[PCWorld]

Post your comments for Office: If it Ain't Broke, Why Fix it? here

[Evildave]

Basically all I read is that M$ Office has 'momentum', and changing course costs energy.

A bunch of businesses already have M$O, and they'll keep having it, just as people with herpes will keep having that.

Micro$oft winz!

So why even consider or look at a free office alternative that saves you $X per seat that you don't have to pay for Office 'upgrades' on, or a site license that gives Micro$oft the RIGHT to come and snoop around your company doing 'license audits'. You can finally kick the M$ 'license validation' spies out of your business forever... or just pay up AGAIN and let them snoop. Maybe lay off some more people to afford the 'upgrade'.

Maybe your company doesn't want to support Microsoft's bottom line and information gathering expeditions forever, as Sun didn't. Which is why there is OpenOffice.org, which is mysteriously not mentioned in the article even once, other than indirectly by mention of Star Office (the PAY version of OpenOffice).

[Grr8008]

Maybe it is just that they need some of the features provided only in Microsoft Office. Also Microsoft office is the standard. It is hard to change a standard quickly without a lot of people working together. If everyone worked together to change to Open Office, a very worthy alternative, then the standard would change. People are just comfortable with what they know and don't want to move on.

[HvonT]

This is the most blatant non-article ever. IT professionals support Office because otherwise their business associates and superiors would not be able to effectively exchange documents with customers, suppliers, and shareholders. Duh!

[empirestatebuddy]

Say what you want about Vista, or IE, or Bing, but... Microsoft Office is simply BETTER than any of its competitors. A lot better.

[rasmasyean]

According to Forrester Research, as of June 2009, some version of Microsoft Office is used in 80% of enterprises and the latest Office versions hold roughly 80% of those installations.^[[4]|#citenote-3]^
^en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_office^

^My VCR ain't broke since over 10 years. Do I really need a DVD player / recorder / TiVo? Hmmm....^

[bbvammy]

Its all about the Benjamin.

[yankeeDDL]

This sounds to me another XP-Windows7 issue all over.
Office actually has been quite stable and robust for some time. I used Office XP for some time and the update to 2003 did not bring any new feature that I could use.
Office 2007 is only even more bloated and slow, so there's really no reason to use it.
In the end, I have used Openoffice (installed on the same PC with MS Office) for 90% of my office-related work. It's faster and "Calc" has some major advantages over Excel. It has also native PDF support which makes it more convenient.
So, like for XP-W7, the question is: why would you spend money to move to a slower version of the same software?
The better MS products are, the less people will be inclined to buy new versions. This is a fundamental advantage of open-source which is free.
Somebody made a comment about a VCR which is not broken, so why not buying a DVD player? That's not a good comparison at all. With Office 97 anybody can do just about anything. Sure, Office 2007 has new features, but who really needs them? I heavily use macros for part of my job. Every new Office version breaks compatibility with the predecessor and makes us go through 3~4 months of hell. It's a pain that we'll gladly avoid since there's no tangible benefit, for the use that we make. And I can't imagine any home user to really get anything out of MS Office that they cannot get from the free OpenOffice.

[rasmasyean]

I think you have to look at it from a broader perspective. In enterprise (esp. those that have a decent IT department), Office applications aren't stand-alone desktop letter-writers and super calculators. Maybe you are not familiar with such an environment, but Office apps integrate synergistically with server apps and data providers and sometimes web services (which are like server apps over the intra/inter net).
For example, instead of having a developer produce a report queried by an analyst in various formats and layouts, etc. They can make a generic query application and dump it into Excel. The analysts can just sort/filter/arrange/macro it to their preference. It beats having to customize a reporting solution to 10 different ppl across 10 different departments. Of course, as you can expect, Microsoft also supplies programming tools that allow this synergy to take place...but it works with Java, C, mainframes, as well...albeit of course Microsoft specialized in the Windows and Office technology used by most ppl so...

