Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Office 15 Development To Go JavaScript, HTML5 For Extensibility

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the is-this-the-embrace-or-the-extend? dept.

Microsoft 117

mikejuk writes "Programmers have had to put up with Microsoft dithering over Office development for a long while. The macro language VBA has been on its way out ever since .NET was introduced and yet it is still the only macro language available. Now it looks as if Microsoft plan to put JavaScript and HTML5 into Office 15. And how do we know this? By reading job ads to discover what projects Microsoft is hiring for."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Dear diary (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010412)

Today timothy irradiated slashdot with his faggotry.

FUCKING ALL RIGHT !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010454)

If this won't kill it off, nothing will !!

Re:FUCKING ALL RIGHT !! (0)

WrongSizeGlass (838941) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010722)

If this won't kill it off, nothing will !!

MS is adding 'extensions' to JavaScript so it can access system resources in Windows 8 (their new 'full screen' native Win 8 applications). With these extensions the exploit writers can now use the same code to infect web pages, Office 15 documents and the new Windows 8 applications. So I guess you're right: if this doesn't kill it off, nothing will.

Re:FUCKING ALL RIGHT !! (0)

erroneus (253617) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011296)

yes... their damned embrace and extend... sickening. They'll probably come up with some sort of encrypted javascript to protect their valuable source code and on and on and blah blah blah... I don't want javascript to have easy access to the file system on my computers!! What kind of security nightmare are they trying to create? And surely they don't mean for all of everyone's work is to be stored exclusively on their cloud do they?

I know that I should never underestimate the stupidity of typical users, but I am not just worried about people liking the idea, I am terrified of it.

Re:FUCKING ALL RIGHT !! (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012218)

So someone should create a NoScript plugin for Office?

Re:FUCKING ALL RIGHT !! (1)

zget (2395308) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012778)

How is this any different from VBA inside office documents having access to your local files? It's just a language... Besides, Office documents have always asked permissions to run scripts if they are present. This changes nothing else than adding alternative scripting language for those who rather use it.

Re:FUCKING ALL RIGHT !! (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013570)

You've been able to use JScript in place of VB/VBS in lots of places in Windows-land since forever.

This is new or unexpected in what way?

A programming language inside documents? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010458)

Why does anyone need a programming language embedded in documents? Seems like that would be ripe for potential security/privacy violations, viruses, etc. I could see having some sort of limited template/macro language but, really, a full blown programming language inside documents?

Re:A programming language inside documents? (4, Insightful)

xombo (628858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010466)

HTML pages are documents. JavaScript is a full-blown programming language inside documents. It makes good sense.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010516)

No it doesn't. Javascript definitely does not belong in an HTML file. It belongs as a separate file so that you can actually make sure that it's updated rather than hoping that it doesn't get screwed up when you want to change the HTML.

Programming in documents is a serious security problem that ought to have been fixed years ago. If you need interactivity, then use an external program, otherwise let's keep the bugs to things that are actually unavoidable.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

kikito (971480) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010594)

Hemm ... no.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010608)

Link to an external JS or not, the fact of the matter is that when the page ends up in the browser they both / all reside within the same DOM. Your ivory tower view of how things should be is commendable, but not workable in the real world.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

Serious Callers Only (1022605) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010686)

Your suggested solution (moving js outside the document) would make no difference to security.

The issue is that a program like word needs to execute code (formats like PDF, macros, code to manipulate the document) which leaves it open to attacks so that code needs to be properly sandboxed, ideally in a separate process as has been popularised by chrome and more recently web kit. That has nothing to do with where the js etc resides in the document, which from a security point of view, doesn't really matter.

So long as there is an option for disabling js completely on read, and sand boxing it fully when it is turned on ( something browsers have been doing for years) moving to js and HTML would not make office any less secure, and possibly more secure as rendering js and HTML is a well understood problem.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

benjymouse (756774) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011194)

So long as there is an option for disabling js completely on read, and sand boxing it fully when it is turned on ( something browsers have been doing for years) moving to js and HTML would not make office any less secure, and possibly more secure as rendering js and HTML is a well understood problem.

