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 Delayed, Too

CowboyNeal posted more than 8 years ago | from the not-quite-ready dept.

463

turnitover writes "And you thought calling it 'Office 2007' was just to make it seem all future-like -- but according to eWEEK.com's Mary Jo Foley, turns out calling it is truth in advertising: Office 2007 won't ship until 2007. What does this mean for Microsoft and its reputation as a company that can eventually ship software? What will this mean for office managers who have to plan upgrades and budgets? Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?"

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

Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org? (-1)

bjpirt (251795) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986622)

hopefully

Re:Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org? (1, Insightful)

Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986697)

It's not likely that open office will be a success until they have a native os x port.

Its well known that while Mac users do not have as large a market share as linux users, we set the direction of the industry.

I'm afraid that open office just doesn't cut it. I'd much prefer to give Microsoft my money, then put up with the slow & ugly oo.org.

Re:Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org? (-1, Troll)

babbling (952366) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986796)

Progress is being made. [openoffice.org] The problem is that Apple chose to ditch X11, and in doing so, ditched a whole lot of UNIX software that was made to use X11.

Re:Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org? (4, Informative)

Nexum (516661) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986874)

Um, Apple has not chosen anything of the sort [apple.com] .

Re:Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986864)

So why don't Apple help out in the porting effort? Linux companies like Novell help gnomify the program to behave better on the gnome desktop. OS X is a small proprietary technology and it's understandable it's hard to keep a port without funding.

Re:Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986717)

no, it won't. Stop trolling over commercial products because you don't make money.

Essbase and PSoft Nvision support? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986834)

Excel is the linchpin of MS-Office. Corporate finance analysts around the world are deeply wedded to it with workbook templates that mesh with core financial planning, forecasting, and reporting systems. Why? Because predicting the future requires flexible models and what-ifs that mesh with detailed historical results.

So when will adapter add-ins be available for Open Office from PeopleSoft, Hyperion, JDEdwards, Oracle financial apps, .... ?

Open office stuff may work fine for casual emailers and memo writers, but it is the bean counting that runs the show.

Back_2_tech

$ in my pocket! (0)

toucci (834101) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986625)

I like to recieve my Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition early to warm me in the cold months, but releasing an unneeded Office update is welcome as late as microsoft would dare.

Re:$ in my pocket! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986822)

an unneeded Office update
IOW, every release since Office97?

/.-Article about Office delay also delayed (0, Offtopic)

Advocadus Diaboli (323784) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986628)

Well, at least since I'm using Open Source in my Office no work is delayed there anymore. :-)

SCNR

Delayed, delayed... (4, Funny)

alexhs (877055) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986629)

Couldn't say admit once and for all that they're thinking MS-Windows and MS-Office are now mature products and that they won't release new versions anymore ? :)

Re:Delayed, delayed... (1)

mgblst (80109) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986690)

Yes, that is true.

So is the problem that they are diverting too many resources to other projects - obviously not just programmers, but real leaders in the company, people who get things done. Or are they simply having trouble coming up with enough changes to justify a launch.

I can't imagine it being the second point, as if they only release it with a few changes people will stay buy it, surely?

I looked.. (4, Interesting)

Ckwop (707653) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986633)

Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?

Microsoft Office was at it's best with Office 97. OpenOffice might not have all the features of Microsoft Office but I don't care because I'll never use them. Moreover, nobody is going to take away the download for OpenOffice 2 and decide we need a shiny new version. I also resent being called a dinosaur by Microsoft for using one of their old products that I found to be reliable.

I looked, I made the switch and there is no going back.

Simon.

Re:I looked.. (2, Insightful)

Jarlsberg (643324) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986665)

Personally, I've always had a soft spot for the final Windows 3.1 release of Office. Not that I'd ever use either Windows 3.1 or Microsoft Office for Windows 3.1 ever again, but at the time, it felt like a stable, mature product. Today, when I use my Windows box, I use Office 2004. It's fast, does everything I need it to do (and probably thousands of things I dont' care about). Will I switch to 2007? Only if it comes preloaded (which Office 2004 did).

On the issue of Microsoft releasing late. As a rule of thumb, Microsoft always releases stuff at least 12 months after they first gave a shipping date. This has been the case with their products ever since the early days of Windows. That Windows Vista is now being delayed into it's third year is rather dramatic, though, and also unusual for Microsoft.

i assume (1)

schwal (836247) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986699)

that you meant office 2003, as that is the newest version, outdating office xp.

Re:i assume (4, Interesting)

NMerriam (15122) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986738)

Office 2004 is the latest Mac version, MS seems to alternate between PC and Mac rather than releasing both at the same time, which results in interesting feature leapfrogging.

Re:I looked....oh wait (1)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986677)

> OpenOffice might not have all the features of Microsoft Office but I don't care because I'll never use them.

But I am sure you enjoy that fact that Microsoft Office loads quite faster than Openoffice.org. This feature, I am sure, you appreciate. Right?

Re:I looked....oh wait (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986703)

But I am sure you enjoy that fact that Microsoft Office loads quite faster than Openoffice.org. This feature, I am sure, you appreciate. Right?

