docs. I won't pay a dime for that cloud stuff. That's why I despise Office 365 and the 'software as a subscription' business model. Norton and McAfee tried that nonsense with their antivirus programs: signature updates became 'downloadable content' DLCs.

Microsoft, I know you are desperate to regain languishing market share for Windows 8 and keep MSFT shareholders happy, but Windows 8 is a mega, epic, colossal flop. Give up already.




I hate the ribbon.
By aliasfox on 3/25/2014 11:02:20 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know if Office365 has it, but in Office 2007, 2010, 2011 (Mac), and (I presume) 2013, it's atrocious, slow, a screen hog, and inconvenient. Don't think I'm an old fart either - I'm 29, and have only been working in Office every day since 2003 (Word) and 2007 (Excel).

Sure, 2003 is ugly, and having 1MM rows in 2007 onwards is a godsend. But having to click between tabs to get to Pivot Tables and then somewhere else to format and having to figure out what lots of little icons mean when you're looking for a not-commonly-used function... not cool. I've used 2007+ as long as I used 2003 (about 4 years each), and I'm still griping about this.

At least 2010 isn't as slow/unstable as 2007 was. No idea what Office 365 feels like.

Also, for mobile devices - I've used Apple Numbers on my iPad, and while it's fine for playing with a few numbers to show a client/customer, I feel like it would be beyond painful to do anything in depth. Spreadsheets on touch/mobile is a checkbox feature, not a game changer.

Lastly, while I love my Mac for home use (including photo workflow), I can't stand Excel 2011. That is all.




...
By Stephen! on 3/25/2014 3:23:39 PM , Rating: 2

I had "fun" with Microsoft Office. A work placement for a small company doing basic clerical work. The laptop that I'd been given to use, ended up in reduced activation mode, because nobody had bothered to activate it before the grace period had expired.

Which then looked awkward trying to explaining to the manager (She didn't seem to even be aware of what reduced activation mode was) why I was doing any work because it wouldn't let me enter data onto Excel spreadsheets :P




Marketing technobabble
By Donkey2008 on 3/27/2014 2:34:43 AM , Rating: 2
"Office 2003 no longer meets the needs of the way we work, play and live today"

Spoken like a true marketing asshole.




By Bateluer on 3/25/2014 2:20:29 PM , Rating: 1
Time to move away from Microsoft Office anyway people. If you're still using Office 2003, there's nothing in it that LibreOffice can't do better.




Just A Matter Of Time
By mgilbert on 3/25/14, Rating: -1
RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By cditty on 3/25/2014 9:41:56 AM , Rating: 5
You can still buy Office 2013 outright. You don't HAVE to do 365. For a family, 365 is a pretty good deal. Especially if you use multiple device types (PC, tablet, etc...). Since they are announcing Office for iPad in two days, that device would just count towards your five device limit.

I don't need the multiple device approach, so I just bought 2013. To each their own, but they are not forcing anyone to subscribe... Yet.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By 91TTZ on 3/25/14, Rating: -1
RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By StraightCashHomey on 3/25/2014 11:11:24 AM , Rating: 3
Just curious, but do you work for an IT Consulting Company? I do, and I work in a medium-sized city (200,000) and it's VERY rare that I see an environment that does not have Active Directory and Office.

Google is the largest competitor and/or threat to Microsoft, NOT open source. Really the only places that use Google Apps en mass are K-12 institutions. Microsoft needs to do a better job penetrating that sector, because these kids are going to grow up using Google Apps instead of Office, and those kids are going to grow in Tech Directors who are really going to push that initiative.

With that said, Office 365 is really an amazing suite. I highly recommend it.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By 91TTZ on 3/25/2014 1:14:57 PM , Rating: 2
I currently work for a datacenter and I've been in IT since 1996. I've never been at a place that didn't use Microsoft Office and everyone has used Windows Server. But my perception is biased since I'm a Windows guy and I wouldn't be hired at a place that doesn't use a Microsoft environment.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inighthawki on 3/25/2014 11:13:16 AM , Rating: 4
Sounds like the ramblings of a standard open source nut. "Big business is just keeping us down by censoring the greatness of open source software!"

Ever consider that a lot of it just kind of sucks?


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By BRB29 on 3/25/2014 11:51:20 AM , Rating: 2
For professional use, there's nothing better than Office. Believe me, I tried doing case studies and complex graphs iWork, Google and OpenOffice.

