Microsoft Office 2004 for Mac Released 134
kylea writes "Office 2004 for Mac OS X has finally been released. From the Apple page: The latest improvements to the Office productivity suite promise new approaches to create, manage and distribute your projects. New features and tools in the programs help you get work done more efficiently. And now you can extend your reach beyond Office with greatly improved AppleScript support."
Download locations (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Download locations (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I'll stick to LaTeX (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I'll stick to LaTeX (Score:5, Funny)
\begin{document}
\textbf{YES!}
I agree \emph{completely}.\footnote{``Text markup'' is much more portable. I
have 10-year-old \LaTeX{} files that are still usable on my \textsc{gentoo}
box.}
\end{document}
I'll stick to troff (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I'll stick to LaTeX (Score:2)
Wacky, but if it works for you, I won't argue.
Re:I'll stick to LaTeX (Score:3, Insightful)
My theory for anything that I write has been that anything more complex than a plain text document generally deserves LaTeX.
Re:I'll stick to LaTeX (Score:2)
P.S. Thanks for the link in you sig. I clicked on it a while back and have found it very useful a couple of times since then.
Features (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
-Sean
Re:Yes, but... (Score:3, Funny)
I hear it's because the MBU hasn't paid up the $100,000 for access to the APIs...
Re:Yes, but... (Score:4, Informative)
Read the Exchange Server Support info here [microsoft.com]
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Informative)
short answer yes with an if, long answer no with a but... [microsoft.com]
If you have an Exchange 2000 server (with Service Pack 2 or later) then it's as close as it gets. If you're running an earlier Exchange server, then you're still in the same boat as you were with Entourage 2001. In either case, there's still no real MAPI support.
~jeff
Re:Yes, but... (Score:2, Informative)
PLEASE PLEASE,FOR THE LOVE OF GOD,STOP!!!
MAPI is not the Exchange protocol, its the Mail API under Windows! It has no meaning outside the Windows world. It gives you an opertunity as developer to call the default mailclient and do basic mailoperations without knowing anything about which mailsystem that is used.
The Exchange native protocol is just called that, and is a modified X.400 derivative.
AFAIK the future of this protocoll is still unknown and there is parallel developments between sho
Re:Yes, but... (Score:5, Informative)
Overall, a great upgrade, but I wonder what else is missing.
Let me be the first to say that (Score:5, Informative)
The only thing I noticed that doesn't transfer well so far has been bitmaps that are embedded in documents.
Had some problems with it. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Had some problems with it. (Score:2)
Appleworks, that is. (Score:2)
Re:Let me be the first to say that (Score:2)
Re:Let me be the first to say that (Score:5, Informative)
Your windows background will help you zilch using Office for the Mac. It is a Mac platform product completely different from its Microsoft Windows Counterpart.
Yes, MS Office does more. But since I get most of the important functionality out of AppleWorks I can't begin to justify the $320 price difference.
MS Office for mac is $399 and AppleWorks is $79.
Keep in mind that I am a home user and am not in a corporate situation where I need to work with Office documents. Though - AppleWorks does have limited support for viewing editing and creating Microsoft Office Compatible documents.
Re:Let me be the first to say that (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Let me be the first to say that (Score:5, Interesting)
Appleworks is just about passable if you don't need to write anything more complicated than a letter or a memo. For any substantial document, it's hopeless. It's the big exception to user friendliness in Apple's product range - trying to get auto-numbered sections or create and use custom paragraph styles is needlessly difficult. And it has a tendency to lose any advanced formatting when importing docs from Word. It took me less than a day to realise that I needed to by Office for mac.
which version (Score:2)
Re:which version (Score:5, Informative)
Re:which version (Score:5, Informative)
Anyway, after playing around with Entourage 2004 (to me the only reason I need office, the new word, and excel are just gravy) for a few hours, I just wanted to share my first impressions:
The Good:
I like the little popup notifications in the corner when I have new mail. Although now that I think about it, its a bit Windowsish - not that's a bad thing.
I like the grouped sorting. I always sort my messages in the order in which they are received, descending. Entourage groups them so I have little blue headings for Today, Yesterday, etc. This helps me organize my email better.
The other nice thing is that you can tell it to hide read messages. I have this set on all my mailing list filtered folders to keep track of things a bit better.