This is a big advantage. IMHO this is what OOo should be focusing on more. Anyhow, the point shouldn't be which one is faster, but the features/price factor. OOo wins big on this one and alot of people could just switch over without missing any features at all. The problem I think with OOo adoption is more that it is competing with Office pirated edition more than it is competing with legal copies of Office. If Office comes preloaded, sadly, little will take the time to switch over...

Re:I looked....oh wait (1)

ceeam (39911) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986721)

Actually - I tried OOo2.0 for Windows (that I got with Ubuntu CDs BTW) and I _was_ amazed how fast it is in both loading and processing. I'd say that it is faster than MSOffice2k3 (again - both in loading and processing times). But still I do have a problem with OO - after a while all my menus are gone (empty). I guess I will figure out how to turn them back on but as for recommending it to people around - this provokes a second thought for a while.

But it _is_ speedy anyway - amazing what Java (right?) app can achieve.

Re:I looked....oh wait (1)

jawtheshark (198669) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986763)

But it _is_ speedy anyway - amazing what Java (right?) app can achieve.

Nope. From the OpenOffice.org about page [openoffice.org] : The source is written in C++

Re:I looked....oh wait (1)

Onymous Hero (910664) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986730)

Sure, this may well be true but look at the background processes Office loads on startup - its no wonder Word etc loads quicker. Surely you appreciate the fact that there are less annoying/bloaty/redundant features (did someone say Clippy?) in OO?

Sure, OO isn't perfect but for something free its bloody good. For the majority of tasks people would use MsOffice for OO is a perfect substitute. With every release OO just gets better....

My main problems with OpenOffice (on any OS) (5, Interesting)

jesterzog (189797) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986876)

OpenOffice might not have all the features of Microsoft Office but I don't care because I'll never use them. Moreover, nobody is going to take away the download for OpenOffice 2 and decide we need a shiny new version.

That said, what are the chances of OpenOffice.Org actually improving radically? As much as I admire the people who put effort into improving it, the project gives me the impression of something like Netscape 4, which was like the engine of Netscape 3 with lots of band-aid features stuck over its face that made it act slower, inconsistent with itself, unstable, and generally buggy. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it feels like there's so much legacy code and design in OpenOffice that it's difficult to implement important changes. In essence, and I'd be happy to be proved wrong, it seems like a big ancient application built on legacy design that's only going downhill and will inevitably be overtaken by others if it hasn't been already.

I've been put off OpenOffice for some time now because it won't (cleanly) compile as a native 64 bit application. I was looking forward to the 2.0 release because I'd been led to believe that the incompatibilities were being ironed out specifically for that release, and then it would compile as a 64 bit application, but on release that unfortunately wasn't the case. Searching further, I discovered that the OpenOffice code was apparently still so messy from the Sun days that it simply hadn't been feasible to port to a 64 bit app in any reliable way, and probably wouldn't be for a long time to come.

If OpenOffice had nice and easy-to-maintain code, I would have thought that a 64-bit build would have been as easy as a recompile -- perhaps with a couple of unforseen bug-fixes here and there. The problem is that something as basic as native 64-bit compilation is yet another thing that was never in the original design brief, and trying to patch it in later is a horrible task. I'm not an OpenOffice.Org developer, so if someone knows otherwise about this I'm keen to know.

OpenOffice is convenient to have right now because it provides an 80% replacement for a lot of what MS Office does. Many people looking to switch might be able to use it as a drop-in replacement if their requirements aren't too complex. It's still a mammoth and heavily complex system with considerably dead weight, though, and unfortunately it's not particularly bug free.

Personally, I've found it much easier to go with the more light-weight open source office apps, which aren't trying to be mammoth applications. Lately I've been using the likes of AbiWord, KWord, Gnumeric, and so on, and I've found them to be much more responsive, integrated with my system, and generally more stable than either OpenOffice or MS Office would be. (Actually I can't test MS Office on my system because it's not Windows, so I'm comparing it with MS Office on a typical Windows system.)

The lighter-weight open source apps don't do as much as OpenOffice or MS Office, but they do enough to keep me satisfied. Unfortunately this isn't an option for most people who are locked into Microsoft Office for things like specialised code and plugins and various desktop integration stuff, but then neither is OpenOffice. eg. Supporting something like OpenOffice at my current work is completely out of the question, simply because it won't integrate with our document management systems, despite ODMA (Open Document Management API) being an open API that's existed for ages and is supported by the bulk of DMS products. (MS Office doesn't cleanly support ODMA either, but it's popular enough that it gets special attention from the DMS vendors.)

Underpromise, always (5, Funny)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986634)

Always underpromise. It's not important to overdeliver, but it's very important to underpromise. And hedge. Always hedge.

Always tell the truth. It doesn't have to be the whole truth, but it is important that what you say be 100% verifiable.

Re:Underpromise, always (1)

ggvaidya (747058) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986729)

I love how you phrased that! Do you mind if I quote you on my blog [freshdurians.com] ?

Re:Underpromise, always (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986802)

He's quoting Scotty from Star Trek, I think.