I would say use the Google Suite as a student or the Apple Suite. If you got a job, get Office. It's really not expensive anymore especially when you buy it through your job or student discounts.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Solandri on 3/25/2014 12:34:45 PM , Rating: 4
A lot of companies, schools, and organizations which buy site licenses for Office also allow employees to buy a copy for home use for $9.95. I'd check that out first. Most people don't know this program even exists.

http://www.microsofthup.com/hupus/chooser.aspx?cul...

I got my copy through Technet so I'm not sure what HUP actually gives you. But I've seen people recommend you spend the extra $14 to get a DVD copy for future installations.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By marvdmartian on 3/25/2014 1:59:00 PM , Rating: 2
MS Home Use Program, for Office 2010, gave me a download for $9.95. If I wanted it on a disk, it cost extra (though I don't recall how much).

As long as that's available to me, I'll utilize it. Not really a huge fan of the whole online/cloud thing yet, as I doubt that security and my privacy are their biggest concerns.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By marvdmartian on 3/25/2014 1:59:05 PM , Rating: 2
MS Home Use Program, for Office 2010, gave me a download for $9.95. If I wanted it on a disk, it cost extra (though I don't recall how much).

As long as that's available to me, I'll utilize it. Not really a huge fan of the whole online/cloud thing yet, as I doubt that security and my privacy are their biggest concerns.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By drlumen on 3/25/2014 12:12:30 PM , Rating: 2
There is no similarity between Linux and Windows. Apple is a branch of a Linux flavor so if anyone were to be sued it would be Apple. SCO tried to sue Linux users for, supposedly, impeding on UNIX code and they crash and burned.

Never heard of SCO? Get my point?


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By 91TTZ on 3/25/2014 1:19:08 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not saying that they'd have a strong legal case against a well-funded company, I'm saying that you have a few immense companies that have the cash to harass a small community to death.

If I was rich enough I could sue you into oblivion and never win a case against you. I don't need to make a good enough argument to win the case, I only need to make a good enough argument to have the judge agree to let the case proceed to court and not make me pay your legal bills. By making you spend money to defend yourself you'd go broke.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Stephen! on 3/25/2014 3:09:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Apple is a branch of a Linux flavor


Apple is using BSD, a Unix derivative.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By mellomonk on 3/25/2014 3:16:26 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is no similarity between Linux and Windows. Apple is a branch of a Linux flavor so if anyone were to be sued it would be Apple. SCO tried to sue Linux users for, supposedly, impeding on UNIX code and they crash and burned. Never heard of SCO? Get my point?

MacOS X and iOs are based on Darwin. Which in turn is based on FreeBSD, not Linux. Completely different kernel, though both are Unix-like operating systems. Apple's involvement in the open source communities is controversial for some because so much of what they do is proprietary. But they have contributed back code to FreeBSD and open source in general. For example the Webkit technologies.

SCO Group sued Unix and Linux distributors and corporate users, primarily IBM and Novell. Linux would not have been involved at all except that SCO asserted that IBM contributed back some of the code in question to the Linux kernel. Ultimately Novell prevailed in it's case dealing a huge blow to SCOs assertions. SCO still exists and is still in court with IBM.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By NellyFromMA on 3/25/2014 1:31:59 PM , Rating: 3
I can't help but look at it as a tale of theory vs implementation in a given moment (which so far is virtually all of tech history).

Open-source is great, in theory. You don't have to pay which is GREAT for consumers, don't get me wrong.

However, there is a whole tried-and-true-for-decades reality that people WILL PAY for QUALITY which open-source is nearly always inferior to a proper paid product.

This is especially true for businesses as we require reliability over cost-reduction... To an extent, of course. But that extent has more or less been figured out by Microsoft and other paid-product corps for quite some time hence their business financial health.

You could actually argue that BECAUSE of open-source initiatives making in-roads into MS coveted business-market that MS and many other corporations are trying to sweep us into service-based offerings as a result.

Open-source offerings simply need to meet the quality of paid products to replace them for business purposes. The only offset to this that comes to mind is hiring IT or other specialists to deal with the issues that inevitably arise from open-source implementations which easily can offset the licensing / subscription costs of a paid product.

Of course everyone awaits the day we can have paid-quality at no-cost. The likelihood, however... well, theory vs implementation it seems.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Solandri on 3/25/2014 2:32:21 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Open-source is great, in theory. You don't have to pay which is GREAT for consumers, don't get me wrong.

However, there is a whole tried-and-true-for-decades reality that people WILL PAY for QUALITY which open-source is nearly always inferior to a proper paid product.

Open source software is great. The problem is the developers.