I'm quite happy to see that I can *easily* use certificates so that I can digitally sign my messages. (assuming that you can figure out how to import them in the first place, see below)
Unicode Support! (need i say more?)
The last new feature that I enjoy with the new Entourage is that you can finally control the autocorrect settings without waiting for word to boot.
The Bad:
The Entourage database is bigger than v.X.
Grouped sorting sorts the groups ascending or descending, depending on your settings, but it only sorts the items in the groups ascending. I haven't found an option to fix that. (Yet. Anyone have any suggestions?)
Changing folders with a lot of messages seems a bit slower, probably due to those Today, Yesterday etc. headers, and the hiding of read messages.
Entourage still doesn't have a grammar checker.
Creation and/or importing of certificates is anything but obvious. This isn't even made clear in Help. It took me 20 minutes just to find a link to the Microsoft website that than had links to several Certificate Authorities. Then the one I chose (because the page said that they are free and trusted) was anything but clear as to how to create a certificate (no longer Microsoft land I know) and Entourage doesn't trust them to boot, so I can only assume that neither does anyone else's email client.
The Ugly:
I think the new icons are a throwback to the Office 98 days. They are flat and ugly, I want my aqualicious icons back.
When I tried to install the new Handheld Sync Conduit, the authentication box said "Hendhel-" (with a cut off 'd') instead of OK. And than it turned out that it was the same old handheld conduit that shipped late in the Entourage X life.
I don't get enough information in that little popup notification box. I would like to see *who* the message is from, as well as the folder it was filtered to.
I can't move the little popup notification box. It is stuck in the lower right corner
The popup notification box only seems to appear when I get new mail and Entourage isn't the currently running application.
Preview Pane on the right doesn't give me enough options on the mail list on the left. I want more than 2 columns of information!
I think I've run out of first impressions.
Re:which version (Score:5, Interesting)
In the Apple Mail app, mail is stored in
I only recently learned that when you drag Entourage mailboxes to your desktop, they are saved as mbox files (although I haven't tried it yet - haven't been doing backups lately). Of course, this isn't documented by Microsoft - could have saved me a lot of trouble if they had.
Does anyone know whether you can do this in the new version? I really don't plan to get the new Office (give me a good reason why I should upgrade), but I was curious.
Re:which version (Score:1, Informative)
What's to find out? Quit Entourage and copy ~/Documents/Microsoft User Data in its entirety to someplace else. Presto-- your mail is backed up.
Re:which version (Score:2)
Incidentally, I usually alias Saved Attachments to the users preferre
Re:which version (Score:1)
Mine came with five. Guess I'm extra special.
Re:which version (Score:5, Funny)
Are we not all teachers?
Re:which version (Score:3, Funny)
You mean here at Slashdot? We've got tons of underqualified "teachers" and nobody willing to be the "students".
Re:which version (Score:2)
Yes! Please tell us Word 04 also has Unicode support!! If I can go back to copying and pasting ancient Greek text directly from perseus [tufts.edu] directly into my word processor rather than copying it by hand, I will jump for joy.
Re:which version (Score:2)
[use the Mac OS X Character Pallet to insert the random Unicode characters]
yes, but it isn't as clean as TextEdit (some characters show up in word as a box, others show up as they are expected)
Re:which version (Score:2)
Re:which version (Score:2)
Re:which version (Score:2)
* Grouped sorting sorts the groups ascending or descending, depending on your settings, but it only sorts the items in the groups ascending. I haven't found an option to fix that. (Yet. Anyone have any suggestions?)
I figured out how to get the behavior I wanted, but it isn't as strait forward as it should be. First, I chose View -> Arrange By -> Edit Custom Arrangements. The Custom Arrangements: Mail window opens.
From here I can click New, give it a title and set th
Sig (Score:1, Offtopic)
-e:1:in `decode64': _deprecated_base64 is deprecated; use Base64._deprecated_base64 instead
Might want to use:
ruby -e 'require "base64";puts Base64.decode64("...")'