Re:Underpromise, always (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986748)

Unless you're microsoft, and those bridges are already burned ;)

Re:Underpromise, always (1)

slimme (84675) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986811)

Man you're so 60's.
In the new century companies lie (or misrepresent the thruth) as much as they can get away with.

My motto these days is: If a company tells me something, it's a lie untill proven differently.

Are you kidding? (0, Flamebait)

kentrel (526003) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986635)

Will it make anyone look at openoffice.org

LOL. Is that a joke? Even the current version of Office is a lot more powerful than OpenOffice. No, Office 2007 being delayed is NOT going to make anyone turn to openoffice.org. It's a nice product for the average user, but its not a serious competitor by any stretch of the imagination.

lol.

Re:Are you kidding? (1)

Saven Marek (739395) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986652)

But does Office do 48 bit like OOo does? does it do layer masks like OOo does? does it do hueristics like OOo does?

No, MS Office doesn't do any of those and until it does then it won't be fully useful to normal people.

Re:Are you kidding? (2, Insightful)

what about (730877) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986666)

I am a OpenOffice/StarOffice user, they are fine for me and the saved money are "invested" in something else I like.

But, you may absolutely "need" the extra features, just do your research and check if the features you want are not available elsewhere.

Unless, of course, one of your requirements is that it must be a product from Microsoft...

On a side note, I am wondering if you are a Microsoft evangelist :-)

Re:Are you kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986734)

Exactly why was this marked as flamebait? The point is valid. The current version of Office already supercedes Openoffice.org - there was a /. thread just a few weeks ago discussing this..

Re:Are you kidding? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986751)

Exactly why was this marked as flamebait?

Because that's what it is.

The point is valid.

Irrelevant. Whether it was valid or not, it was written in language that was clearly intended to upset and provoke. This is what we call "flamebait".

Answers (4, Insightful)

shish (588640) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986637)

What does this mean for Microsoft and its reputation as a company that can eventually ship software?

Not much, they'll still have a reputation for eventually shipping, as they always have done

What will this mean for office managers who have to plan upgrades and budgets?

They'll get over it

Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?

No; they don't trust any software they've not seen advertised (whereas if it's advertised, it shows the company is making lots of money, so it's products must be good)

Re:Answers (5, Funny)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986696)

You forgot this one.

No because no salesperson came by from open office and gave them a rolex/airplane tickets/golf clubs.

Re:Answers (1)

BlueHog (963071) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986770)

Business users will still use MS office because as the saying goes "No one ever got sacked for using MS" The change will only start coming when you get kids using oo. This will when more departments in colleges/universities/schools start using it, the kids think it's a normal product and demand it's installed it at home as well. When they eventually get to work they will be peeved if they can't use it. To counteract this MS will give away free software to schools and increasing the educational discount they give.

Re:Answers (4, Interesting)

leuk_he (194174) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986833)

What does this mean for Microsoft and its reputation as a company that can eventually ship software?

Not much, they'll still have a reputation for eventually shipping, as they always have done


However it will make them think over using software assurance(=subscription) or not since the value of software assurance decreases if MS does not release new versions. It might be cheaper just to buy a single version and upgrade every 2 or 3 new versions instead of having the latest one that is not in time for the current subsription.

Re:Answers (1)

Flyboy Connor (741764) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986911)

Not much, they'll still have a reputation for eventually shipping, as they always have done

Even if it means they have to remove many of the promised features, or if they just have to take the old version, slap a few new graphics in the interface, and change the version number.

Delayed? (0, Troll)

EnsilZah (575600) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986638)

Really?
I didn't know it took so much work to update the logo. =o

Re:Delayed? (1)

rhesuspieces00 (804354) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986875)

no, they need to introduce some new bugs as well. no one would buy it just for the new logo.

Dates (1)

solarbob (959948) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986641)

You mean it will ship in the year its for? Why can't people just do this. I've got some magazines on subscription and I get the March issue in Janurary. Way to confuse people. Can't we just realease the March edition on the 1st of March? What about newspapers? They come out on the same day and no-one gets confused by that

At our office (4, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986642)

Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?

Unfortunately, at our office we don't really look at that right now.

BUT... We barely even look at Office 2003 either. The only useful part about that one is that I think Outlook 2003 has vastly improved design against worms and spam.

I mean... Come on. What features do people need from Office 2007!?

The new UI requiring massive relearning and costs for our middle aged crowd, means it has to have almost revolutionary new features as well, beyond the UI, for an upgrade to be worth the effort.

Re:At our office (0)

vhogemann (797994) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986807)

The only useful part about that one is that I think Outlook 2003 has vastly improved design against worms and spam.


If you need security, why not use OpenOffice? You don't need to uninstall MSOffice, keep it if you have any document that OpenOffice can't handle, but use Impress to open those PPT and PPS that you receive by email.

MSOffice vulnerabilities means nothing to OpenOffice, and I'm yet to see a Macro Virus that works on it. Also, it handles corrupt files much better than MSOffice, while Word hangs Writter will faithfully open almost anything that you throw at it.

I bet that you'll find yourself using OpenOffice more and more, and one day you'll be confident enought to uninstall MSOffice from your computer. And as your co-workers see you safely opening suspect files, and recovering otherwise unrecoverable documents they'll want to check OpenOffice as well.