I believe that Office is already (2010) sandboxing documents. IIRC documents "tainted" with an Internet origin will open in a sandboxed (low-integrity) process.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

BradleyUffner (103496) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012420)

No it doesn't. Javascript definitely does not belong in an HTML file. It belongs as a separate file so that you can actually make sure that it's updated rather than hoping that it doesn't get screwed up when you want to change the HTML.

Programming in documents is a serious security problem that ought to have been fixed years ago. If you need interactivity, then use an external program, otherwise let's keep the bugs to things that are actually unavoidable.

You are just arguing semantics with the separate document thing. The Office Document format is now composed of multiple files inside a single logical document file. The scripting could easily be moved out of the content file and be stored as a separate entity. Users obviously want this functionality, or documents using it wouldn't exist in the first place.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013338)

Yep. How come there's still no "#include" in HTML? Anybody with half a brain would have put that in from day one, but noooo.

(Server side includes don't count - they don't work for HTML files stored on my hard disk)

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

funfail (970288) | more than 3 years ago | (#37015592)

Who uses static HTML files these days? Everything is generated dynamically on the server side anyway.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

sribe (304414) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010472)

Why does anyone need a programming language embedded in documents? Seems like that would be ripe for potential security/privacy violations, viruses, etc. I could see having some sort of limited template/macro language but, really, a full blown programming language inside documents?

You don't need it so much "inside documents" (although some people do that), as you do "inside the word processor app" with full access to the document--for all sorts of applications involving building documents.

Make the distinction visible from the outside (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010596)

If the macros are embedded within a document, it should be treated as an executable carrying around data, not as a document containing macros. Change the extension, the associated icon, don't allow macro execution in what is presented as a document (rename it first), give the usual warnings when opening email attachments. And make it possible to open the the "executable" as a document without macro capability. It shouldn't be difficult to implement, and suddenly everyone can see what they're dealing with before they open the file. And nothing useful is lost, as far as I can see.

Re:Make the distinction visible from the outside (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010630)

>...Change the extension, the associated icon, don't allow macro execution in what is presented as a document (rename it first), give the usual warnings when opening email attachments. And make it possible to open the the "executable" as a document without macro capability.

Good thing that Microsoft already did that with the Office 2007 document formats, then!

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

cgenman (325138) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010682)

Excel is pretty much a programming language, just a really bad one. Embedding a better one within it just makes sense.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

SilverHatHacker (1381259) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010964)

My dad was bored one day, so he wrote Stock Ticker (the old board game) in a spreadsheet.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010602)

Why does anyone need a programming language embedded in documents? Seems like that would be ripe for potential security/privacy violations, viruses, etc.

Office already has reasonable security controls over VBA macros. They aren't executed automatically if a document came from an untrusted source. Like so many things, if you're going to willfully execute malicious code, nobody can help you. But the problem of Word macro viruses and the like has been around for a long time and has largely been addressed by a combination of modern antivirus software and Office's own security controls.

That said, if I want to write macros to make my use of Office more efficient, who are you to say it's a bad idea? I'm not going to write macros that violate my own security or privacy. I have VBA macros that I use every time I open Word. I've written macros for Photoshop as well -- the difference being, those are written in JavaScript. I'd be more than happy to translate my VBA macros away from that rather shoddy and awkward language into a language that I use all the time for all sorts of things.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37012724)

Excel for Mac is pretty shit when it comes to security controls. When an Excel file contains macros it'll prompt on opening to either disable macros, open the file as normal, or not open the file. Logically it makes sense to me that I'd open the file and have a look at the macros to ensure that they're doing nothing unusual, but that's not possible. Disabling scripts means that the scripts are still visible but can't be viewed.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

Beale (676138) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013410)

I'd be more than happy to translate my VBA macros away from that rather shoddy and awkward language into a different shoddy and awkward language.

FTFY

Re:A programming language inside documents? (4, Insightful)

Co0Ps (1539395) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010612)

You would be surprised how much business logic companies tend to squeeze into office documents, especially excel documents. I'd go as far as saying most of the world runs on excel sheets + VBA. Horrible but true.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

mvar (1386987) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010732)

You would be surprised how much business logic companies tend to squeeze into office documents, especially excel documents. I'd go as far as saying most of the world runs on excel sheets + VBA. Horrible but true.