Re:Sig (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:Sig (Score:2)
andrei@tux andrei $ ruby -v
ruby 1.8.1 (2004-04-24) [i686-linux-gnu]
andrei@tux andrei $ ruby -e 'require "base64";puts decode64("RnJlc2ggYmxvb2QgdGhyb3VnaCB0aXJlZCBza2l u ")'
-e:1:in `decode64': _deprecated_base64 is deprecated; use Base64._deprecated_base64 instead
from -e:1:in `decode64'
from -e:1
andrei@tux andrei $ ruby -e 'require "base64";puts Base64.deco
Re:Sig (Score:2)
This is what ruby-doc [ruby-doc.org] had to say:
Until Ruby 1.8.1, these methods were defined at the top-level. Now they are in the Base64 module but included in the top-level, where their usage is deprecated.
Be careful... (Score:5, Funny)
More M$ Arrogance... (Score:4, Insightful)
This is due to a lack of both Exchange server support and .NET technologies on the Apple platform.
Their answer? Run XP. Defeats the purpose of getting an Apple to begin with if you ask me.
Stick with the Mono project for .NET compatibility, and wait for a OS X Native Open Office port while using Appleworks in the mean time.
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:2)
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:1)
How about you run OpenOffice on an emulator and call them "arrogant" because they won't port it to your OS of choice. Or, complain to Apple for not creating a usable Office suite,
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:1)
Take it or leave it. I'd rather leave it.
There is a plan for OO on the OS X platform as native. You can run it in the mean time with minor modifications to your system. Microsoft is going backwards. They started native, and now they recommend an emulation OS for advanced administration (2 gigs worth).
I'll admit that aside from security (maybe due to popularity), Microsoft makes as good a
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:3, Informative)
Things might get interesting shortly =)
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:1)
When did I do that?
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:3, Interesting)
Incidentally, I believe the delay is in getting VPC to run on G5s, not getting it to run on Panther.
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:1)
Perhaps I'm missing the point, but "Professional" versions in years passed actually offered more advanced features, not just a copy of Windows.
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:2)
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:2)
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:2, Insightful)
That is my point. Some will be thankful that Office Professional for OS X is being released, only to find that it is not comparable to the PC version of pro. Office for Mac has a history of having newer features then the PC version.
I simply feel it's mislabled. It should be Office 2004 with Virtual PC 7.
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:4, Informative)
Btw, after using it, it's very similar to v.X from what I can tell.
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:4, Informative)
Virtual PC took advantage of the afore-mentioned instructions to gain a speed boost. Without them, you have to do a few byte swaps (eg: an integer of the form ABCD becomes DCBA, but you need to keep strings in the same byte order, etc...) before doing the calculations. This means that Virtual PC simply will not run on the G5, and needs to have the optimised code re-written to work properly without those instructions.
Presumably, they'll introduce a second code path: one that makes use of those instructions and one that doesn't. Of course, that depends on the code structure; it may be easier to just ditch those optimisations and keep it generic.
Re:More M$ Arrogance... (Score:1, Redundant)
I have a copy of Virtual PC and it runs flawlessly on Panther. I think that you mean "once they fix Virtual PC for G5":
" Virtual PC relies on a feature of the G3/G4 processors called 'pseudo little-endian mode' for increased performance when emulating a Pentium processor.... Because the new G5 processor does not support this feature, large portions of the VPC for Mac program must be rewritten and carefully tested
Using the test drive now (Score:3)
Comments regading teacher/student version (Score:5, Interesting)
On the web, people have suggested unchecking "send commands simultaneously" from the Account configuration menu (just google for it). But that doesn't seem to help. Any other suggestions?
Also, the "live sync" option for IMAP accounts doesn't seem to work. I expect to be notified immediately when I get new mail, but it only notifies me when I'm actively doing something with Entourage (reading old messages, etc.).
Finally, if you have "live sync" on AND have the account included in your "send & receive" schedule, Entourage seems to get the mail twice, resulting in duplicate mails appearing in my inbox. And then you can only "delete" one of them. To get rid of the second one, you have drag it to the trash.
I ran into all these problems the first hour of using Entourage. Very disappointing.
-Andrew
Re:Comments regading teacher/student version (Score:3, Interesting)
It works dandy for me now, granted live sync would be nice but at least my messages are stored in a central location.
-todd
Re:Comments regading teacher/student version (Score:2)
Re:Comments regading teacher/student version (Score:2)
Andy
Question for early adopters - address book/iCal? (Score:5, Insightful)
Now, there may be very good reason(s) why the MacBU chose not to integrate with the system PIM services (and yes, I know Office X predated stable versions of those services!). If that's the case, an informed explanation of why this is so would also be much appreciated.