In paid software, the customer is king. If a large number of the customers want a feature, it doesn't matter what the developer wants, the customer will eventually prevail. See Microsoft backtracking on Win 8 for a great example.

In open source software, the developer is king. The customers can all want a feature, but if the developer doesn't want to implement it (or for larger projects, the codebase maintainer doesn't want to include it in the main codebase), the customers are SOL. Sure they could fork it and start up their own version, but that still leaves the new developers in control. The only thing a pure-user customer can do is bow and lick the feet of the developers.

In theory, the open source developers are altruistic saints who listen to everyone's requests and fairly allocate development time to what's most needed.

In practice, the developers are like regular people - once they get a taste of the power that comes with controlling something, they frequently turn into selfish pricks who consider themselves to be a different and superior caste. They work on what they want, and not only ignore what those of the lower caste (users) need or request, they mock them for their inability to write code.

That's why so much open source software is difficult to use. Ease of use is considered a waste of time because it helps the incapable user, rather than empowering the programmer. For the same reason, the best open source software products are the ones the user never sees. Most routers run open source software. The router developers acts as the middleman. They present a competent face to the OSS developers so get the changes they want. They sell a product so they make the effort to do what the OSS developers consider to be beneath them - make the software easy to use.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By NellyFromMA on 3/25/2014 3:27:02 PM , Rating: 2
Excellent points all around. Well put.

Of course, in the end, open-source software is virtually always developed by volunteers, so I can't really dislike it for what it is.. but, you as the user have to really understand the nature of that choice in order to evaluate whether or not a paid product is worthwhile in the face of an open-source alternative.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By bsd228 on 3/25/2014 5:59:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote: Open-source is great, in theory. You don't have to pay which is GREAT for consumers, don't get me wrong. However, there is a whole tried-and-true-for-decades reality that people WILL PAY for QUALITY which open-source is nearly always inferior to a proper paid product.

Open source software is great. The problem is the developers. In paid software, the customer is king. If a large number of the customers want a feature, it doesn't matter what the developer wants, the customer will eventually prevail. See Microsoft backtracking on Win 8 for a great example. In open source software, the developer is king. The customers can all want a feature, but if the developer doesn't want to implement it (or for larger projects, the codebase maintainer doesn't want to include it in the main codebase), the customers are SOL. Sure they could fork it and start up their own version, but that still leaves the new developers in control. The only thing a pure-user customer can do is bow and lick the feet of the developers.


Is it really any different for Adobe users right now? Or Office 2003 users for that matter? In each case, the company is dictating to the users that if they want updates, it will be by subscription only. If you're committed to Photoshop, you don't really have a choice in the matter. Professionally speaking, the alternatives are weak. It still is a showdown in progress - Adobe keeps offering cheaper and cheaper subscription plans to those of us who bought CS6 and said "no mas." Eventually, I think they will have to offer a CC/CS7 license.

Unfortunately for MS, few people actually need the 5% premium offered by Office products. Most would do just fine with GoogleDocs or the various OpenOffice variants.

As for the easily mockable claim by the prior poster than open source is always inferior - just look at how much open source product MS has adopted as its own. Or compare the number of Exchange servers to sendmail/postfix ones out there (or the number of MSCEs it takes to keep that turkey running).

Open Source developers are trying to solve a problem. If it's their own problem, then yes, they're going to set the agenda. They're putting it out on SourceForge to let others benefit from it and yes, offer updates via pull requests. If they don't accept them, then you do have the option of forking it, or offering them money to meet your needs.

OTOH, when people put stuff out there to solve a broader problem, they are in fact interested in your needs, and are generally inclined to work thru them, based on resource and priority. Which is also exactly how commercial software is developed.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By bsd228 on 3/25/2014 5:59:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
quote: Open-source is great, in theory. You don't have to pay which is GREAT for consumers, don't get me wrong. However, there is a whole tried-and-true-for-decades reality that people WILL PAY for QUALITY which open-source is nearly always inferior to a proper paid product.

Open source software is great. The problem is the developers. In paid software, the customer is king. If a large number of the customers want a feature, it doesn't matter what the developer wants, the customer will eventually prevail. See Microsoft backtracking on Win 8 for a great example. In open source software, the developer is king. The customers can all want a feature, but if the developer doesn't want to implement it (or for larger projects, the codebase maintainer doesn't want to include it in the main codebase), the customers are SOL. Sure they could fork it and start up their own version, but that still leaves the new developers in control. The only thing a pure-user customer can do is bow and lick the feet of the developers.


