Is it worth it...?

[Guy Kudlemyer]

Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.4.11
Processor: PPC

Because I work for a company that subscribes to the Microsoft Home Users¹
Program, I was able to purchase a copy of Office 2008 for Mac for a paltry
$19.95. I also bought the 2004 version for the same price several years ago.
The 2004 version works nearly flawlessly, and interfaces quite compatibly
with the PC¹s at work that are all running XP and Office 2003.

I have been watching this news group, as well as
microsoft.public.mac.office.excel for several months now, as those are the
two applications I need most when I want to work on my employer¹s documents
at home on my Mac. What I have been able to determine over these many months
is that at least Word and Excel (and probably everything else contained in
Office 2008) seems to be fraught with problems and dilemmas, many of which
appear quite daunting to solve, or are unsolvable.

My questions for the gallery are:
1--Am I correct in my assertion that the problems with the 2008 version are
many and difficult to remedy?
2--Is it worth the time, effort, energy, and frustration to install and
begin using 2008, when 2004 is serving my needs well already?
3--If I wait to install, how many cycles of Updaters should I wait? (I don¹t
want to have to install a dozen Updaters after I¹ve installed the program.
At this point, I believe MS is on their third updater for this version,
correct?)

I want to stay relatively close to the leading edge, but I don¹t want to be
a troubleshooter, only a non-technical user who has a reliable product that
works well and doesn¹t have to waste copious hours fidgeting with it to get
it to work. Anyone care to take a stab at the above questions?

Thanks for any help!

--Guy
Thurston, OR

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

Hi Guy,

Short answer: Nah.

Long answer:

Regardless of the quality of Word 2008, no one here is going to push you
to upgrade when you are happy with what you have. That's just general
principle, common software-sense. Word 2004 was indisputably better than
Word X (IMO) which seemed to be a warmed-over version of Word 2001
hastily ported to OS X asap, but if someone was happy with Word X, I
didn't say "oh, you need to upgrade."

Word 2008 is not indisputably better than Word 2004, and depending on
the features one uses in both Word and OS, may be worse. But lots of
people using Word 2004 would not consider it nearly flawless, even after
three years of updates. I actually don't know that Word 2008 is
particularly any less reliable than Word 2004, in general, at least now
that the 12.1 update is out--I remember a lot of panicky posts when Word
2004 first came out, and similar intermittent problems we couldn't track
down, and I think this group is getting more traffic with the revamped
website and as switcher numbers go up. Installation problems definitely
seem worse than 2004, but that's not an everyday frustration. Things
that depend on VBA, yes, may have become insoluble problems with Word
2008, and I think that situation is worse with Excel than with Word.

If you are happy with Word 2004, there's no problem in staying there.
I'm not 100% certain, but I believe that the 11.5 combo updater includes
the ability to open .docx files with no problem and without installing
the converter, and .docx is one of the big things driving the upgrade to
2008 (but you don't need it for compatibility with Office 2003). The
other is Intel-native, but that doesn't apply to you.

Word 2008 has some new features that some people like--if you've been
skimming the group, you probably know what they are. Publishing Layout,
Citation Manager, more features in Notebook Layout, improved Mail Merge.
But if you don't need them, why bother?

Note that you do not have to remove Office 2004 when you install Office
2008 (and shouldn't)--I have both on my computer. However, Office 2008
does insist on being the default app over Office 2004. There are
currently two updates for Office 2008--a combo 12.1 and 12.1.1. How many
you have to install only depends on how recently a combo updater was issued.

 

[MC]

2--Is it worth the time, effort, energy, and frustration to install and
begin using 2008, when 2004 is serving my needs well already?

If I'd known then what I know now I wouldn't have "upgraded."

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Guy:

Short answer: No.

Longer answer: Don't even think about it!

You say that Office 2004 is meeting your needs fully now? So you have no
need to change.

Office 2008 has less functionality, so you will still need to have both
installed. As you correctly point out, Office 2008 is very buggy. Many of
the painful bugs have not yet been fixed, and some cannot be fixed.

Office 2008 has a slight advantage handling the new Office 2007 file
formats. But it is not 100 per cent capable with them, there are still a
LOT of issues if you work cross-platform.

Much of this depends on the kind of work you do. I work in large
corporations, typical corporate office work, and specialising in long and
complex documents. I cannot use Office 2008 for my work: it doesn't have
the functions or the stability.

