Here Comes the Next Microsoft Office(winsupersite.com)
winsupersite.com
Here Comes the Next Microsoft Office
http://winsupersite.com/office-2013/here-comes-next-office
11 comments
No one I know uses Visio any more. They all seem to use PowerPoint for diagramming.
Why? Because you have to pay more for Visio and to be honest Visio is horrible.
I use dia over Visio - it's a much stronger product.
Why? Because you have to pay more for Visio and to be honest Visio is horrible.
I use dia over Visio - it's a much stronger product.
Microsoft actually does provide Visio to students through Dreamspark.
> Microsoft never did a particularly good job of making Office a representative Mac application suite
Most people who have used Office:Mac will attest that it has a better interface than the original. Hopefully this cross-platform release won't be a setback.
Most people who have used Office:Mac will attest that it has a better interface than the original. Hopefully this cross-platform release won't be a setback.
> Most people who have used Office:Mac will attest that it has a better interface than the original.
I've never met anyone who didn't think that Office:Mac is terrible compared to Windows Office.
I've never met anyone who didn't think that Office:Mac is terrible compared to Windows Office.
Until you tried to load more than 100 rows into excel. Then you find out it crashes every ten seconds.
Excel for mac is also extremely slow and laggy.
Excel for mac is also extremely slow and laggy.
[deleted]
> the subscription-based versions of Office 2013—which are sold through Office 365
I wonder whether this will be a source of confusion among consumers. The way I understood it, Office 2013 is the desktop version, and Office 365 is the cloud-based subscription version. But I see both marketed under the Office 2013 moniker. Between this and the Windows 8 / Windows RT, their product names are overlapping, giving these launches a muddled message.
I wonder whether this will be a source of confusion among consumers. The way I understood it, Office 2013 is the desktop version, and Office 365 is the cloud-based subscription version. But I see both marketed under the Office 2013 moniker. Between this and the Windows 8 / Windows RT, their product names are overlapping, giving these launches a muddled message.
I'm pretty sure they're trying to retire the 201X moniker from Office. Office for RT, and the 2013 final copies on MSDN, all lack year marks on the loading screen. It's just Word now, not Word 2013.
Basically, they're trying to brand Office 365 as the subscription, with Office as the software suite, which can be part of the subscription.
Of course, the box art from October still has the year: http://www.neowin.net/images/uploaded/1_office2013.png
But I think that the subscription-based model will mean that there won't be a version you receive. You just always get the newest one, whatever it may be.
Basically, they're trying to brand Office 365 as the subscription, with Office as the software suite, which can be part of the subscription.
Of course, the box art from October still has the year: http://www.neowin.net/images/uploaded/1_office2013.png
But I think that the subscription-based model will mean that there won't be a version you receive. You just always get the newest one, whatever it may be.
Don't worry, Office 2010 has been sold like this and I can assure you there's no confusion at all.
For personal user, Office brand is still desktop app.
For corporate/small-biz, Office brand is Office 365 + Office 201x (desktop version).
There reason for this is because for personal user, they don't bother with Office 365 and for corporate/small-biz, they usually take their time to read the offerings (to get better values of it) or purchase them via partner-services who in turn will explain the whole MS licensing stuffs.
For personal user, Office brand is still desktop app.
For corporate/small-biz, Office brand is Office 365 + Office 201x (desktop version).
There reason for this is because for personal user, they don't bother with Office 365 and for corporate/small-biz, they usually take their time to read the offerings (to get better values of it) or purchase them via partner-services who in turn will explain the whole MS licensing stuffs.
I like Microsoft but branding is definitely not its middle name. One problem is that they try to place too many products under the same umbrella ("Live", for example). It can be difficult to distinguish between different but related product lines.
They have to give Office 365 a different branding, since the Office suite that ships with it will vary depending on what the current version is (e.g. Office 2013, 2015, 2017, etc).
Microsoft will have a problem in the future - not as big of a problem as the Windows one, but still a pretty big problem. They will have to make some choices.
1) Keep Office Windows (and Mac) only as some sort of "competitive advantage"
2) Expand Office to iOS and Android, too, which will have billions of users in the future, more than the Windows ecosystem itself
3) Keep prices as high as ever
4) Dramatically lower prices by an order of magnitude to make sense for the mobile ecosystems, and be more competitive with free or sub $10 Office Suites, that while may not have all the Office features, it will have a lot for many people. If they didn't think that was true, they would've never made the Office 365 web app.
So the problem for Microsoft is that whichever way they go, they will get less revenue from Office in the future, whether that's because more people will prefer cheaper alternatives like Google Docs or even their own Office 365, or because they have to dramatically lower the price for the "native" versions on iOS and Android, or because most people on these platforms, won't care as much about Microsoft's Office, because there are good enough (or free/much cheaper) alternatives.
I think in the end they will get less revenue because of a combination of both not being as relevant on competing platforms, and having to compete on a much cheaper price level.