This is so horrible and yet so true, I've seen excel documents being used for an insane variety of purposes, from simple event monitoring to full CRM & Payroll

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011804)

to full scale building energy analysis for the full year, all 8760 hours of it. one hour at a time. Anyways, use what works and what you know. You always seem to have half the time needed to do a proper job of it.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

clyde_cadiddlehopper (1052112) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011150)

Agreed, but the alternative -- waiting for IT to build something -- is simply unacceptable. I build budgeting and forecasting systems (Essbase and relational). As such, I dwell in the land of the undead zombies midway between Finance and I.T. Finance wants it good and fast. I.T. wants it cheap and stable. VBA macros in Excel make it possible for me to get the job done and move along to the next project.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

ctmurray (1475885) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012028)

I use VBA macros in Excel to manipulate data and images that I have to do regularly. Why is VBA good? Because I have not programmed a full program since grad school in Fortran in 1985. I am able to use VBA to take an existing GUI (Excel) and add functionality in short order since VBA is so similar to Fortran. I already store the data (and images) in worksheets for my science research. And when I want to curve fit the data, or rotate, shrink and place 100 images I use VBA. There is a very active community to help you work through the criptic syntax, I usually can get past a barrier in 24 hours. So the reason to keep VBA is for all the thousands of lone users like me just trying to get our work done.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

MonkeyOnATypewriter (1361269) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012678)

Please try someday Matlab or its open source clone Octave.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (2)

kiddygrinder (605598) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012736)

this is pretty true, at one point we were pretty much told to nuke any spreadsheets we could find and roll the functionality into our other applications, after seeing some of the absolutely required and totally horrific functionality built into some of these bad boys we pretty much turn the other cheek a lot of the time.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

multi io (640409) | more than 3 years ago | (#37015306)

Agreed, but the alternative -- waiting for IT to build something -- is simply unacceptable.

Another alternative would be that many more people (non-IT people) learn to program. I mean program with half-way modern (interactive/scripting) languages, environments and libraries. I actually think that this is a cultural issue, and an education issue. In a world where pretty much every automation is run by computers, you could argue that a deeper understanding of how those machines work is a sort of fundamental piece of knowledge like reading and writing and algebra.

Re:A programming language inside documents? (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011786)

think custom functions for excel. Not every thing can be done there and writing a hole app just to do something that is already 99% doable in excel seems like a waste. Also in the HVAC engineering world, everyone has excel and everyone knows how to use it. where as almost no one knows C, C++, python, .Net, etc in that world.

Anyways, as for word documents, think a custom markup language, and a nice interface to select options in the document.

Good, maybe. (1)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010462)

Javascript itself would be an excellent "macro" language for Office, but I'm not so sure about the HTML5 part. I sure hope you don't have to use DOM to alter spreadsheets. That would suck.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010522)

Yes, but it doesn't really solve the problems that come from having a macro language built into a document format. Until you remove that, there's not a whole lot you can do that's going to improve things.

Re:Good, maybe. (4, Insightful)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010708)

You probably didn't know that Tools > Macros >Visual Basic Editor is the world's most popular IDE.
There are full blown Win32 applications that run out of Excel spreadsheets.
Crazy, but true.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013214)

I'd go a step further and say that every business over a particular size is guaranteed to have at least one such application - and if it's not written in Excel, it'll be written in Access.

The application is practically guaranteed to be a horrendous mess, but it's almost certainly become business-critical.

And the good people behind LibreOffice still can't figure out why anyone wouldn't want a free office suite.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

billyswong (1858858) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013732)

And the good people behind LibreOffice still can't figure out why anyone wouldn't want a free office suite.

That's sad but true. Although the LibreOffice looks as if there is a macro function, there is just plainly no documentation for people to write custom code! Oh sorry, there's documentation for the BASIC language, but not the API to access the spreadsheet...

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

jimicus (737525) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013828)

Wouldn't do you much good anyway, not unless it includes compatibility with Office VB apps.

Interoperability with existing applications (both those written in-house as spreadsheets and third-party apps that somehow plug into Office) and outside entities are far and away the biggest thing keeping people on Office. The closest you'll get to a migration in most businesses today is "drop office except for a select few" approach.