> Initially it was thought that the adoption of Vista has been generally low, due to largely poor reviews and harsh criticism, but a later Gartner research report predicted that Vista business adoption in 2008 will actually beat that of XP during the same time frame (21.3% vs. 16.9%)^[80]^ while IDC had indicated that the launch of Windows Server 2008 +served as a catalyst for the stronger adoption rates.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_vista]
[/quote]
There is a functional reason for Vista adopting rocketing with the advent of Server 2008. The same goes for Office applications as well.
When you use it "at home" perhaps you won't do anything near as crazy as those corporate nerds. But the question then becomes...will MS Office familiarity land me a job or will it be better for my kids so they can get jobs easier? And then you have...since everyone I know is using MS Office...blah blah...

[CaptainKeyboard]

I am using Microsoft Office XP Professional since I purchased my first computer in 2002. The applications work very well for me. In fact I have discovered that I can do many jobs more effectively than without a computer, printer and scanner. As a keyboard specialist, I do not even need a high keyboarding speed to use all of the programs in Office XP Professional. If the keyboarding speed did not help me to become hired during my job searches, my slower keyboarding speed helps me to become comfortable using my computer and the programs without hurriedness and tension. I cannot find one good reason for Office XP Professional to be improved upon except for later versions to be loaded into newer and powerful computers. I am more at home with Microsoft XP Professional than I would be with anything else. - Captain Keyboard

[CaptainKeyboard]

I am using Microsoft Office XP Professional since I purchased my first computer in 2002. The applications work very well for me. In fact I have discovered that I can do many jobs more effectively than without a computer, printer and scanner. As a keyboard specialist, I do not even need a high keyboarding speed to use all of the programs in Office XP Professional. If the keyboarding speed did not help me to become hired during my job searches, my slower keyboarding speed helps me to become comfortable using my computer and the programs without hurriedness and tension. I cannot find one good reason for Office XP Professional to be improved upon except for later versions to be loaded into newer and powerful computers. I am more at home with Microsoft XP Professional than I would be with anything else. - Captain Keyboard

[CaptainKeyboard]

I have been using Microsoft Office XP Professional since I purchased my first computer in 2002. The application programs have been working fine for me. In fact, I have been able to do more work effectively with Office XP Professional than without a computer, printer and a scanner. I feel that I can accomplish the same results with Office XP Professional as users who use later versions of Microsoft Office. Office XP Professional has enabled me to accomplish more progress with my tasks that I do not need a high keyboarding speed to get the job done. If high keyboarding speeds did not help me to gain employment during my job searches, then a high keyboaarding speed is not necessary for every job that can be done when using Microsoft Office. Thus, I cannot find a good reason for Office XP Professional to be upgraded to a new version of Microsoft Office 2003. I became more comfortable with my computer and Microsoft Office XP Professional that I would not even use a typewriter to fill in the blanks on application form papers. Although I have no plans to return to work in the ordinary office, Microsoft Office XP Professional works great for me, and I have no need to replace it with a newer version of Microsoft Office for the sake of pleasing the numbers. Since that I am working fine with Microsoft Office XP Professional, why and for what in this Western world should I change? It works fine with Microsoft Windows XP Professional and other programs that I use. Also, Microsoft the Office XP Professional programs do not break down and crash, as long as Microsoft Windows XP Professional works fine with the computer. I depend on Microsoft XP Professional and a replacement for the programs in that suite will never be needed. - Captain Keyboard

[Evildave]

rasmasyean said:

... MS Office...blah blah...I couldn't have said it any better.

Yeah, 99+% of the 'real world' doesn't need all of that crap. So why make up an elaborate scenario that 0.1% does need, once in a while?

Quote

For example, instead of having a developer produce a report queried by an analyst in various formats and layouts, etc. They can make a generic query application and dump it into Excel.

And then you discover the developer used M$ Orifice 2007, and your whole company uses M$ Orifice 2003, and nobody among ten different people in ten different departments can open it at all. So your company makes inquiries for some M$ Orifice 2007 licenses, and gets CONvinced by Micro$uck to upgrade EVERYONE to M$ Orifice 2010 right away! And the company lays of a dozen or two good workers to pay for the upgrade. Then you discover that now the documents can be opened, but the M$ Orifice 2007 macros don't work right anymore, because M$ 'changed things'. Of course, at this point the developer is in deep doo-doo, too. They're scrambling to figure out what Micro$uck broke, and so they have to update to M$ Orifice 2010 like you did, and their other clients are now screwed, because the updates they send to THEM won't open on THEIR versions of M$ Orifice.