1) Keep Office Windows (and Mac) only as some sort of "competitive advantage"
2) Expand Office to iOS and Android, too, which will have billions of users in the future, more than the Windows ecosystem itself
3) Keep prices as high as ever
4) Dramatically lower prices by an order of magnitude to make sense for the mobile ecosystems, and be more competitive with free or sub $10 Office Suites, that while may not have all the Office features, it will have a lot for many people. If they didn't think that was true, they would've never made the Office 365 web app.
So the problem for Microsoft is that whichever way they go, they will get less revenue from Office in the future, whether that's because more people will prefer cheaper alternatives like Google Docs or even their own Office 365, or because they have to dramatically lower the price for the "native" versions on iOS and Android, or because most people on these platforms, won't care as much about Microsoft's Office, because there are good enough (or free/much cheaper) alternatives.
I think in the end they will get less revenue because of a combination of both not being as relevant on competing platforms, and having to compete on a much cheaper price level.
They will almost certainly make the iOS and Android apps only available to monthly subscribers, which includes all their cloud services. If they have "billions" of customers paying them $10-$20 a month, they will be doing very well for themselves.
Is there really a market for serious office productivity apps on tablets? I'm not seeing it. I certainly would not want to do any heavy duty editing or spreadsheet work on a 7" touch screen.
> whichever way they go, they will get less revenue from Office in the future
Can you explain how you arrived there? If office is made available on other platforms it will raise the revenue not lower it.
Can you explain how you arrived there? If office is made available on other platforms it will raise the revenue not lower it.
When you get to the top, every way is down.
Currently (well, before the portables took over) everybody has a Windows machine, and buys Ofice for it. Once people change to non-Windows machines, they don't get more numerous, thus, if MS drops the price to stay competitive, revenue will go down.
Yes, they do, they also get richer. But changes in population and economy aren't quick enough to compensate for an order of magnitude drop in price. At least not at the short term.
Currently (well, before the portables took over) everybody has a Windows machine, and buys Ofice for it. Once people change to non-Windows machines, they don't get more numerous, thus, if MS drops the price to stay competitive, revenue will go down.
Yes, they do, they also get richer. But changes in population and economy aren't quick enough to compensate for an order of magnitude drop in price. At least not at the short term.
> Microsoft will also update the Mac suite at some point, meaning that by the end of 2013, there will be a version of Microsoft Office available for every major computing platform on earth. Just as with Multiplan in 1982.
Could someone elaborate what the sort of work it would take for MS support Linux? I'm really excited that there is going to be web version because I'm sick of LibreOffice.
Could someone elaborate what the sort of work it would take for MS support Linux? I'm really excited that there is going to be web version because I'm sick of LibreOffice.
But which Linux? Linux is relatively small in general, but then when you start looking at the fragmentation within Linux it gets even nastier.
For example, Mint Linux, RedHat, Ubuntu, etc? Valve has only decided to release Steam on Ubuntu and support that.
For example, Mint Linux, RedHat, Ubuntu, etc? Valve has only decided to release Steam on Ubuntu and support that.
Yes, they packaged it for Ubuntu and it's been repackaged and worked in majority of distributions in a matter of minutes. Literally - around 30min after the announcement I wanted to start looking at a way to get it running under Arch, but there was already a 6th version of the packaging script available online.
I'm not sure what do you mean by fragmentation exactly - sure all distributions look a bit different and have some specific approach to packages/configuration, but apart from that it's all almost exactly the same. If something works under ubuntu, there's no good reason it wouldn't work under other distributions.
I'm not sure what do you mean by fragmentation exactly - sure all distributions look a bit different and have some specific approach to packages/configuration, but apart from that it's all almost exactly the same. If something works under ubuntu, there's no good reason it wouldn't work under other distributions.
and all of them collectively only make a couple of percent of desktop share. Given this why bother with Linux at all? There is a web version that can be used on almost any platform
Would it be possible to run the Android version under Linux? I know that this will sound like anathema to many, but it could be an interesting development, considering that not being able to run Office is one of the main obstacles to Linux desktop adoption.
It's doubtful without the source and/or running something like Ubuntu for Android.
While I respect the work put in, OpenOffice/LibreOffice are just unusable. I've tried since 2007 but I've had to use Google Docs and Spreadsheets instead.
I would pay a lot of money for a Linux Excel.
While I respect the work put in, OpenOffice/LibreOffice are just unusable. I've tried since 2007 but I've had to use Google Docs and Spreadsheets instead.
I would pay a lot of money for a Linux Excel.
Have you tried LibreOffice recently? It had a major breakthrough some time ago (a year? can't remember) that improved loading times enormously and actually made it usable.
Loading times weren't the issue for me. The issue is that the interface is just not "friendly." It is not always consistent with its self and little thought is given to usability.
This used to be something I would be critical of the Thunderbird e-mail client for too, but that has come along massively in the last couple of years (so much so that I use that instead of Outlook, the quick filters are masterful). Ditto with GIMP (the Photoshop replacement), it has come forward leaps and bounds.
There is nothing technically wrong with LibreOffice. I just wish it could match Office 1995 in terms of its interface.
This used to be something I would be critical of the Thunderbird e-mail client for too, but that has come along massively in the last couple of years (so much so that I use that instead of Outlook, the quick filters are masterful). Ditto with GIMP (the Photoshop replacement), it has come forward leaps and bounds.