That's how I convinced my mother to switch, she is a lawyer and almost lost her PhD. thesis because of a corrupt file that MSWord couldnt open... So I installed OpenOffice, and it opened flawlessly. ;-)

Re:At our office (1)

Warg! The Orcs!! (957405) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986840)

I mean... Come on. What features do people need from Office 2007!?

I'm not sure it's so much a case of what it'll do as much as how it'll do it. It'll probaby have much more XML support and possibly XAML support as MS seem to be heading down that path with Vista and MS Dynamics.

Probably.

Re:At our office (1)

solarbob (959948) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986857)

99% of people just use the basic math functions and graphs of Excel. Basic layout in Word. All which can be done with free alternative. I really don't need the new C#.ASP.NET.COBOL programming interfaces. I just want something I can type letters on ..

Re:At our office (1)

jesterzog (189797) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986895)

BUT... We barely even look at Office 2003 either. The only useful part about that one is that I think Outlook 2003 has vastly improved design against worms and spam.

I mean... Come on. What features do people need from Office 2007!?

Well, since you mentioned Outlook, I can think of at least two things from the point of view of someone who's had to write Outlook addins. (Even worse, in inheriting the maintenance of other people's Outlook addins.)

I'd like Outlook to have a consistent API for writing addins that's native to .Net (or anything else that has decent garbage collection), and where it's not necessary to directly interface with COM objects to get things done. It seems a bit ridiculous that 5 years after Microsoft released and started pushing its new Microsoft's own applications that were released several years afterwards!

I'd consider settling without that if Microsoft would simply fix the bugs that seem to be preventing some Outlook event handlers from firing when they're supposed to. (Specifically in our case, the Inspector.Close event doesn't fire reliably, and there's nowhere else to cleanly put the clean-up code that goes and deallocates the COM objects.)

Irrespective of the interface, Outlook 2003 is buggy, and many people who've had to integrate it with anything will know this very well. If Microsoft could just make it stable, not to mention having it run addins in sandboxes so that malfunctioning addins can't make an entire desktop unstable, I'd be happy.

of course !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986644)

Of course it will be out in 2007 !! its office 2007 not office 2006!! :p

AJAX Office (0, Offtopic)

Umbral Blot (737704) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986646)

Don't worry it's AJAX Office to the rescue, oh wait, no it isn't. I don't see why this would make people turn to Open Office either, unless Open Office is promising and delivering the features in the now delayed MS Office 2007, which to the best of my knowledge it isn't. In my personal experiance OOo is still playing catch-up, and essential features, like the spell checker still need some fine tuning (it never seems to suggest the word I meant). OOo's real hope of beating Office of course may be by improving and making more intuitive the basic features, used 99% of the time, beyond those that are part of MS Office, like an adaptive spell checker. Unfortunately this doesn't seem like OOo's goal either, they just seem to be trying to catch up with MS Office in the number of features offered, which they may never be able to do in full, even with these delays.

Re:AJAX Office (1)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986701)

What particular features of office 2007 were you looking forward to?

Re:AJAX Office (1)

Peteee (945896) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986910)

The massivly improved UI that makes it a million times more efficient.

Seriously, download the beta and be blown away by how easy it is to do things that you never thought you could do, with a minimum of mouse clicks.

Retraining is moot. The UI makes it terribly easy to use and you could figure everything out very easily.

Re:AJAX Office (1)

SpectreHiro (961765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986747)

I dont unnerstand why peeple alwayd makwe such a big deaeal about spell chjekcers. I mean, ca'nt you just lern how to spell in the frist plase? Lazy gits...

Slashdot: Editorializing for your amusement (1)

jettoki (894493) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986647)

What does this mean for Microsoft and its reputation as a company that can eventually ship software? What will this mean for office managers who have to plan upgrades and budgets? Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?

Will this diabolical delay put a damper on daily productivity!? Will competitors claim the keys to the corporate giant's coffin!? Has Microsoft finally met its match?!

Stay tuuuuuned and find out!

Re:Slashdot: Editorializing for your amusement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986686)

Same Microsoft-channel!
Same Microsoft-time!

[Images of BIll Gates wandering around in grey lyrca and blue speedoes.]

Doesn't mean anything really (1)

Celvin (601177) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986648)

What does this mean for Microsoft and its reputation as a company that can eventually ship software?
Nothing. This happens all the time, and nobody really cares.

What will this mean for office managers who have to plan upgrades and budgets?
It means they have to buy other software and/or hardware this year to keep the budgets high (you know, if you don't use it all this year, you'll get less next year). This is cool for the guys who get new toys, but of no real consequence.

Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?
This will do nothing for openoffice.org, unfortunately. The only exception may be people who want to buy the new office, and doesn't want to buy an old office just to upgrade next year. They may try openoffice in the meantime, but don't count on it. They'll probably just pirate the old one instead.

-C

Wait a sec! (5, Informative)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986649)

> Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?

Not until there is reported improvement in load times. For God's sake, how can one be expected to wait for 47 seconds for OpenOffice.orgs's writer to load a 1.7Mb document with 23 pages and 6 images? It's insane! I will not say what the other application takes but I'm sure every slashdotter knows what I am talking about.