Is it really any different for Adobe users right now? Or Office 2003 users for that matter? In each case, the company is dictating to the users that if they want updates, it will be by subscription only. If you're committed to Photoshop, you don't really have a choice in the matter. Professionally speaking, the alternatives are weak. It still is a showdown in progress - Adobe keeps offering cheaper and cheaper subscription plans to those of us who bought CS6 and said "no mas." Eventually, I think they will have to offer a CC/CS7 license.

Unfortunately for MS, few people actually need the 5% premium offered by Office products. Most would do just fine with GoogleDocs or the various OpenOffice variants.

As for the easily mockable claim by the prior poster than open source is always inferior - just look at how much open source product MS has adopted as its own. Or compare the number of Exchange servers to sendmail/postfix ones out there (or the number of MSCEs it takes to keep that turkey running).

Open Source developers are trying to solve a problem. If it's their own problem, then yes, they're going to set the agenda. They're putting it out on SourceForge to let others benefit from it and yes, offer updates via pull requests. If they don't accept them, then you do have the option of forking it, or offering them money to meet your needs.

OTOH, when people put stuff out there to solve a broader problem, they are in fact interested in your needs, and are generally inclined to work thru them, based on resource and priority. Which is also exactly how commercial software is developed.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By GTVic on 3/25/2014 1:40:36 PM , Rating: 2
The main issue with color is that you can't tell when the window is active but I wouldn't use that as the major point to a discussion about subscription software.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inperfectdarkness on 3/25/2014 12:08:27 PM , Rating: 3
I'm used to Office 2010 and .docx files and the like. This is mostly due to the PC's where I work being upgraded & also because I qualify for MS discount on Office software. I don't have a huge issue with the migration from the "ease of use" standpoint.

What I do dislike is "change for the sake of change". I get XP going away. The longer an OS is in the tooth, the more and more exploits are found for it. Eventually, like an old car, you end up with so many "fixes" that it's time to start over with something new.

Office isn't like that. Not even close. To me, the forced Office upgrades are unnecessary. A money grab at best. Between all of the added features, MS could potentially justify ONE upgrade to office since 2003, but not a handful.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By DT_Reader on 3/25/2014 12:29:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You can still buy Office 2013 outright.

Or you can continue to use Office 2003, which still runs on Windows 7 (I can't speak for Windows 8). No support after April? So what - I haven't had any real support from Microsoft for years. Any questions are answered on blogs, not official Microsoft support sites.

And there are several very good free alternatives to Office 2003. If Office 2003 does all you need, you'll be very happy with Libre Office or Apache Open Office or Kingsoft Office.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Murloc on 3/25/2014 2:58:32 PM , Rating: 2
1. Office 2007 onwards offers a real productivity increase.
Really, it was like day and night. After that, it was just nice but incremental upgrades again.
2. Open source office suits from a user point of view are just ugly and cluttered.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By smilingcrow on 3/25/2014 6:26:47 PM , Rating: 2
"If Office 2003 does all you need, you'll be very happy with Libre Office"