Cheers

Version: 2008
Operating System: Mac OS X 10.4.11
Processor: PPC

Because I work for a company that subscribes to the Microsoft Home Users¹
Program, I was able to purchase a copy of Office 2008 for Mac for a paltry
$19.95. I also bought the 2004 version for the same price several years ago.
The 2004 version works nearly flawlessly, and interfaces quite compatibly
with the PC¹s at work that are all running XP and Office 2003.

I have been watching this news group, as well as
microsoft.public.mac.office.excel for several months now, as those are the
two applications I need most when I want to work on my employer¹s documents
at home on my Mac. What I have been able to determine over these many months
is that at least Word and Excel (and probably everything else contained in
Office 2008) seems to be fraught with problems and dilemmas, many of which
appear quite daunting to solve, or are unsolvable.

My questions for the gallery are:
1--Am I correct in my assertion that the problems with the 2008 version are
many and difficult to remedy?
2--Is it worth the time, effort, energy, and frustration to install and
begin using 2008, when 2004 is serving my needs well already?
3--If I wait to install, how many cycles of Updaters should I wait? (I don¹t
want to have to install a dozen Updaters after I¹ve installed the program.
At this point, I believe MS is on their third updater for this version,
correct?)

I want to stay relatively close to the leading edge, but I don¹t want to be
a troubleshooter, only a non-technical user who has a reliable product that
works well and doesn¹t have to waste copious hours fidgeting with it to get
it to work. Anyone care to take a stab at the above questions?

Thanks for any help!

--Guy
Thurston, OR

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[Michel Bintener]

Hi Daiya.

If you are happy with Word 2004, there's no problem in staying there.
I'm not 100% certain, but I believe that the 11.5 combo updater includes
the ability to open .docx files with no problem and without installing
the converter, and .docx is one of the big things driving the upgrade to
2008 (but you don't need it for compatibility with Office 2003).

The converter still needs to be installed; however, once that has been done,
any Office 2004 application (11.5) can open and save documents in the new
file format.

--
Michel Bintener
Microsoft MVP
Office:mac (Entourage & Word)

*** Please always reply to the newsgroup. ***

 

[Phillip Jones]

On one issue I believe you misspoke

There are three updates (technically because of the size they are really
upgrades but that is a MS Semantics issue).

12.01
12.10
12.11
(According the file name when you down load them)

or version numbers if you look at About MS word/Excel/PowerPoint
12.0.1
12.1.0
12.1.1
--------
<my added comments>

Unlike Apple that rolls all previous updates in to the next (example if
you installed say OSX.3.2 and download the X.3.9 update from software
update it would include all changes and security updates for .3. .4 .5
.6 .7 .8. .9 any Security updates after that point Software up date
would notify you of and you would download and install separate), MS
requires that you must update to .01 first, then .10 then .11

all are 40 some mb plus in size.

Adobe also uses this method in which you can't skip updates you have to
do all in sequence.

Note this is only in reference to the last paragraph about updates.

Until updates become minor bug fixes or tweaks where only 10 mb code or
less is changed. I recommend you download the updaters fro Mactopia
rather than the automatic updater included in MS Office. Less like to
become corrupted especially if you have a slow internet connection.

</<my added comments>

Hi Guy,

Short answer: Nah.

Long answer:

Regardless of the quality of Word 2008, no one here is going to push you
to upgrade when you are happy with what you have. That's just general
principle, common software-sense. Word 2004 was indisputably better than
Word X (IMO) which seemed to be a warmed-over version of Word 2001
hastily ported to OS X asap, but if someone was happy with Word X, I
didn't say "oh, you need to upgrade."

Word 2008 is not indisputably better than Word 2004, and depending on
the features one uses in both Word and OS, may be worse. But lots of
people using Word 2004 would not consider it nearly flawless, even after
three years of updates. I actually don't know that Word 2008 is
particularly any less reliable than Word 2004, in general, at least now
that the 12.1 update is out--I remember a lot of panicky posts when Word
2004 first came out, and similar intermittent problems we couldn't track
down, and I think this group is getting more traffic with the revamped
website and as switcher numbers go up. Installation problems definitely
seem worse than 2004, but that's not an everyday frustration. Things
that depend on VBA, yes, may have become insoluble problems with Word
2008, and I think that situation is worse with Excel than with Word.