There is nothing technically wrong with LibreOffice. I just wish it could match Office 1995 in terms of its interface.
Personally I use LibreOffice and find it good in many use cases, but sometimes you just need Office - either for compatibility reasons, or because you need some special feature.
But I think the real question is - do you think most people who need a Word or Excel app for whatever reason will have this kind of problem?
Most people no - but, for example, a company of my group tried to go fully Linux, but constantly have problems with Word documents formatting. Having that option could help a lot this kind of choices.
Big monolithic desktop apps just are not and probably never will be a strength of FOSS development. When I do use FOSS for office productivity I prefer a program with a uniquely FOSS-y take on the problem sphere (like Lyx for word processing) over one that's trying to play catchup on propretary models.
Part of the problem is that it doesn't support all MS Office features which makes it frustrating when you're working with coworkers and clients using Office. A perfect example is smart graphs (which are non existant) and graphs look different (and bad) and then don't work on the mac version.
What makes it unusable for you? I've used OpenOffice and derivatives since 2006 on Windows, and haven't had any real problems.
What's the big problem? Someone needs to write an X backend for the android system and then you should be able to run most libraries (compiled for x86) in a chroot or something.
There was a Java port of X posted here a few days ago, as well as a port of X.org that I did a couple of years ago. Complete source is here (http://github.com/tmzt/androix) but building X can be somewhat tricky.
I have also posted an apk here (http://db.tt/UkFlvNAm) which has been tested on recent tablets (Galaxy Tab 2).
I have run Abiword on this in an ARM chroot, though on much slower hardware (a T-Mobile G2).
I have also posted an apk here (http://db.tt/UkFlvNAm) which has been tested on recent tablets (Galaxy Tab 2).
I have run Abiword on this in an ARM chroot, though on much slower hardware (a T-Mobile G2).
The common approach today is to run X and a VNC server inside the chroot, then VNC into it from the android userland.
> I would pay a lot of money for a Linux Excel.
What Excel functionality do you need?
What Excel functionality do you need?
Even if it's not, MSFT now has office web apps, so if all you need is google docs as .docx files, that shouldn't be the limiting factor.
> by the end of 2013, there will be a version of Microsoft Office available for every major computing platform on earth.
Except Linux, which is quite a major platform it seems.
Except Linux, which is quite a major platform it seems.
Even if I really like Linux and I'm using it on a daily basis no it's not, it's below 2%.
They probably should've written that as "major consumer computing platform."
What about Android?
This is a weird article to me. In my experience, people hated the ribbon and didn't find it useful or innovative, just annoying. Also, most of my friends that switch to Mac found the Mac version of office to be quite a bit better than the Windows version. I know Word for Mac had quite a few more features (Notebooks being the biggest one) than the windows version.
I suppose they could be talking about lack of apps, like OneNote and Visio?
I suppose they could be talking about lack of apps, like OneNote and Visio?
I agree with you on the Mac comments, but Paul Thurrott himself talks about the ribbon in the comments- it annoys experts, but everyday users love it. Since we are surrounded by very tech savvy people, we tend to think that everyone hates it. They don't.
to some extent i can't really buy this argument. office 2007 still accepts office 2003 keyboard shortcuts, so if an expert is completely at home with 03 he or she should still be able to function normally in 2007+ without needing to visit the ribbon very much. i was quite happy with this - the ribbon is there, but it forces nothing on me. i was happily smashing away until i one day decided to pay attention and saw the yellow dialog box over the ribbon which said something like 'office 2003 shortcut'.
if an lotus 1-2-3 superuser for some reason really couldn't change his spots after 30 years, excel 2010 still keeps / as a menu shortcut for those folks, even though lotus shortcuts no longer work.
if an lotus 1-2-3 superuser for some reason really couldn't change his spots after 30 years, excel 2010 still keeps / as a menu shortcut for those folks, even though lotus shortcuts no longer work.
Ribbon was an improvement to 99% of the people using it.
If it was such an improvement, why did they remove the menus? (it takes a paid extension to bring those back). They could have at least left it as an option for power users.
because the menus would make it worse for the average user and the power user should be willing to pay if it's that important for them.
Google Docs, Google Drive, Google Calendar.
The cynical side of me that has used Microsoft software for 3 decades asks: 'WTF did Redmond break to make it "better"?'
Sometimes I think that Microsoft themselves want Visio to die off. They don't give it to students (so they can learn it) and even a lot of business licences don't come with it.
I understand they want to hold something back so they can sell their super enterprise style licences, but Visio is such a versatile tool which has a wide variety of applications far outside of big businesses (e.g. room arranging, garden layouts, college classes, etc).
Worse still each year that Microsoft hold Visio back the web-based alternatives get better and better. Eventually Microsoft will just be forced to discontinue it and nobody will even notice, because almost nobody knows what Visio is or does right now.
I would happily trade Access or OneNote for Visio. Why not let me do a "pick your own licence" deal? I can pick four or five products I want (e.g. Word, Excel, Outlook, Visio, and OneNote).