Even a 10 year old version of MS Office has more features and is much faster than the current version of Libre Office.
If you are happy with Libre then you never needed MS Office in the first place which is true for many home users.
For myself the lack of an email client is a limitation as well.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Golgatha777 on 3/25/2014 9:55:30 AM , Rating: 2
Yea, Adobe went subscription only a few years ago and their stock is nearly triple the price now. I expect this gives Microsoft a serious hard on for a subscription only model since they have a similar stranglehold in the OS and Office markets.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 10:04:47 AM , Rating: 3
Yes and no. I'm one such user of office 2003. Yes it's paid for, so I don't have much incentive to acquire a new version, but it's much more than that. Fact is the shitbon interface started the stupidification of windows in general. Instead of having the most needed functions one or two clicks away the ribbon interface forces the user to do two, three, or even more clicks for pretty basic things, which for me is unacceptable.
I use office for a living (being a freelance translator) and the ribbon interface reduces my productivity 15-20%, besides it looks ugly, something made for kids, not for serious work.
Besides the free office versions are slowly catching up, so I expect in a couple of years when I will finally be forced to slowly start moving away from office 2003, libre office and the rest of open software versions will finally have all the functionality needed in my line of work while retaining a workable interface. Sadly I've had to write off Microsoft as a software making company that supposedly knows what it has been doing.
Ruining office, then ruining skype, then windows with the whole METRO or "ANTICUATED&BACKWARDS WIN 3.11 INTERFACE ALL OVER AGAIN" in windows 8 debacle...
They are continuously taking the extra step needed to ruin software productivity and usability. May be the restructuring will turn the ship around, but I´ll not put my hopes up.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Just Tom on 3/25/2014 10:23:36 AM , Rating: 1
If you don't like using the ribbon interface just put your most commonly used commands on the quick access toolbar. One click and you're done.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Accidic on 3/25/2014 10:37:13 AM , Rating: 2
I've done this. It helps but it's still a headache and not worth being troubled with it. They're lucky the spreadsheet area is far superior in 2007+ or there'd be literally no reason to ever get away from 2003 aside from Office compatibility. I would never dream of spending money on a 2007+ version of Office. I may get forced to use it at work but that's as far as I'm willing to go.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Just Tom on 3/25/2014 11:24:05 AM , Rating: 1
While I understand not upgrading, my home machine still has Office 2003, I don't see how it is a headache to add commands to the quick access toolbar. The process is pretty simple and straightforward.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Accidic on 3/25/2014 11:31:20 AM , Rating: 2
You can actually download freely created versions as well (ubit comes to mind). You still lose quite a bit of real estate. Our portable is restricted to a 13" screen at 1360x768. That's a lot of real estate to abandon. In 2003 I use a minimalist layout. 1 line, 2 at the absolute max with the 2nd at the bottom to intentionally segregate items. I don't mind people who bought in disagreeing with my opinion on the subject. You can call me stubborn even if you'd like. But I'd point out it's no more stubborn than Microsoft and the stupid ribbon in the first place.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Just Tom on 3/31/2014 8:20:49 PM , Rating: 2
You do realize you can minimize the ribbon? If you do so it takes up the same space as the traditional menu bar.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 10:42:45 AM , Rating: 5
There are too many commonly used commands to do that. As I said, I use office for a living. Not just writing a letter and hitting print. So I do need and use a wide array of formatting tools.
Up to office 2003 you just activated the corresponding toolbars and could access any number of commands with one click.
Besides the toolbars are compact and a great number of needed functions can be fit in two or three rows at the top of the screen. This is not quite the same with the ribbon interface and its´fisher price sized icons.
Microsoft in the last ten years has been moving from usability and functionality centered towards aesthetically centered and dumbified interface design.



RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inighthawki on 3/25/2014 11:16:33 AM , Rating: 2
The ribbon is really nothing more than a more advanced drop-down toolbar that's more intelligently organized. If you have a problem with size, just minimize it and pretend each tab is just an entry on the menubar with a horizontal dropdown list.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 11:26:04 AM , Rating: 3
:) :). You don´t get it, do you? Yes, you CAN do everything with later office versions that you can with office 2003. What you CAN´T do is do everything you need with more or less ONE CLICK. In other words later office versions DO TAKE more time to do the same amount of work. I have measured it and in my case office 2003 is 15-20% faster to use than later Microsoft office packs. I value my time too much to spend money on a product that makes me loose productivity.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inighthawki on 3/25/2014 11:42:09 AM , Rating: 2
While a somewhat valid counterargument, if you're spending 2 weeks, 10 hours a day each, doing a particular task, you should really know the keyboard shortcuts to do everything at that point. Probably would have saved you 15-20% of your time regardless of which version of office you used.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 11:55:35 AM , Rating: 2
Again, your words clearly show you lack much experience in this field. When I speak about formatting tools I´m not talking about Ctrl+B, or Ctrl+I, or Ctrl+U, Ctrl+C and similar really common functions. I´m talking text boxes, columns, embedded tables, watermarks, comments, footnotes and similar functions.
Besides defending shitty interface design decisions with the fact that there are still keyboard shortcuts is the same as defending the decision of a car manufacturer replacing the wheels on one side of the car with square ones with the argument that you can still drive at the same speed while driving on the side with only the round wheels :). Or a wheelchair manufacturer that announces a wheelchair with square wheels, saying people can still go as fast with crutches.

The fu


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 12:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry for the misstype at the end of my post.

The fact is that in 16 years of work as a translator I have learned the shortcuts that I find useful. For example when working with macros or translation plugins like wordfast or trados there are more useful shortcuts. But there are plenty of functions that are easier and faster to use with a graphic interface.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inighthawki on 3/25/2014 12:13:09 PM , Rating: 2
You're right, I don't have your experience, so I don't even know specifically what you do. But by shortcuts I meant the fact that you can do any command on the ribbon with alt commands. And if you know the commands well enough, using those alt commands should still be faster than clicking a toolbar icons.