WIN! WIN! WIN! For Micro$uck, that is.

[yankeeDDL]

If you can use any PC, you can use any office application.

Knowing MS Office (instead of Openoffice) doesn't really constitute any disadvantage: the two products are very similar for all the common operations.
Your comments on some of the enterprises are valid. Yet, they refer to some enterprises. I work in a 10K+ people semiconductor company, and yet we have no interest in what you indicate.

Vista, Office ... they all follow the "lates and greatest" scheme, because "everyone" uses them. And Evildave pictured a classic scenario of this catchup mode. People, finally, are getting fed up with this and looking for alternatives. Remember: you only see advertisement for commercial software.

You'll never see advertisementof Linux games,'cause they're free. Many however, are great games: well written, well thought of. Many are inspired by "mainstream" games too and use newer technologies. Obviously, if you look for DirectX10 features and the absolute latest title, then you are restricting yourself to Windows. Me, I like games and I don;t care which platform they're on: PS3, Wii, Windows or Linux. And I enjoy them all. If you stick to Windows only, you're missing out the fun.

Same applies to Office really: if you restrict yourself to use MS Office 2007 for all you do, you're missing out performance and features that Openoffice offer. Excel (even 2007) does not offer in-cell auto spell checking. It's a mistery to me why it doesn't, but that's the way it is. For what I do, it's a fundamental feature. I enjoy it, for free, on OpenOffice. Makes my life easier and I bet that many, most, "regular" office users, will enjoy too. If they only knew it existed ... They don;t and till they stick to MS Office they won't know it: it's a pity, because it's a very simple and yet efficient feature that "everybody" can take great advantage of (instead of the sophisticated enterprise query system which, you'd have to admit, are interesting for ... well, only some enterprises).

[rasmasyean]

I'm surprised there is an "in cell spell check". Maybe that appeals to home users who like to organize small snippets of personal info or some "cool feature" an open sourcer convinced Open Office to squeeze into the distribution? Why in the world would I want to see red lines all over my spreadsheet if it's used to data organization. It's not a word processor. Again, I think that's something maybe not too useful in most business cases. Not all data are proper words.
I'm sure some of your 10K employees use what I describe somewhere along the way. You just don't know it and don't work in that area. If you have in-house IT (or maybe contracted even from India, etc.) you have those kind of custom apps, whether it be from Microsoft or some other solution. Someone is going to need it...unless you use filing cabinets. And also, that's just a simplified example. I didn't want be THAT boring as to go into all aspects of office automation geekspeak.:p
I'm not sure you and Evil Dave understand that people don't necessarily want "alternatives". They want what they see the other guy has, they want the best, and they want what works for them rather than adapt to some new way of doing something that takes 1 more step. Corporations have money. People have money. Some people who don't have money or don't want to spent it, know someone from the former lists who will let them copy it. You can forget your FREE argument there. There are more pirated copies of Windows and Office than there are installations of Linux and OO by a long shot! And it's not because people are kleptos and snicker at the thought of diviance for the sake of it.
But you are right that sometimes a transition breaks things. What's wrong with reprogramming compatibility from 2003 to 2007 to benefit a wider audience and still remain standardized across the firm? By the way, usually they find a way to support both new and legacy items until some IT people can reach it in the work queue rather than screw themselves by some surprise switch.
You're living in the argument that...
"One day, computers are going to automate everything for us and we can just sit there and have it churn data out to the wazoo while we get sun tans."
In contrast, that's not what happened. The computer industry has created more jobs than ever because people need to upgrade / run new software / handle 10 sales per hours instead of 9 / etc. And that doesn't happen by itself. It takes people intervention. And neither Windows nor Linux can perform this kind of function by itself.

[yankeeDDL]

You're surprised that there's an "in cell" spell check because you haven't used OpenOffice. You may want to do that before commenting on OpenOffice some more. Who knows: you may actually like it ...