Re:Wait a sec! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986689)

For God's sake, how can one be expected to wait for 47 seconds for OpenOffice.orgs's writer to load a 1.7Mb document with 23 pages and 6 images?

Just leave all of your documents open all of the time. You'll eventually run out of RAM, but just get a few external FireWire drives and the OS will manage via swapping. If those fill up, just keep chaining drives - that's the beauty of FireWire.

Re:Wait a sec! (4, Informative)

glasen (926355) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986726)

I don't know, what you are talking about.

My OO.o2 loads a 10MB document with lots of images (~20) and 10 embedded tables, in under 10 seconds.

Have you ever tried the version 2.0.2 of OpenOffice.org?

Seems to me that you haven't

Re:Wait a sec! (1)

phyrz (669413) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986844)

I upgraded to 2.0.2 this morning... very impressive. after an initial load of around 5 seconds, all docs are now opening (nearly) instantly.

Try 2.0.2, I couldn't find it in the release notes, but they make the thing faster.

Re:Wait a sec! (4, Informative)

The Lerneaen Hydra (885793) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986746)

How about disabling java in the settings, my OO.org used to take a painfully long amount of time to load, but after disbaling the time went down to something mroe acceptable (probably 1/2 to 1/3 of the time). AFAIK java is only used for advanced things that most people dont use, like macros ,live content or other stuff.

Re:Wait a sec! (2, Funny)

xtracto (837672) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986848)

AFAIK java is only used for advanced things that most people dont use, like macros ,live content or other stuff.

Wow, bloated software with things that "most people dont use"??

OpenOffice has REALLY come a long way to catch up with Microsoft products features!

Re:Wait a sec! (3, Interesting)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986794)

Not until there is reported improvement in load times.

Interesting astroturf attempt you have going there. Open Office Write 2.0 starts in about 3 seconds on my P/M 1.4Ghz laptop. MS Word is possibly a half a second faster.

Opening a 1.6MB .doc file in Word took about 2 seconds, while OOo took about 7 seconds to import the same file. Once the file had been converted to Open Document, load times were indistinguishable.

And ... is it dotNetted? (1)

plankrwf (929870) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986650)

In an earlier post (someone to provide the link?) someone stated that Vista was NOT build on .Net technology... I am wondering whether Office 2007 will be...

Roel
P.S. Will Microsoft rename the product Office 2008 so that they can still ship early ;-0

Re:And ... is it dotNetted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986818)

Nope, probably they'll persuade the US government to introduce the year 2006 1/2...

You don't miss what you've never had... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986653)

Is a slip in the product release going to convert users to OpenOffice? No. Most users have already got the level of functionality they need from Office already. They won't need the extra features until they have it in their hands, and only then may they suddenly decide that their business practice can't survive without it.

The comment has already been made that OpenOffice is a decade behind MS Office. And that's fine because most users don't need the level of functionality of MS Office, they just need something that works. But those businesses who do use the additional level of functionality aren't going to miss what they don't have yet.

upgrade budgets?? (1)

moochfish (822730) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986663)

What will this mean for office managers who have to plan upgrades and budgets?

Since when do companies have a burning urge to upgrade to software that isn't even out yet when their current software meets all their needs? The short answer is that the budgets will be spent on other things and the IT departments will be happy they won't have to spend money and time upgrading.

Re:upgrade budgets?? (1)

davisog (233309) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986727)

Companies do have an upgrade cycle which is often (unfortunatly) driven by other external companies or suppliers (a vicious circle, really). One has to wonder whether the delay helps book a bit more revenue as it catches companies who's upgrade assurance licences expire before the delivery of the software. I know my firm has been stung with the Windows 2003 Server Release 2 not being included on our upgrade assurance.

Here's an idea... (1)

carterhawk001 (681941) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986667)

Stop announcing when you plan on releasing software. Follow the Carmack Model and tell everyone Office/Windows/Etc will be done when its done. I'd rather have working software instead of a beta that got rushed out in time for xmas.

Re:Here's an idea... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986789)

I believe software isn't rushed out for christmas solely because they said that's when they would...

Failures (0, Troll)

pubjames (468013) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986687)

What I find interesting is that Microsoft had so many large failures recently and yet they seem to manage to get away with them without too much negative press. Remember how the whole .NET platform was going to revolutionize the way computers worked? Quitely dropped. Their MSN ambitions, Windows on mobiles - both have performed well below expectations. And yet they rarely receive bad press in the mainstream. I guess as long as their two cash cows, Windows and Office, continue to deliver amazing profits, people will see them as successful, and repeated failures will be ignored.
 

Re:Failures (0)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986708)

microsoft spends hundreds of millions of dollars in advertising every year. If a publication wrote anything less then worshipful articles about MS then those advertising dollars would go elsewhere.

Re:Failures (1)

patio11 (857072) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986745)

[i]I guess as long as their two cash cows, Windows and Office, continue to deliver amazing profits, people will see them as successful, and repeated failures will be ignored.[/i]

Yeah, I know what you mean. Amazing that Thomas Alva Edison could even show his face around town after 7,999 of his 8,000 tries to invent the lightbulb failed.