I was also not trying to defend the ribbon via a function of "still having keyboard shortcuts." That was actually a completely separate point from the ribbon altogether.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 12:37:44 PM , Rating: 2
It may be as you said, but you have to admit it´s still a very weak argument to be considered a point "in favor" of later office versions. There are a lot of shortcuts in office 2003, but even so I don´t use them ALL. It´s just not worth it. So saying the interface of later office versions doesn´t decrease productivity thanks to shortcuts can´t be considered a serious idea.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By 91TTZ on 3/25/2014 1:23:56 PM , Rating: 2
It sounds like you're saying that the Ribbon isn't a bad idea because it's still possible to work around it.

Sort of like how it's not a bad idea to place a boulder in the middle of the street because everyone should know how to drive around it.

The fact is that when the "old" way of doing things was more intuitive and faster for most people than the "new" way, they've taken a step backwards in the development of the product. It seems like the older versions of programs were all about functionality, but newer ones are all about style. At some point they began placing style before substance.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 1:38:51 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. Would rate you up if I could :)


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inighthawki on 3/26/2014 6:54:31 PM , Rating: 2
No I feel that the ribbon is an improvement for the vast majority of their users, but for people like you who seem to have very specific performance needs, keyboard shortcuts are still available for everything you do to work just as quickly as before.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Accidic on 3/25/2014 11:26:51 AM , Rating: 2
While not entirely untrue, it also takes up at least double the real estate that I use in 2003 (more than that for most users) and is less intuitive than the prior menus. With that in mind you can replace the menus (custom) but that doesn't do much for real estate which blows if you're on a lesser resolution machine. Additionally, while you do gain functionality and some new features that are potentially nice to have, it also abandons features that 2003 had by default and unless you're willing to pay $$$ to replace them your SoL. Your company may be better than mine and pony up that dough. Mine does not.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 11:38:20 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, screen estate and menu logic is quite important too. More or less on the same line of thought, that the ribbon interface does make office less efficient for serious work.

Of course writing a letter isn´t serious work and office 2013 will do an excellent work in such a work scenario. Even wordpad would be plenty for such usage patterns :).


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By chripuck on 3/25/2014 10:39:27 AM , Rating: 2
People may have Windows 8 somewhat justifiably, but if you haven't changed over to the Ribbon in 2010 then you're missing out. Win 7/O2010 is the new gold standard in machines and replaces XP/O2003.

I develop Office apps as a third party consultant and I would never go back to 2003. You're crazy man...


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Accidic on 3/25/2014 10:58:12 AM , Rating: 2
Different strokes for different folks. I'm forced to use the combo you mention for work and I consider it garbage personally.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 11:01:33 AM , Rating: 2
Funny you say that. Not every new idea or interface design must be better than the one before. Fact is the ribbon and metro interfaces are more or less POS for any serious work productivity.
And I´m not some kind of Luddite sticking to something of the past just because it´s supposedly "the thing I know".
I have tried to use the new office versions and even windows 8, but productivity loss is too great. 15-20% may not look like much, but the difference is quite real. Just like these last two weeks I´ve been translating about 200 pages of text. This will take approximately 100-120 hours of 12 ten hour days of work. By switching to a later office version it would take me 2-2,5 ADDITIONAL 10 hour workdays to finish this job. Quite the difference, don´t you think?
I actually studied computer science, so it´s not like I don´t know how to use software.
Up to office 2003 I did upgrade almost immediately after a new version was released. I even made the switch from XP to win 7 almost immediately (although windows vista and 7 did fumble quite a bit with the interface too. Mainly with network settings management, but really quite a lot of system configuration functionality was hidden 3-5 clicks away, when it was only 2-3 clicks away in XP), because the advantages were very obvious.
So again, it´s a point of perspective. A dumbified interface makes software easier to use and more pleasing for very basic usage patterns and inexperienced users in general, but a pain in the neck for any serious work.

Yes, compatibility problems (even with microsoft compatibility pack) are starting to crop out. So it´s only a matter of a few years before I WILL be forced to upgrade. But it does seem it wont be to a Microsoft product, but rather an open software version, because of the interface tendencies in Microsoft.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By inighthawki on 3/25/2014 11:19:17 AM , Rating: 4
You're full of it. There is nothing so inherently unproductive about the ribbon that would take that much extra time to accomplish something. And if it really did, then you could have easily learned a handful of keyboard shortcuts.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 11:34:27 AM , Rating: 2
How much pages do you write, edit or otherwise do serious work each day? Not so many, don´t you?
Yeah, thought so. A 15% loss in productivity may not seem like much when writing a 2 page document. It is quite a big difference when you work on large documents.