If you are happy with Word 2004, there's no problem in staying there.
I'm not 100% certain, but I believe that the 11.5 combo updater includes
the ability to open .docx files with no problem and without installing
the converter, and .docx is one of the big things driving the upgrade to
2008 (but you don't need it for compatibility with Office 2003). The
other is Intel-native, but that doesn't apply to you.

Word 2008 has some new features that some people like--if you've been
skimming the group, you probably know what they are. Publishing Layout,
Citation Manager, more features in Notebook Layout, improved Mail Merge.
But if you don't need them, why bother?

Note that you do not have to remove Office 2004 when you install Office
2008 (and shouldn't)--I have both on my computer. However, Office 2008
does insist on being the default app over Office 2004. There are
currently two updates for Office 2008--a combo 12.1 and 12.1.1. How many
you have to install only depends on how recently a combo updater was
issued.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[Phillip Jones]

Yep I think it is and I updated to 11.5 on my g4-500 using 10.3.9

Unfortunately comes up with a message.

A Converter is available for this document. Unfortunately it will not
run on current system installed. Your system must be a minimum of OSX.4.9.

My problem is on this particular Hard Drive I have I have X.3.9
installed. I've attempted to install X.4 on this drive 7 times and 7
times its failed.

It will get to the point where the gray screen appears with the winder
(looks like clock hand going from point to point). And would stay that
way if I were to leave it all day. I'm not sure if I have updated it on
my Firewire drive which has 4.11 but I'll have to try it.

Hi Daiya.


The converter still needs to be installed; however, once that has been done,
any Office 2004 application (11.5) can open and save documents in the new
file format.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[Daiya Mitchell]

Hi Phillip,

You are incorrect here, on several points.

MS has released three updates but 12.1 is a combo updater, making 12.0.1
no longer necessary. So the only updates that would need to be installed
at this point are 12.1 and 12.1.1.

MS periodically releases combo updaters that include all previous
updates--there is no standard policy against them. For instance, since a
combo 11.5 updater was just released for Office 2004, someone installing
Office 2004 today would only need to apply *one* update to get three
years worth of patches and service packs. It is true that not every
update is a combo updater.

I have always used the distinction that an "update" is a free patch to
the existing version and an "upgrade" is a paid new version, regardless
of the size. This seems pretty common around the web, not just MS
Semantics. E.g. Tiger is fully updated on my machine but I have not yet
upgraded to Leopard.

Daiya

 

[Tim Murray]

It will get to the point where the gray screen appears with the winder
(looks like clock hand going from point to point).

Was this from a real Apple disc?

 

[Clive Huggan]

Guy, I use Word intensively too, and I second John's comments.

Cheers,

Clive Huggan
Canberra, Australia
(My time zone is 5-11 hours different from the Americas and Europe, so my
follow-on responses to those regions can be delayed)
====================================================

 

[etcstgo]

Guy,

As a writer and translator, I've been spending my workday in front of
Word since 1991. As a hobbyist developer, I am quite comfortable with
beta and otherwise bleeding-edge software. So I went out and I
purchased Office 2008; found and reported a bunch of new Word bugs,
and went back to Word 2004.

1--Am I correct in my assertion that the problems with the 2008 version are many and difficult to remedy?
Completely.

2--Is it worth the time, effort, energy, and frustration to install and begin using 2008, when 2004 is serving my needs well already?

No. Office 2008 is not ready for prime time.

Patricio Mason
Santiago, Chile

 

[Phillip Jones]

Yep all $125 Buck worth.

I had no trouble using it on my PowerBook 17 lap to or the FW Drive
attached to this G4-500. so its not a question it won't work on this
machine. Its a question of installing on this Drive. I had no trouble
going from OSX.2.3 that I originally installed on this Machine to X.3.9.

I always buy the Family pack because I always want to install on more
than one Drive. and Unlike others there is no provision in Apple's Eula
to install on Desktop, Laptop, or a Backup.

Was this from a real Apple disc?

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[Phillip Jones]

I guess it just a matter of opinion

to me a file when downloaded reach 30, 40 or up Megabyte is is an
upgrade (whether paid or or not) an up date is where if you download by
automatic update reads the contents of of the update, reads the contents
of the applications and support files to be updated and only replaces
the exact items actually changed.