Re:Failures (2, Insightful)

SpectreHiro (961765) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986803)

In what world has the .NET platform been quietly dropped? From what I can tell, MS is still pushing it like crazy.

Re:Failures (5, Informative)

webagogue (806350) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986819)

What are you talking about, "failures?" When was .net dropped? That MS didn't build Windows out of it is not a failure and it would be stupid to do so. People regularly, begrudgingly even, talk about nice and easy it is to develop applications in .net. MSN? Who do you think is running their Windows Live ambitions? That they aren't trying to get people to use walled-garden online services that are losing popularity isn't a failure. They are adapting to the market. And Windows on mobiles? Excuse me, but hasn't the share of WM on smartphones steadily increased year after year? Hell, there is even a Palm (rumored?) running Windows mobile. If that isn't raging success, I don't know what is. Yes, that Windows and now Office were delayed is crap and heads should roll (not so much for Office) but the things you are calling failures are everything but.

short answer (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986698)

Will this make anyone look at OpenOffice.org?

No.

long answer;

Not a chance.

stand back, yes, you! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986710)

This week's MS criticism levels have been high, thanks to Microsoft breaking deadlines again and yet another IE hole.

But Vista was no easy job:
1. The core programming API is transitioning to WinFX (from Win32 which has stayed so for like 13 years! If you count Win16 its even staler). This is a _huge_ win for Windows developers.
2. 50% of the time spent on Vista is for testing.
3. New Driver model, lots of kernel changes. Device support is a much bigger problem in the Windows world, there are just too many.
4. 3D Accelerated GUIs (OS X does this, but the scale is different as you will see.)

Well, to those not exposed to Windows this is like having Java has the standard way to write software in Linux.

To keep this post still on topic, Office 2007 will make little sense without Vista. Atleast to look gorgeous. If Vista is late, so will Office be.

Office? (2, Funny)

Kortec (449574) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986716)

What is this Office stuff everyone's always on about, anyway? Is that like some pre-school version of LaTeX and Emacs?

Not a fan of KDE but... (5, Informative)

mythz (857024) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986733)

KOffice is looking pretty impressive aswell lately.

Collaboration (5, Interesting)

batkiwi (137781) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986744)

Where are OpenOffice's collaboration features which rival the office system?

Now, this entire setup requires eating the dogfood, drinking the poison, going the full hog, whatever, BUT, with office 12 + sharepoint V3 + LCS:

1. I am assigned a new project. I open our intranet, go to the projects site, and instantly create a new site with about 4 clicks.
2. I add my fellow team members to said site.
3. I write a design document and add it to a document library.
4. "Jim" loads up said document and looks at it. He has a question. There, IN OFFICE, is a sidebar showing that I'm online, and that I wrote the document. He clicks on me to chat in realtime about the document.
4a. Jim raises some good points, which I can't answer, so with 2 clicks he opens a discussion group about said document.
4b. Through 10 versions (tracked), and many discussions, the team comes to a final decision. We close the document discussion site and merge our changes back into the base document on the project site.
5. We start into the project. Frank now has to go onsite, with no internet access for 3 weeks. He takes his notes document off of sharepoint and saves it locally (this is what requires V3).
5a. Frank comes back 3 weeks later, plugs in, and is asked if he wants to resync with the project site. He does, and we see his updates.
6. 9 months later, the project finishes. Admins click it into read-only mode, so that we have our documents, chats, discussions, lists, etc, but cannot change them.
7. 6 months later the site is backed up and purged off of live storage.

Throughout this experience we can collaborate on documents through LCS + sharepoint + office12, take things offline, click-create project sites, etc.

Tell me an opensource solution which matches this as seamlessly.

I'm all for openoffice, and run linux at home, but office12 is something special. Is it worth the price? Possibly not. Are the entire front + back office system's features matched ANYWHERE? No.

Yes, you can run *nuke + jabber + openoffice + openxcange +..... but do they work together? Can I set up a *nuke site which links into jabber and openexchange and openoffice, so that I can see inside a document whether the creator and other relevant people are online, and have versioned discussions with them?

Re:Collaboration (3, Insightful)

aug24 (38229) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986806)

Dumb question perhaps, but how many people do you think need/want/use that level of functionality?

I'm a contractor. I've worked in literally dozens of teams in about a dozen companies. I have never, never, never seen anyone bother with this level of interactivity for documentation. We generally have breakout discussions with a nominated individual to take notes write up afterwards. Sometimes this is a techy, sometimes not. It's just not needed.

For the remaining 99.5% of users, this is not an issue. It's not even a consideration.

Justin.

Re:Collaboration (5, Funny)

StrawberryFrog (67065) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986809)

Tell me an opensource solution which matches this as seamlessly.

You could always use the "meeting" system, using the "talking" communications protocol. Suppliment this by the "go over and chat" concept using "voice over voice" chat.

Re:Collaboration (1)

idlake (850372) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986820)

Is it worth the price? Possibly not. Are the entire front + back office system's features matched ANYWHERE? No.