There is NO way two, three or more clicks take equal or less time than 1 click. It´s as simple as that. Clicks take time. That time is equal to lost productivity.

If I didn´t have to use so much and varied formatting tools MAY BE the loss of productivity wouldn´t be so great, but I do. So the end result is a net 15-20% loss when using later versions of microsoft office packs.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By _devo on 3/25/2014 6:35:48 PM , Rating: 2
I created an account just to back up the original poster. I also use Word up to 10 hours a day. Serious productivity was lost for after moving away from office 2003 (forced migration from work). On top of that Microsoft purposefully gimped the compatibility mode. For example, resizing pictures is usually not allowed via the ribbon and complicated macros no longer work. Much needed functions are simply not in the ribbon menu when you try to do any serious work. I will admit that for commonly used functions the ribbon menu is quite fast for keyboard short cuts.
*I won't be replying to comments ~I got work to do*


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By DT_Reader on 3/25/2014 12:46:05 PM , Rating: 2
I have Office 20something with the ribbon at home, and I know what you mean. I have Office 2010 at work, and in 2010 you can customize the ribbon. I've created a custom tab with all the things I use. It's great, and I wish I could do it at home, but not enough to throw more money at Microsoft for an "upgrade".


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By lagomorpha on 3/25/2014 10:11:15 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
It's just a matter of time before all companies force us to use subscription services for all our software, so they can dip into our pockets, month after month after month. Thank goodness for pirated software.


Or you could just migrate away from all Microsoft/Apple software to Linux/Libre Office as the former get too audacious in their demands of consumers.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By chripuck on 3/25/2014 10:41:10 AM , Rating: 3
Ha, you're funny. Office is the one Microsoft product that is done right. Libre office/Open office/Google docs etc. etc. are garbage for an enterprise user. Home use, who cares, but for people trying to actually get work done you don't use that limited open source variants.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Accidic on 3/25/2014 10:54:56 AM , Rating: 1
Well if you decree it it must be so.

Sidenote, OpenOffice has saved our bacon more than a couple times in an Enterprise environment when 2007 and 2010 bowed up and insisted on being fubar. Office is just more idiot friendly. If I have to teach them how to make it work for them though there is little difference.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By chripuck on 3/25/2014 10:58:11 AM , Rating: 3
I develop Excel applications for a living. I've been tasked to convert Excel apps to various open source variants and it's always failed because they just don't work as well.

Word, PowerPoint, Outlook the open source variants are fairly spot on and can replace it in a pinch, but Excel is the cream of the crop in terms of end user data analysis.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Accidic on 3/25/2014 11:00:54 AM , Rating: 2
I don't develop for a living but I do use spreadsheets predominantly for a living. And I can work with either without too much issue. Sorry but there haven't been a lot of improvements I can't live without since 2003 was released and to that end, the alternatives are starting to gain ground. At least for the purposes of which I need it.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Vytautas on 3/25/2014 11:06:56 AM , Rating: 2
I do agree on your take of open source excel equivalents, at least for now. They ARE quite limited. But at least in my case (I don´t manage spreadsheets of 66k or more lines), I really don´t need anything more than what the office 2003 version of excel has to offer. An the open source versions are getting better all the time. :)


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By ipay on 3/25/2014 12:12:00 PM , Rating: 2
As an enterprise and web application developer, I'm curious... what do these Excel applications do? Over the years, I've converted a number of Excel (and Access) to client/server and web apps, because they just didn't work for the clients. What does one done right look like? I haven't seen one and am honestly curious.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By DT_Reader on 3/25/2014 12:55:49 PM , Rating: 1
If you must exchange files with people who use Microsoft Office, then Libre Office or the others can be a hassle. But if I were starting a new company I wouldn't allow any Microsoft products in the building. Period. In fact, I wouldn't allow anything without an open license. Too much hassle keeping things legal for the BSA - a company with no legal standing that will swoop in on you demanding to see the license for all your software. I'd prefer to be in a position to tell them to sod off, and I can't understand any company under 50 employees using any Microsoft products other than sheer inertia. If you hire an employee and they can't learn Libre Office in their 90 day probation period, then hire someone else.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By DT_Reader on 3/25/2014 12:42:09 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know why you got downvoted to oblivion, other than your comment about pirating software. But that was simply a stupid comment - you can't pirate Office 365.