The "in cell" spell check is in addition to the "classic" spell check (which is supported by both Calc and Excel). That one yes, I do find completely useless since it flags (almost) any word.
The underline instead is much more subtle and so far I did not find one (one signle) Excel file where I did not have typos. I do work with excel a lot and make all sort of tables, many of which contain some text. It has nothing to do with being a word processor. In-cell spell check is convenient and practical, period. And if you don't like it, you can turn it off.

As for the rest ... I don;t think there's much point dicussing it any further: we're obviously on two separate levels. To me, and alternative is always agood thing. Having a choice is always better to be forced to use one specific application. People that don;t want alternatives, in my opinion, are either afraid to change or are "fanboys" in the negative way: they just like what they think it's best just "because". You may say that I'm a Linux fanboy, or an opensource fanboy; fact is, I use Linux because it does what I need (most of the times, but not always) better than Windows. Same with OpenOffice vs MS Office. There are also a lot of other reasons to do so (like principles: MS EULAs are an insult to the freedom of choice) but I can see how these are more subjective reasons to pick one vs the other.

And your argument about the computer industry creating more jobs: if you're referring to the armies that "fix" broken Windows installations, I don't really have anything to add. This may make sense from a corporate (MS) standpoint, certainly not from a users' perspective. So I cannot imagine how any end-user would support this. I would think it'll be a better world if we did not need so many support teams solving problems with the PCs and instead have more people doing productive things, innovating the PCs.

[rasmasyean]

Yes, I think you're right. We are obviously talking about different levels. But you're saying that OO can substitute MSO on all the levels I'm talking about which I tell you is not true. And I already said that ppl don't need MSO features for personal stuff and there are other reasons why they want MSO even thought they don't "need it" (feature-wise).
What you are saying is equivalent to...
"My car engine just runs great and I never really have to pop the hood and it gets me around. Nuclear submarine engines require 100 engineers and crew to keep that going. Why can't they use my car engine so that they can concentrate on innovating engines instead of maintenance."

[yankeeDDL]

I never, ever said that OO can replace MS Office on ALL levels.
Infact I said (many times) the opposite: I said that on those enterprise examples that you brought up there is no choice but to use MS Office. There are also other examples that have been brought up in different discussion (e.g.: when you need 100% compatibility on complex formatted documents - e.g.: legal).

I always stated that the vast majority of MSO users will be just fine with OO, and most definitely home-users.

And your paraphrase of what I said is totally incorrect as well. OO requires very little maintenance. It's mainstream formats are OpenSource formats and are stable and have been stable for a long time. You need support when you keep "innovating" and breaking compatibility with your own formats. If MS stops updating their format and come up with one, good one, once and for all, then they will avoid the need for so much support. I'd say that supporting old version transfer to new version is hardly an "innovative" function.
There are three reasons to break compatibility with the past:
a) Fix errors
b) Add features to a previously poorly engineered/designed version
c) Just create a siutuation to force people to upgrade to stimulate sales artificially

Of those, only b) is barely acceptable. I mentioned already that what the majority of end-users do with MSO can be done easily on much older versions of MSO. You don't need the .docx version to write a letter, nor the .xlsx to make a table. You will do just fine with Word97 and Excel97 versions. Of course there are exceptions. But they are ... well, exception, not rules.

[rasmasyean]

Hey, man. That's some nice thoughts. Unfortunately people can't predict the future as well as you think.
And the future is determined by dynamic forces that include non-technical things like politics, economics, cultural trends, etc.
But if you find a format that is perfectly scalable for 10 years, you are like a messiah of computing and I will be your right hand man.
Not too long ago, to make software required some Mathematical ability and training but when you had that, you can pretty much make 90% of the "stuff out there". Now you don't need to be that "talented" and you can use these tools and drag and drop GUI items and have an editor that types things for you...but you can only specialize in like 10% of the types of software there are. And unless you are like some super guru with absolutely no life, you'd be hard pressed to make good software without those tools because you can't remember 10,000 operations that firms like Microsoft make up. Did anyone predict software will get that complex back in the mainframe days? Half of them are probably internet related that not even the NCSA guys thought would crop up! And the next 10,000 will be "cloud computing" operations that 90% of the experts didn't even think of yet! Get ready for .docc and .xlsc!

[bbvammy]

@Evildave

You always crack me up after a hard day of work.