The kind of setup makes sense if you're already wedded to the Office file formats. For most real-world uses, however, the best thing to do is likely to ditch the office suite entirely and go with in-browser WYSIWYG editing.

Once you take the office suite out of the equation, any of a number of excellent systems give you all the functionality of your Office+Sharepoint+LCS setup at a fraction of the cost (installation, training, maintenance).

You may still laugh at the notion of thin clients and in-browser applications, but it's happening. Even Microsoft is realizing that. Office is a dinosaur, burdened with features that make no sense in a modern computing environment and that are difficult to support in a modern collaborative, networked environment.

Re:Collaboration (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986868)

Where are OpenOffice's collaboration features which rival the office system?

Over Here [basecamphq.com] . Basecamp for project management, with all of the features you're talking about, plus Writeboards for versioned documents, plus Campfire for real-time chat if you must.

Whatever mojo Office does, it had better be something better than what you're talking about, because that shit is easy.

One word: Writely. (1)

ZuperDee (161571) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986871)

I think this Web 2.0 application right here [writely.com] , which was recently bought by Google, will probably be the best of what the competition has for a solution to your problem. Once again, we see that Microsoft no longer has a monopoly on such ideas. This is why I hope Google continues to improve Writely, and why I hope they'll eventually buy this web app [numsum.com] , too. Mark my words, Google is gearing up for a direct assault on Microsoft's "cash cow!" And if Google works on ODF support in Writely, I am willing to wager it will be far more open than Microsoft Office, too. These kinds of developments are PRECISELY why Microsoft wanted to kill Netscape, why they now want to f___ing kill Google, and why they have been so desperately trying to make their new Windows Live portal *THE* platform of the web. In order to maintain their dominance with Windows, they know that they must find some way to make the Internet dependent on their proprietary technologies and platforms, so that they can continue to dominate and lock people in. Time will tell if Google will be able to beat them or not... But mark my words, Microsoft is DOWN, but *NOT* out. They are still a force to be reckoned with, and last time I checked, they still control more than 90% of the desktop OS market, and more than 70% of the web browser market. DO NOT DISCOUNT MICROSOFT.

Re:Collaboration (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986897)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7...

Sounds wonderful. What kind of "project" would have people who needed, and were capable of using, these tools? I've never met any bureaucrat who could understand, let alone use a single one of those features. People "collaborate" by printing out a document, writing on it, and faxing it back. Or, if they're slightly more sophisticated, interspersing their comments in CAPITAL LETTERS in the original and emailing it as an attachment. Then they let some flunky sort it all out an make it look nice, probably retyping most of it in the process. As for "discussions", people either meet, or use the phone. I work in DTP, 90% of the documents I get haven't even been spellchecked, I gave up trying to explain how to do that years ago, they just refuse to learn any features beyond hte absolute minimum.

Re:Collaboration (2, Interesting)

asylumx (881307) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986903)

You are absolutely right, the corporation I work for uses a similar approach and it works very well for us since we have roughly 30 locations worldwide and there are multiple projects that span more than one of those locations. You can't use the "voice over voice" mentioned in an earlier reply to walk up to somebody in australia and talk about an issue. Not only are they half a world away, but their work hours are exactly the opposite of yours.

Having something that is extremely intuitive (like opening the document and having the info already in front of you) is very important as well especially when you have hundreds of employees at any given location who are certainly NOT IT professionals, but need to use the software. You don't want to spend weeks or months showing them how to use it, you want to be able to assume they know how to use a computer and you want your software to be easy enough that training is a moot question.

It always amazes me how if OpenOffice or the like has to delay their releases to fix bugs, they are literally applauded... but when it's MS that is trying to get it right, instantly they have everyone pissed at them.

Re:Collaboration (2, Funny)

vginders (521915) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986905)

We should tell Linus and his team about this software. I'm sure it could help kernel development, which happens online all over the world. As they can't have a lot of face to face meetings, this Office 12 looks like a good solution for them.

Software insurance (3, Insightful)

treuf (99331) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986749)

I'm sure all the company which have MS Software Insurance (which includes all upgrades for 3 years - and which is now mandatory for volume licences AFAIK) will be happy to have that news.
No included major update for them ...

Last time I had a MS rep on phone the major argument for their licence price increase was that insurance - for now we could never use it for what we bought.

I think it'll NEVER ship (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986752)

Now been delayed to Jan 2007. I reckon this is a tactical slip. I think
they're really telling the OEM's there's NO BLOODY WAY it'll be ready in time
for the 2006 Chrissy buying season. I reckon they already think internally
it'll need to slip more than that.

My prediction :
MS Vista will NEVER ship. I think that Microsoft's plan to increase customer
lock-in by "fully integrating" all their products (OS + apps) has resulted in
a total project size that is greater than the state of the art can support.
We all know that once a project gets to be a certain size that the
communication and thrashing can end up with productivity actually going
backwards. I suspect this has now happened to Vista.

Everyone else is going components to simplify development, whereas for lock-in
purposes MS are trying to go the other way. I reckon that if Bill let go of
his megolomaniacal urge to own the whole world they COULD finish it; they
have enough good people, but if you tell even good people to go bale out the
ocean with a sieve you're gonna fail.