Re:Good, maybe. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37013228)

Yeah, in stead of turning the browser into operating systems, we should rather have turned spreadsheets into operating systems. Remember: as long as we don't do it to chess programs, nothing can go wrong.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#37014342)

It's still not appropriate to have applications that look like documents. It doesn't matter how popular it is, it's a bullshit practice that just leads to malware infection. If it's genuinely a document then I shouldn't have to worry about opening it in my editor because some asshole is embedding things that don't belong in a document.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010606)

Maybe HTML would be used to create some kind of fancy user forms? I dunno, it seems like a weird decision to go with JS at all, instead of, say, VB.NET or C#.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

cynyr (703126) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011812)

They are looking for something with a simple syntax and ease of use for non-programmers and something that they can automatically create when you click "record macro"

Re:Good, maybe. (2)

deniable (76198) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011840)

.NET can still be used through Interop and the like. This looks to be aimed at the level of people who need to build stuff but don't have VS of one form or another. Another option would have been to pair a baby VSTO with the Express editions of VS.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

drobety (2429764) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010734)

I like the idea, there are already nice HTML5 charts library out there (ex.: http://www.rgraph.net/examples/index.html [rgraph.net] ), so if this can be reused in Excel, that makes sense.

Re:Good, maybe. (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011824)

Given the new formats, there's no reason they couldn't use the DOM, Excel is just one large table after all. It's more likely that they'll use the HTML for user forms and the like. This will replace the current VBA dialog editor. This is a bit of a mixed blessing because we'll have a lot of code to replace. Then again, they've done this before. I wonder if this is HTA reborn.

I know the web is cool... (2)

Haedrian (1676506) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010492)

And everything, but isn't this a bit too much?

Remember when Windows tried to 'integrate' with the web - I think it was Windows 98...

Is HTML and JS really the best tool for this job? Is it the best tool for all the jobs MS is intending it to be used for?

Re:I know the web is cool... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010614)

They are trying it again with Windows 8. I know, in windows marketing language 98 8 ... sigh

Re:I know the web is cool... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010660)

windows 8 will be focused on the chinese market where 8 means success and happiness.

Re:I know the web is cool... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010850)

I predict 10 years later, Microsoft (and many other companies) will be working overtime trying to pry this crap out of its products, thinking, "what were we thinking??"

Re:I know the web is cool... (2)

DocHoncho (1198543) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011734)

You mean like they are apparently doing with VBA? What retard came up with that "solution"?

Re:I know the web is cool... (2)

realmolo (574068) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010996)

HTML and JS probably *are* the best tool for *this* job. Which is basically scripting.

JS and HTML are familiar and easy. And they're powerful enough.

What would you prefer? PERL? Python? Those would be good, too, but let's face it- JavaScript integrates better with most things that you would do with an Office document. It's almost the unofficial scripting language of Windows.

Re:I know the web is cool... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011618)

HTML and JS probably *are* the best tool for *this* job. Which is basically scripting.

And if Microsoft is following the lead of Google Docs....

Re:I know the web is cool... (2)

deniable (76198) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011848)

Actually, JScript is one of the official scripting languages for Windows. Apart from some of the OLE stuff being painful, I much prefer it to VBScript with WSH.

Re:I know the web is cool... (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011178)

If you're using Office in the cloud, then yes. Hosted solutions to counter Google Docs. Active-X is old hat. Office Lite in the browser will enable employees to edit corporate documents over https from any web browser in the world. Especially makes sense with WP7 where a full Office install doesn't make sense on a phone - no maintaining of 'Pocket Word'.

Replacing vba with JS is a no-brainer, since what runs in Office fat-client will run super fast in the web-client.

A greater emphasis on HTML, even in the native application allows one-click publishing of presentations and customer applications built using Access. Forms generation...

Re:I know the web is cool... (2)

DocHoncho (1198543) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011726)

It sure beats the hell out of VBA... only Microsoft could impose such an abomination on an unsuspecting world. And the documentation... dear gods, to delve into that abyss is as likely as not to destroy any sanity a man has left.

If Microsoft can, for once, provide a well documented macro language for their Office products that doesn't derive from the Loins of the Devil (aka VB)... well, it'll be a cold day in hell, who am I kidding?

Re:I know the web is cool... (2)

BitZtream (692029) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011886)

You do realize that integration is tighter now than ANYTHING Win98 had? ActiveDesktop has been renamed, but its still available, even in Win7, which is really what you're referring too. Works just fine now that they've got the bugs out and fixed a lot of the security issues.