My apologies, I was un aware That MS Emulated Apple in the use of Combo
Updater and could actually skip previous updates. Glad they have come
into the modern world

At least that will be better than, than Adobe's method where you have to
run all previous updates in exact order, even if only 500 bytes of code
are changed. :-(

Apple's numbering system for OS version are unique for OSX.

OSX.1, OSX.2, OSX.3 , OSX.4, OSX.5 can't even be considered Upgrades as
such. They are totally different animals (pun intended)or completely new
systems. Often they use totally different version of the Mach Kernel,
The UNIX is totally different. In fact from X.2 to X.3 they went from
the use of BSD UNIX which they had to paying a licensing fee to Berkley
(Royalty Fee) for each copy sold, to FreeBSD. which is under the GNU
type Licensing system. And is actually totally different write up from
BSD. has many more and richer command sets than BSD. I don't have OSX.5
I don't have anything fast enough to install it on. So I have no idea
what type UNIX is used. who knows might even be X86 or XFree86 since
Intel chips are now used.

Hi Phillip,

You are incorrect here, on several points.

MS has released three updates but 12.1 is a combo updater, making 12.0.1
no longer necessary. So the only updates that would need to be installed
at this point are 12.1 and 12.1.1.

MS periodically releases combo updaters that include all previous
updates--there is no standard policy against them. For instance, since a
combo 11.5 updater was just released for Office 2004, someone installing
Office 2004 today would only need to apply *one* update to get three
years worth of patches and service packs. It is true that not every
update is a combo updater.

I have always used the distinction that an "update" is a free patch to
the existing version and an "upgrade" is a paid new version, regardless
of the size. This seems pretty common around the web, not just MS
Semantics. E.g. Tiger is fully updated on my machine but I have not yet
upgraded to Leopard.

Daiya

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>

 

[John McGhie]

Hi Phillip:

I guess it just a matter of opinion

No, sorry: it isn't Not in here, where we have to be careful to call
things by their correct names or we end up confusing folks.

An "update" is computer software manufacturers trying to avoid using the
term "Bug Fix" because they love to pretend that their software doesn't have
any bugs. Sad, really...

But an update contains only changes to enable the software to achieve its
design more reliably.

An "Upgrade" contains code that adds new features to the software. It's a
new version.

to me a file when downloaded reach 30, 40 or up Megabyte is is an
upgrade (whether paid or or not)

Size has nothing to do with it. I know that as a man, you will have
difficulty with this concept. But it doesn't

an up date is where if you download by
automatic update reads the contents of of the update, reads the contents
of the applications and support files to be updated and only replaces
the exact items actually changed.

You are talking about two different methods of applying updates. You are
describing the "Delta" method, which replaces only the changed parts of a
file. The last major software manufacture I saw doing that was Corel
Corporation.

These days, I believe ALL software houses update by "file replacement",
where they replace entire files with new ones. More than anything, this has
to do with the way object-oriented programming functions. Because of the
way the executable is laid out, if you change some part of it, you have to
change all of the other references to it, which usually means replacing the
whole file. Modern security practice causes developers to "randomise" the
layout of their code, to make it more difficult for the bad guys to figure
out where the credit card numbers and passwords are. You can't "delta" an
obfuscated file, because you don't know where the pieces landed either

My apologies, I was un aware That MS Emulated Apple in the use of Combo
Updater and could actually skip previous updates. Glad they have come
into the modern world

Yeah, well Phillip you are about 20 years out of date on the Windows side of
things. Really you shouldn't comment until you have had a look! Microsoft
has been issuing "Service Packs" as long as I can remember. The update from
DOS 5 to DOS 5.5 was the first one I remember: it was what you call a
"Combo" update.

Microsoft has been doing this as long as Apple, if not longer.

At least that will be better than, than Adobe's method where you have to
run all previous updates in exact order, even if only 500 bytes of code
are changed. :-(

Microsoft still does that too. I wish both companies would clearly and
accurately indicate when they are doing this. It would save administrators
a hell of a lot of time.

Apple's numbering system for OS version are unique for OSX.

OSX.1, OSX.2, OSX.3 , OSX.4, OSX.5 can't even be considered Upgrades as
such. They are totally different animals (pun intended)or completely new
systems. Often they use totally different version of the Mach Kernel,
The UNIX is totally different. In fact from X.2 to X.3 they went from
the use of BSD UNIX which they had to paying a licensing fee to Berkley
(Royalty Fee) for each copy sold, to FreeBSD. which is under the GNU
type Licensing system. And is actually totally different write up from
BSD. has many more and richer command sets than BSD. I don't have OSX.5
I don't have anything fast enough to install it on. So I have no idea
what type UNIX is used. who knows might even be X86 or XFree86 since
Intel chips are now used.

I think it is worth recognising that the "X" in OS X is really not part of
the "version number". It's just a marketing name. If you accept that, then
we have Apple Unix Version 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... And things become a lot easier
to understand.

I am using Apple Unix 4.11 here. Some people are using 5.3.

Cheers

--
Don't wait for your answer, click here: http://www.word.mvps.org/

Please reply in the group. Please do NOT email me unless I ask you to.

John McGhie, Microsoft MVP, Word and Word:Mac
Sydney, Australia. mailto:[email protected]

 

[Phillip Jones]

Hi Phillip:



No, sorry: it isn't Not in here, where we have to be careful to call
things by their correct names or we end up confusing folks.

An "update" is computer software manufacturers trying to avoid using the
term "Bug Fix" because they love to pretend that their software doesn't have
any bugs. Sad, really...

But an update contains only changes to enable the software to achieve its
design more reliably.

An "Upgrade" contains code that adds new features to the software. It's a
new version.


Size has nothing to do with it. I know that as a man, you will have
difficulty with this concept. But it doesn't


You are talking about two different methods of applying updates. You are
describing the "Delta" method, which replaces only the changed parts of a
file. The last major software manufacture I saw doing that was Corel
Corporation.

These days, I believe ALL software houses update by "file replacement",
where they replace entire files with new ones. More than anything, this has
to do with the way object-oriented programming functions. Because of the
way the executable is laid out, if you change some part of it, you have to
change all of the other references to it, which usually means replacing the
whole file. Modern security practice causes developers to "randomise" the
layout of their code, to make it more difficult for the bad guys to figure
out where the credit card numbers and passwords are. You can't "delta" an
obfuscated file, because you don't know where the pieces landed either


Yeah, well Phillip you are about 20 years out of date on the Windows side of
things. Really you shouldn't comment until you have had a look! Microsoft
has been issuing "Service Packs" as long as I can remember. The update from
DOS 5 to DOS 5.5 was the first one I remember: it was what you call a
"Combo" update.

Microsoft has been doing this as long as Apple, if not longer.


Microsoft still does that too. I wish both companies would clearly and
accurately indicate when they are doing this. It would save administrators
a hell of a lot of time.

I think it is worth recognising that the "X" in OS X is really not part of
the "version number". It's just a marketing name. If you accept that, then
we have Apple Unix Version 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... And things become a lot easier
to understand.

I am using Apple Unix 4.11 here. Some people are using 5.3.

Cheers

Well they are a little behind its my understanding that 5.4 is out now.

and in my case I am stuck with OS 3.9 on the main drive on my G4-500 and
4.11 on my laptop

as for updating On a update from software update on my Macs' and on any
updates ?upgrades such as 12.11

I get the same basic messages.

checking computer for file to replace,
checking package contents ,
verify files, setting files for installer to change
creating installer script.

Install files.

Optimize system.

ON MS installer similar to above except

looking for files to change

then you see a running count and the titles of the files passed by then
pauses and message shows replacing file xyz then continues to run with
a series on names running fast pause, replacing ZDA and so on then at
end optimize, then finished install.

in all the install for office it actually tells you exactly which files
its replacing. It doesn't give the warning about the optimization. but
the pizza wheel runs and the progress bar continue until finish. The
setting of prebindings is what links all components to each other.

Next time I have to do an update I'll use SnapzPro to make a movie so
you can see what it does. and I'll send to you.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET |LIFE MEMBER: VPEA ETA-I, NESDA, ISCET, Sterling
616 Liberty Street |Who's Who. PHONE:276-632-5045, FAX:276-632-0868
Martinsville Va 24112 |[email protected], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet
------------------------------------------------------------------------

If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!

mailto[email protected]

<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/90th_Birthday/index.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Fulcher/default.html>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Harris/default.htm>
<http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/Jones/default.htm>

<http://www.vpea.org>