Every MS OS has slipped by more than the last one. I reckon they've now
slipped off the "real" axis of the graph and are headed for infinity. Expect
further slips in Vista and associated apps.

In a sense I'm already right - elements of Vista have been falling off the
ship for the past few years (for example, the database file system). There's
nothing like being able to put a bet on something that's already happened :-)

So there it is in writing. MS say Jan 2007. I say they'll NEVER ship it.

Let's see who comes out closer :-)

What will it mean for upgrades? (2, Interesting)

Tim C (15259) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986762)

It'll mean that they won't happen until it's out, and money will be saved that can be spent somewhere else.

Businesses don't upgrade just so they can use the latest and greatest; my company (a large multi-national) is still perfectly happy with its Office 2000 site licence. It sees no reason to upgrade, and why would it? The licence is still valid, and the products do what is required of them. I'm sure we'll upgrade eventually, but we wouldn't go to OpenOffice (or a previous version of MS Office) just because Office 2007 was a bit late; we'd simply wait.

Office 2007 won't ship until 2007 (1)

Kangburra (911213) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986768)

... and this is a bad thing?

Surely releasing a product with a year in it's title in that year is a good thing? What's the point in releasing Office 2007 in 2006?

Must be an MS thing I guess.

Re:Office 2007 won't ship until 2007 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986889)

I believe there is a feature in the software used by many businesses where the year of manufacture, represented by 'n', is evaluated as 'n + 1' for a given product. Microsoft recently went under review of its source code and discovered the error. The major automotive manufacturers have yet to do the same. You will still be able to buy the 2007 Ford Focus soon.

Good for ajaxWrite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986800)

This will give ajaxWrite [ajaxwrite.com] more time to implement "The look, feel, and functionality of Microsoft Word".

Not a MS only problem.. (1)

Old Duck (957936) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986805)

I remember eagerly awaiting the release of OpenOffice 2.0, only to have it delayed a number of months (and waiting in limbo since there wasn't any clear launch date after the delay). When it finally did come out, I found it a bit too bloated (takes FOREVER to load on my system) and thus I just stuck with the original. Seems Microsoft Office and OpenOffice.org have more in common than first meets the eye :-)

It's being released in 2006 anyway (1)

DigitlDud (443365) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986814)

If you read the article it clearly says that Office 2007 is being RMT'ed in 2006, but won't be in the stores until January. It's not a delay in schedule, they're just now announcing the delivery dates. And a ship date was never officially mentioned before anyway.

Who cares? (2, Informative)

Tim Ward (514198) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986823)

Not all the people still happily using Office 97, which still does everything that many people need.

The Suites (1)

leishen (558833) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986835)

I despise the Office Suite. I really don't think it's set up to manage large sets of software. But, I also don't think OpenOffice.org is ready for this environment either. I've been using it recently since I don't want to shovel money at Microsoft, and it really doesn't work quite as well as office does, and I actually have more trouble with it. It pains me to say this, truely, since I really want it to be better.

In any case, given the choice, I'd rather not use either of them. I want something better to come along. Pretty soon, I'll have a Mac in my hands, and I'm going to give Apple's office suite a look. How does this compare?

Its not going to bother IT managers (4, Insightful)

supersnail (106701) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986837)

Most well run companies base there IT planning around business cases,
and business cases generally fall into three catagories:-
1. Do this and the company will make more money.
2. Do this and the company will spend less money.
3. Do this because you have to.

Upgrading to something like Office 2007 is definately a type "3"
business case and most companies wont upgrade until either support
is withdrawn or the current version wont work on the latest hardware
or OS.

My current client a well run, well known mega corp is still runnig
a version of "Office 2000" which is "Copyright 1983-1999" according
to the about box.

I have never heard anyone gripe about running such an old version
and the company is doing as well as ever.

OpenOffice, schmopenoffice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986853)

I like OpenOffice, I used version 1 extensively for my final year project write-up at university even though I actually won Office XP from MS in a launch competition. But I tried to use Impress 2 recently and it is quite good for some things, but made my life so hard in so many things that should have been easy that I switched my presentation over to PowerPoint 2003, which I found to be rather good, even if it wouldn't open files saved as .ppt in OO.org. Gotta love employee purchase schemes. Genunine Office 2003 direct from MS for less than £20 delivered, w00t!!1!

Quick Answer (1)

Danathar (267989) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986873)

No

Trolling? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14986883)

Isnt this article just playing whoring on slasdot?
I mean what kinda question is that?

Why upgrade at all? (2, Insightful)

Andy_R (114137) | more than 8 years ago | (#14986902)

From a business point of view, upgrades are a really bad thing. You have to pay again for something already bought, and you have to retrain. The only time my company has ever bought an Office upgrade has been when people send us documents we can't read in the old version.

I believe Office (and windows XP for that matter) is in as 'finished' a state as it needs to be, there isn't anything major missing... or if there is its not anything most businesses would find a cost-effective buy.

In the real world, upgrades are driven by Microsoft EOL-ing the previous version, not by desire for new features, which is why Open Office won't benefit.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?