Thank you!
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:2)
It probably shouldn't be called a very good reason, but Entourage does have it's own integrated, competing calendar and address book, and Microsoft isn't exactly known for going out of their way to make their products bypass built-in features to interoperate nicely with the competition. Few programs from any vendor do.
In fact, it seems to me you may as easily ask why Apple didn't write open API's f
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:2)
Ummmm... They did. [apple.com]
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:2)
Allowing other aps to interface with Address Book doesn't allow MS to sell a competitor that also provides system services using the same interface.
I mean, it would help them to write an equivelent interface using those API's, but they'd b
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:2)
AddressBook is Apple's front-end for this system. Entourage could just as well use these same APIs, and be Microsoft's front-end.
App
Re:Question for early adopters - address book/iCal (Score:2)
Allowing other aps to interface with Address Book doesn't allow MS to sell a competitor that also provides system services using the same interface.
The published API's would help a third party to write an equivelent interface using those
Some features ... (Score:4, Informative)
One other thing is that the floating toolbars alpha fade after a few minutes of inactivity. They go opaque again after you mouse over them. That's a nice touch and indicates as to a lot more MacOS X native integration under the hood.
Other than that, well .... :-/
Compatibility report? (Score:1)
Oh wait...
this is a little late for a "news" announcement (Score:2, Interesting)
Here's the *real* Office 2004 (Score:5, Insightful)
Word = TextEdit (reads/writes Word files)
PowerPoint = Keynote (reads/writes Powerpoints)
Entourage = Mail/Address Book/iSync (I will never give up my Bluetooth)
Excel = Mariner Calc
Two of those you have to buy. Keynote is $100 CDN, Mariner Calc is around $160. Panther was around the same and includes the rest. This is all cheaper - combined - than the standalone version of Word, last I checked.
Don't shell out the massive cash for Office Mac unless you really think you need it. Mostly what I deal with day-to-day is Word and PP files, and I do just fine with the above.
Sure, TextEdit isn't Word, but on the other hand.. it isn't Word, if you know what I mean, and I think you do.
Re:Here's the *real* Office 2004 (Score:1)
I keep it going on my powerbook running under classic (works wonderfully) out of nostalgia, but it is still a very capable and quick word processor.
Re:Here's the *real* Office 2004 (Score:2)
Here's a little experiment: put a table in a word document, edit with TextEdit, re-open with word.
That's trivial for home use, but even if you're only doing the minutes of the local tart-society, this is killing.
As long as MS can treat their doc types as non-standard while in reality they are a standard (real world can be a bitch) you'll need to have MS Office to exchange.
Re:Here's the *real* Office 2004 (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Here's the *real* Office 2004 (Score:4, Informative)
No - I would never claim that Keynote does all the same things as PowerPoint. Keynote handily spanks PowerPoint into the ground, in my opinion.. even in version 1. Charts and diagrams are part of how your workflow goes - Keynote doesn't support those in an editable fashion, but I just do mine in OmniGraffle or some other program first, then paste them in. Obviously this doesn't work for everyone but in my workflow this is what I did with PP anyways (I'd never 'trust' a chart or data set to PP. Never.) I don't think I could ever go back after using the Smart Guides or text editor in Keynote. Or the transitions for that matter.
And to claim that TextEdit and Keypoint read Word and Powerpoint files is like saying that vi is the only Desktop Publishing Program you will ever need. Sometimes it works. If you have created any serious work, it won't.
My experience has been different. The Word features import to TextEdit properly for 99% of the documents I've received... its only when you've done some truly weird acrobatics in Word that it'll choke.. and even then, it never chokes to the extent that you can't fix it pretty fast. Embedded objects can be a problem, but hell, that's true just between different versions of Office.
Believe me I am comforted by the fact that I do have Office just in case something really breaks... but it hasn't happened yet, knock on MDF.
Does anyone upgrade Office for the features? (Score:2)
My Macs are running Mac Office v.X, which was an upgrade from Mac Office 2001 whcih only ran under OS 9. But I don't see anything compelling me to upgrade to Mac Office 2004. I like the idea of Virtual PC, but I can't think of a single Windows Only app I need to use so I'll take a pass on VPC for now.
In the Windows world, I can tell you that I only ever upgrade MS office when I get a new computer and it comes with the whole package. It would be
Re:Does anyone upgrade Office for the features? (Score:3, Insightful)
I have tried the demo. I have found nothing else new worth paying for.
So this bug fix will cost me 300 euro. Yes, I will pay up, but I will spit at the receipt.
Besides there is still no support for right-to-left writing (like in Arab and Hebrew). I guess they will add that to the next version in three years together with a new boring clip-art of a grey o
Re:Does anyone upgrade Office for the features? (Score:3, Insightful)
Only two valid reasons:
1) you NEED to
2) you WANT to
What else?
Re:Does anyone upgrade Office for the features? (Score:2)
I know my answer to most upgrade questions: I'm compulsively drawn to the features, even if I don't need them.
The boring answer would be: "I need the functionality of the new Office because head office has done some fancy preprogrammed forms that need the last version/We love the new organization functions in Office X which lets us do projects easier/It is more compatible with our mail server/I love the new pane view in Entourage/I
Re:Does anyone upgrade Office for the features? (Score:2)
1) Unicode support
2) Long filename support
-B
How about compatibility with Windows Office? (Score:2)
Re:How about compatibility with Windows Office? (Score:2, Interesting)
Finally someone got the bright idea to transfer it to a Mac, open it in Office X, save it as PDF and send it back to the PC. It worked like a charm. The printing from Acrobat on Windows 2K was perfect and all formating was fine.
In this case MacOS X actually helped us with an MS document that Windo
But have any BUGS been fixed? (Score:2)
(The worst is: unwanted and seemingly unpredictable behavior in the numbering and formatting of numbered lists when minor edits are made in other portions of the document).
I was unable to obtain from Microsoft anything corresponding to what other vendors refer to as "release notes" for Office 2001, or any list of
Product Activation? Forced Registration? (Score:2)
Does this version have product activation? Does it force you to register, and force you to sign up for a Passport account in order to register?
I use and like a number of Microsoft products. But there are some things I won't do. Activation and Passport are among them.
Re:Product Activation? Forced Registration? (Score:2, Informative)
NeoOffice (Score:3, Informative)
Real plans for the future? (Score:2)
Re:Real plans for the future? (Score:2, Insightful)
Microsoft's "Mac Business Unit" is suprisingly good. I personally think that Office X and Office 2004 are the best pieces of software to ever come out of there.
It would be a shame for them to dismantle such a good team. The offices for Macs lately have far surpassed the offices for
Re:Real plans for the future? (Score:2)
Re:Real plans for the future? (Score:3, Insightful)
I doubt they'd risk being split up, especially when they have such a good core product here. I haven't seen the new version yet but I expect it's not utterly different. As long as Apple keep Carbon I can't see it being worth the ri
Re:Real plans for the future? (Score:2)
MS did something a little different this time! (Score:3, Interesting)
I wish my Windows XP version of Office looked and acted a lot more like the latest version for OS X. This has just added yet another reason for me not to fire up the XP box when I need to edit a word document. Thanks Microsoft!
Re:apple should work with openoffice.org (Score:5, Insightful)
I can appreciate your argument about most people not needing certain features but price aside, that seems to be the only argument against microsoft office. There are numerous open source and commercial alternatives that offer interesting subsets of features that are good enough solutions for most people. Some alternatives even have features that are better than the ms office equivalent. At the end of the day however, the full set of features found in ms office is pretty much unrivalled by any other product or collection of products.
People with macs like to pay for quality so it would be natural for them to consider ms office 2004. MS seems to have pulled of some nice improvements over the previous version. Compatibility is good, it integrates with OS X better than most other office suits. It's hard not to like it if you have the money and a taste for quality hardware & software.
My thoughts (good and bad) on Office. (Score:2)
Now, I am basically saying there's not a better alternative out there. I
Re:My thoughts (good and bad) on Office. (Score:2, Insightful)
How can you dis the context-sensitive formatting palette! 9 times out of 10 the button/setting/command I want is on the palette, right where I want it. This is so much better than the vanishing menus in Office for Windows, or cluttering my screen with more toolbars. My screen (and everyone else's) is wider than it is tall. I have no interest in another toolbar across the top of my screen.
If your other criticisms weren't better than this I would think you we
Re:Shared Excel Spreadsheets? (Score:2, Informative)
We moved from shared workbooks to FileMaker Pro about 4 years ago and we spend much less time rebuilding corrupted files.