Everyone is going to subscriptions if they can. On-line newspapers are going behind paywalls. Hulu is now Hulu Plus, for "only" $8/month. The Disney company is fixated on finding a way to charge you every time you view a movie, like in the old days when you paid each time you went to the theater. The very notion of you paying once for a DVD or Blue-Ray and watching it forever boils their blood.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By justsomeone on 3/25/2014 2:24:39 PM , Rating: 2
I will run away faster than Forrest Gump from any and every subscription model I possibly can until the day I die.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By NellyFromMA on 3/25/2014 1:22:23 PM , Rating: 5
Office 2003 is over a decade old and you're upset its being EOL'ed?


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Motoman on 3/25/2014 9:58:45 PM , Rating: 2
Why shouldn't he be? For that matter, why shouldn't people be upset that they're being told they have to leave XP?

Say you buy a car. It's not been perfect - you'd had to have a couple things fixed over the years, but you like it and it suits your needs perfectly. Then one day, 10 years after you bought it, Ford calls you and says your car is no longer safe to drive, and you can't use it anymore.

I understand completely that it makes no sense for Microsoft (or anyone else) to continue to provide support for old products that they're no longer making money on. But to tell the consumer that he shouldn't be upset that he's being forced to buy a new product...when the old product is perfectly fine?

You're horribly out of touch. Virtually no one needs any features in an office suite that weren't present in 2003 (or, really, the Win3.1 version of WordPerfect for that matter). Nor do they need any OS features that aren't present in XP. They're being forced to buy new products, when there's nothing wrong with their old products.

Imagine being told by the company that made the door locks on your house that, since those locks are 10 years old now, they're suddenly going to be insecure and there's really no way to secure your house from intruders and thieves unless you run out and buy new locks.

Sucks, doesn't it?


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By corduroygt on 3/26/2014 12:42:37 PM , Rating: 2
But MS isn't saying people can't use O2003 anymore? It's similar to driving your car to a Ford dealership and them wanting you to sell a new car saying your car is 10 year old and that they won't be able to service 2003 models anymore. Which is fine, there are plenty of places that will service old cars.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By Motoman on 3/26/2014 2:41:26 PM , Rating: 2
Not really.

XP/2003 are now forever going to make you vulnerable to security breaches. Saying that "well you can just keep using it anyway" isn't really all that valid, now is it?

There's not the slightest validity to saying it's like an old car the dealer doesn't want to maintain anymore. Your old car isn't going to let someone in and steal your purse because Ford doesn't want to service your door locks anymore.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By NellyFromMA on 3/27/2014 1:51:04 PM , Rating: 2
So should MS offer support for XP in perpetuity for life? Who's life? Your's? Bill's?

Are you suggesting MS should do it for free?

Or, should they offer a security service for a fee for those who choose to stay on XP and are overly concerned with security ramifications?

Would you pay? If so, how much? Would it basically just add up to the cost of Windows 7?

See, that's why its going away. Because it doesn't economically make sense.

Your analogy just doesn't fit the reality of what we're discussing. Choose a better one.


RE: Just A Matter Of Time
By NellyFromMA on 3/27/2014 1:48:17 PM , Rating: 2
No one says you have to leave XP. There is no kill-switch for the OS. You can use it as long as you want.

However, MS has decided that it doesn't make any sense to support XP, just as they had for 3.5, 95, 98, ME, 2000 etc.

It's just not new. You can keep using any of those OS including XP. You just aren't going to get updates forever. Starting any moment.

quote:
You're horribly out of touch. Virtually no one needs any features in an office suite that weren't present in 2003 (or, really, the Win3.1 version of WordPerfect for that matter). Nor do they need any OS features that aren't present in XP. They're being forced to buy new products, when there's nothing wrong with their old products.


I'm not horribly out of touch, but thanks for making it personal..

On that note, I don't expect ANY software company that ISN'T subscription based to support their product for the entirety of my life. Rather, I expect them to support the product for as long as they STATE. And to that end, you actually got more than that because they already delayed the EOL date. So, you actually got MORE than what MS said you would.

Sure, Office 2003, and XP for that matter, largely reflect the FUNCTIONALITY of todays world from an end-user perspective. What they don't do is offer sufficient SECURITY.

Sorry, but I don't expect MS to support Windows 95 - XP forever. I think the thought that they should is well, horribly out of touch.

Also, no car is garunteed to be safe 10 years after it was purchased. It SHOULD be, IF properly maintained. However, no car manufacturer even offers warranty greater than 10 year, 100,000 miles to my knowledge. That doesn't mean you can't still drive it.

So, that analogy isn't quite right either.


"If a man really wants to make a million dollars, the best way would be to start his own religion." -- Scientology founder L. Ron. Hubbard













botimage
Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki