30 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >
 |
| 10. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 13:05 |
Panickd |
|
|
Mr. Tact wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 12:59: I'd think corporate customers won't be too keen on Office being locked to a machine. I'm guessing they'll need and will get a way to transfer a license. Most corporate customers have deals with Microsoft that come with their own set of licensing agreements which supersede the general ones that apply to everyone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 9. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 12:59 |
Mr. Tact |
|
|
| I'd think corporate customers won't be too keen on Office being locked to a machine. I'm guessing they'll need and will get a way to transfer a license. |
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
| Truth is brutal. Prepare for pain. |
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 8. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 12:53 |
PropheT |
|
|
Beamer wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 11:34: I hit it all the time in presentations and Excel, plus I use some Excel and PowerPoint add-ons that exist solely for it. Yeah, and unfortunately that's enough to seriously derail it in a business setting. I've set a few people at work, who didn't have another option at the time, up with OO, but Excel/Powerpoint incompatibility issues are so common that it's impossible to use as a full replacement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 7. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 12:51 |
Beamer |
|
|
swedishfriend wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 12:11: office 2013 will be locked to a single machine? I don't think that will hold up to any push back whatsoever. Have to wait for updates? so MS wants to create an extra threat vector? if half its users don't go for the 365 version are they still going to treat 2013 users as second class? these possible warnings about office 2013 are all based on the assumption that 95% of the users will switch to a subscription model... We want to make things worse for you but better for us so won't you help make that happen by believing our FUD? Their pricing heavily pushes people towards the online version. I have no clue why they'd also make policy go towards it, too. Seems... heavy handed, stupid, etc.
Stupid. Stupid stupid stupid. Really damn stupid. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 6. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 12:11 |
swedishfriend |
|
|
| office 2013 will be locked to a single machine? I don't think that will hold up to any push back whatsoever. Have to wait for updates? so MS wants to create an extra threat vector? if half its users don't go for the 365 version are they still going to treat 2013 users as second class? these possible warnings about office 2013 are all based on the assumption that 95% of the users will switch to a subscription model... We want to make things worse for you but better for us so won't you help make that happen by believing our FUD? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 5. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 11:34 |
Beamer |
|
|
Panickd wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 11:25:
Beamer wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 11:00:
Julio wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 10:56: Or you could just stick with open office and not be sorry at all! Until you need an advanced feature or until you hit file incompatibilities because whatever partner/client you're working with is on Office and OpenOffice can either not open it or render it correctly. I can honestly say this hasn't happened to me for several years. MS hasn't really changed their file format much since the last major revamp so OO and LibreOffice seem to be able to handle it just fine.
As for advanced features, the whole "office suite" paradigm hit it's wall back in 2010. Nothing of note has changed besides the aesthetics since then. I hit it all the time in presentations and Excel, plus I use some Excel and PowerPoint add-ons that exist solely for it.
If it's personal use fine, OpenOffice and the like work, especially for Word replacement.
But I've used Word in a professional setting maybe once a year. The Excel replacements all universally suck compared to Excel, and while PowerPoint is no jewel it tends to work better.
When you're presenting information you need to know 100% that the chart or table looks exactly as it did when you made it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 4. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 11:25 |
Panickd |
|
|
Beamer wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 11:00:
Julio wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 10:56: Or you could just stick with open office and not be sorry at all! Until you need an advanced feature or until you hit file incompatibilities because whatever partner/client you're working with is on Office and OpenOffice can either not open it or render it correctly. I can honestly say this hasn't happened to me for several years. MS hasn't really changed their file format much since the last major revamp so OO and LibreOffice seem to be able to handle it just fine.
As for advanced features, the whole "office suite" paradigm hit it's wall back in 2010. Nothing of note has changed besides the aesthetics since then. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 3. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 11:24 |
Creston |
|
|
Julio wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 10:56: Or you could just stick with open office and not be sorry at all! I'd advice going to Libre Office. Open Office has, for all intents and purposes, not been updated for about three years now, since the entire code team told Oracle to go fuck itself, and they formed Libre Office.
With the exception of Excel, Libre Office is now actually probably better than Office itself. But it's Excel that people know, and use, and will make companies stick with Office.
Creston |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 2. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 11:00 |
Beamer |
|
|
Julio wrote on Feb 18, 2013, 10:56: Or you could just stick with open office and not be sorry at all! Until you need an advanced feature or until you hit file incompatibilities because whatever partner/client you're working with is on Office and OpenOffice can either not open it or render it correctly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
 |
| 1. |
Re: Morning Tech Bits |
Feb 18, 2013, 10:56 |
Julio |
|
|
| Or you could just stick with open office and not be sorry at all! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
30 Replies. 2 pages. Viewing page 2.
< Newer [ 1 2 ] Older >
|
|