Windows HELP is still HTML based. So basically every app has a browser built into it if it uses the standard system help features, like any proper app would.

'integrating the web' happened a long time ago, you just missed it, I could go on for hours about the various ways the integration is far tighter now than anything you would have even thought of in Win98, but I'm far too lazy.

Re:I know the web is cool... (1)

sosume (680416) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013124)

Remember the 'developers developers developers' mantra .. MS will lose lots of developers over this change, such as myself. I did not invest thousands in .NET certifications to see it thrown away for html/javascript. This will lead to the end of Windows.

Re:I know the web is cool... (2)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013760)

I'm not so sure. Think about WPF. It's a XML-based markup language for document layout that you bind code to written in C#.

HTML+js is pretty much exactly the same thing (ie different flavours of the same concept) so they're really replacing something they already use. I can see them extending HTML+js of course, and adding many new features, but did we expect anything different? Hopefully it'll be extended in the way jQuery "extended" javascript programming, and we'll all be happy.

Umm, .net anyone? (1)

syncrotic (828809) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010644)

Obviously VBA, descended as it is from VB6, needs to die. But .net made VB a respectable programming language, so why wouldn't microsoft simply move office macro development to that newer version instead? The learning curve would be pretty easy to climb for existing users, and there are a great many of those: entire businesses run on half-assed collections of excel macros.

VB.NET (1)

Inf0phreak (627499) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010762)

As I understand it, VB.NET is a successor to VB6 in name only [tvtropes.org] , i.e. it's more like C# with a BASIC-y syntax. Or am I completely off-base?

Re:VB.NET (1)

syncrotic (828809) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010812)

There are enough syntactic similarities to make feel familiar, and the IDE will help you out with a lot of the new methods... once your average VB programmer realizes that he can type a dot after an object name and get all of its methods listed in a neat little dropdown, he'll be productive.

Re:VB.NET (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011864)

If he hasn't been using Intellisense for the last decade or more, why would he start now?

Re:VB.NET (1)

MadChicken (36468) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011608)

You're pretty much right. Do a google search for "Visual Fred", a name given to VB.NET by MS MVPs.

Re:Umm, .net anyone? (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010784)

But .net made VB a respectable programming language

Respectable, maybe. Desirable? I don't think so.

No matter what they replace VBA with, it will have to be a gradual migration. Both will be supported for at least some period of time. So why not replace it with something that has nothing to do with Microsoft's Windows-only legacy language? Get that crap outta there!

I know that the only reason I ever write any VBA is because I have to write macros for Word or Excel. Every single time I do that, it's back to the manual, because I don't use VBA for anything else. Often I'll start out by recording a macro and tweaking it in the editor, because I'm not even sure of the basic syntax. I'd be much more comfortable with the whole thing if I knew I could do it in JavaScript.

Also, you may not be aware that Office for Mac OS X gave up VBA some time ago. I use Office on Windows; lots of my coworkers use it on Macs. If I come up with some way to do my work more efficiently, I can't share it with any of the Mac users, because they can't run VBA macros. Switching to JavaScript would almost certainly be something that happens across both versions of Office, since there are plenty of high-quality, cross-platform JavaScript engines available for Microsoft to license, or even use for free.

In fact, anything that gets Microsoft a little further away from being an ivory-tower proprietary software ecosystem, toward a company that uses open languages and document formats, is a good thing and should be applauded. (In fact, I'm a little surprised that most of the comments here have been negative. Microsoft wants to switch from Visual Basic to JavaScript and that's bad?)

Re:Umm, .net anyone? (1)

John Bresnahan (638668) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010966)

Also, you may not be aware that Office for Mac OS X gave up VBA some time ago.

Actually, VBA is back in Office 2011. Just in time to be deprecated, I guess.

Re:Umm, .net anyone? (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011036)

Actually, VBA is back in Office 2011. Just in time to be deprecated, I guess.

Oh yeah?? Well, thanks for the FYI. A few Web searches reveals it's apparently still not 1:1 with the Windows version, though. I think ever since Mac Office 4.2 (the first version to by "synchronized" with the Windows release) rubbed so many Mac users the wrong way, Microsoft has put this artificial division between the two product groups and one doesn't even seem to talk to the other. It must drive IT guys nutty if they have to maintain both.

Re:Umm, .net anyone? (1)

outsider007 (115534) | more than 3 years ago | (#37010960)

It's because of phones. Office has integrate with cool stuff on phones or it's dead meat.

Re:Umm, .net anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37011184)

Rumors are .net is going away, replaced with native functionality.

Re:Umm, .net anyone? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37011578)

Not this again...

Don't they learn? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010744)

Macro viruses all over? Sounds like it to me...

No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37010764)

Clippy returns: The javascript edition.

clippy.say("You are writing a letter")
clippy.ask("Need help")
if (true) {
document.delete();
location.href = 'http://www.goatse.ru';
}

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37011070)

Clippy returns: The javascript edition.

clippy.say("You are writing a letter")
clippy.ask("Need help")
if (true) {
document.delete();
location.href = 'http://www.goatse.ru';
}

else
{
    document.exploitOS();
}

Re:No (0)

DocHoncho (1198543) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011752)

Beats the hell out of

Dim clippy as HelperObject
Dim value as Boolean

Set clippy = Clippy()

clippy.say "You are writing a letter"
Set value = clippy.ask("Need help?")

if value then
Application.Document.delete
Set Application.location.href = "http://www.goatse.ru"
end if

Office 365 (5, Insightful)

jsac (71558) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011418)

I find it far more likely that this has something to do with Office 365: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/office365/online-software.aspx [microsoft.com]

Re:Office 365 (0)

guruevi (827432) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012004)

They're having problems writing a macros interpreter? Wouldn't surprise me, that thing is probably a mess of spaghetti code.

Re:Office 365 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37013262)

They have problems with the whole Office 3-6-5 as well.

Does not work with Android
Does not work with iOS
Does not work with WP7
Does not work with Symbian
Does not work with Firefox
Does not work with Opera
Does not work with Safari
Does not work with Chrome/chromium

Does work with IE9/IE10 and Office 2010

* Some features works with all mentioned, but not all. You can save at some platforms but not on other. You can edit with some but not with all. The whole system is a puzzle.

I'm a Slashdotter - I refuse to read the article (0)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011442)

So, for all I know, this may be addressed in there already.

I'm sure when Microsoft chose to shift Office's file formats to be web-compatible, they weren't thinking about security - but I would hazard a guess they now see this as a serendipitous way to consolidate their security management. When they patch a new exploit, they'll be solving the problem both in Word and in Internet Explorer.

If I were, right now, an security-centric employee with Microsoft's Office team - I'd be updating my resume.

Dance monkeys, dance (1, Troll)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011562)

It's Microsoft Fashion time again. Did you use program in C++? That made sense, since it was cross-platforms and has an independent standards committee. Well, if you want to play in Microsoft land, you have to dance by Microsoft's tune: back in 2002 it was .Net. It was the holy grail -- they stuffed that thing everywhere. People started using it, and liked it too -- there are many .Net communities. In Visual Studio 2010, there's no intellisense [stackoverflow.com] for C++ anymore. Did you have large projects in C++? Well granpa, you should have migrated them to C# by now. We're not going to help you with your geriatric C++ programs.

But now Microsoft isn't feeling "hip" with the young kids anymore. All of these web applications make Microsoft feel two-thousand-and-late. Oh, what is Microsoft to do... Oh! Of course! We have money! and a huge developer base! The kids like JavaScript? We'll give 'em so much JavaScript they'll pass out!

We'll cram it everywhere, not just the browser. Native Windows software? JavaScript. Embedded scripting? JavaScript. Does JavaScript have any standard way to interface with the file system? Does it have any way to do networking, or databases? No? Well, that's not a big deal, we'll just make up our own!

Man, if you program software for Windows, you'd better start eating and breathing JavaScript. They've kicked C++ out, and .Net is next. It's the new Microsoft tune -- so start dancing!

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011708)

Err...intellisense for C++ works just fine in VS2010. I didn't try C++/CLI, but it works beautifully for vanilla C++. Much better than in the previous versions, actually.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (1)

LynnwoodRooster (966895) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011806)

My experience too... It's great for my C++ programming needs - VS2010 is a fabulous C++ editor.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (1)

Mr. DOS (1276020) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011920)

VS2010 includes no IntelliSense for unmanaged C++ code – that is, C++ that doesn't use .Net.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012976)

It's interesting that different people are seeing different behaviors on VS2010. I get no intellisense for either managed or unmanaged C++, you're getting intellisense only for managed code, and the parent poster is getting intellisense for ANSI C++. Below, there's a comment saying "You have to install the right mix of MSDN when you install 2010".

Weirdly, this is kind of good news for me, since I'm getting neither, and either of them would be useful -- it appears that it depends on the project setup.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37013176)

I might be going back to school soon and thanks for the warning.

I will install VS2008 if they have it instead of VS2010.

For Mr. Dos, why can't C++ use managed code? Isn't the point of .NET is that you use ASIL assemblies? I do not use .NET but I find that troubling as many apps are still written in C++. Sometimes you need performance but other parts of the code can include .NET just like the gui or networking layers.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013794)

read the SO link. There is no intellisense for C++/CLI.

That's the managed, .NET written using C++ flavour. old fashioned, unmanaged C++ is just fine.

Hardly anyone uses C++/CLI anyway, and now .NET is obsolete too (see the "Going Native" blogs, posts and webcasts on Microsoft's site) you'll see the shift is towards C++ backend with HTML+js GUIs. Made a lot of people unhappy that has. Me, I laughed my nuts off at all the monkeys that jumped on the 'new cool' thing from MS. Seen it before you see, will probably see it again.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37014118)

Incorrect. VS2010 has support for C++ intellisense, but NOT C++/CLI (managed C++), because it's rarely used and wasn't worth the effort. The only time you'd use C++/CLI is to migrate an old c++ project onto the CLI without a total rewrite into C#.

Re:Dance monkeys, dance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37011894)

You have to install the right mix of MSDN when you install 2010.

At first I was not amused (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#37011716)

Then as I thought about it...JS could be a better language to work in than VBA (I hate VBA...and JS, but much less than VBA).

While I hate the muddled mess that is JS (functional programming with an imperative look and feel) it is much more workable than VBA and should provide some easy access to powerful data manipulation macros in Office with the right libraries available to the user.

Re:At first I was not amused (1)

siride (974284) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013824)

People keep saying JS is "functional programming", yet aside from closures (hardly a functional-only feature), it doesn't seem to have anything that looks like functional programming to me. So what is it about JS that's functional again?

Re:At first I was not amused (1)

modmans2ndcoming (929661) | more than 3 years ago | (#37016514)

being able to dynamically extend any language construct. the author of Javascript called it a functional programming language and it is easier to use in a functional manor rather than an imperative one.

Office 15? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37012212)

Maybe I'm forgetful but Office 2003 is installed as "Office 11"... wouldn't that make Office 12 = 2007, Office 13 = 2010? Where is Office 14?

Re:Office 15? (1)

beuges (613130) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012986)

Office 2010 is Office 14. They skipped 13.

Structure and Behavior, Document and Streaming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37012314)

It makes sense to create a programming language to support both structure and behavior, document and streaming. Is there one out there yet?

Javascript has been in Excel for years (1)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012498)

I've been using it since Office 2003.

Anyone feel like.... (1)

dimethylxanthine (946092) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012534)

an MS Office+JS / VIM+Lisp flamewar? :-)

Re:Anyone feel like.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37013554)

Edlin + JCL!

MSOffice (2)

wesleyjconnor (1955870) | more than 3 years ago | (#37012996)

Would surely require MSJavascript combined with MSHtml5?
Please try to see this as not a troll but a concerned citizen?

AJAX is for Windows 8 Metro (5, Insightful)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 3 years ago | (#37013060)

I highly doubt Microsoft would get rid of VBA. It is the evil and glue that keeps customers locked in and gives PHB's who hate I.T. woodys who want to develop things quick and dirty in Excel rather than a real IDE.

Windows 8 has a problem with MS Office. If you notice closely in those video's the pretty tiled Metro UI loads but the demonstrators have to open the Windows 7 gui to actually open Excel.

So MS wants Office 15 to have a tile UI which needs HTML 5 and Javascript. I could be wrong, but I did find that pecular and in the demo videos and wondered if it was intentional that Corporate America would prefer the old GUI or if MS did not update the GUI code for Office yet.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?